Stop shoving ideologies down children's throats

Katharine Birbalsingh at her Michaela Community School (Image: Byline Times)

At the moment, in Britain, there are really contentious and concerning debates being had about what's 'right' and 'wrong' for children. It has made me feel that I am from a fortunate generation, sandwiched between the kids raised in the 1970s and 80s who at school were very restricted and severely punished for minor reasons, and those in education today where there's too much overprotection and faux outrage. By comparison, my era - in the late 90s and 2000s, felt rather straightforward and dull. The faux outrage right now circles around religion and identity, which I'll address the latter later. 

For quite a while I have been following the developments of Michaela Community School in north west London. In recent years, it has raised the eyebrows of education experts and political figures, many of whom in two minds as to whether the school's seemingly unorthodox approach is a good or bad thing for the students there. For example, reportedly; no pupil is allowed to work in groups, every corridor must remain silent and no more than four friends can hang around in the playground (and you thought the 'rule of six' during the Covid-19 pandemic was considered mean). Wait until these children discover that you can talk to anyone at any corridor anywhere without getting a slap on the wrist, so long as you're not talking about anything stupid or dangerous.

On the whole, however, these strict rules have done pupils some good. Many of whom are from diverse backgrounds (not just race, of course) and achieving the grades to enter Russell Group universities. The school is rated 'Outstanding' by Ofsted, with particular praise towards teaching standards and facilities. 

How Michaela School do things, naturally, has rubbed people the wrong way. The school and its founder Katharine Birbalsingh, dubbed 'Britain's strictest headmistress', have overcome various court battles and social media abuse. The most recent case came after a pupil's family wanted to overturn a prayer ban. The school won as the judge said that, ultimately, no laws were broken. Birbalsingh, you could imagine, was delighted by the ruling, stating that the school is proudly secular - no religious rituals shall ever take place while she is still head, regardless of the faith. That may be assuring, in terms of there being an absence of unconscious bias, however, how much do rules like that impact a child, in helping influence their life choices and direction?

Religion is at a cross roads. According to Census 2021 records, an unprecedented 37.2% of the UK population identified as non-religious, with that figure expected to rise in future Census reports. In addition, the news and social media agendas seem to go above and beyond to highlight the intense negativity about different religious attitudes and beliefs - anti-Semitic and Islamophobic views are widely uttered, with little being done to reduce the level of hatred. Undoubtedly, children - regardless of whether or not they are raised in a secular or religious home - will be confused with what they being raised to believe at home, wildly differing what they consume on social media and what they are taught at school (during lesson and break times). 

In too many cases, it is difficult for children to express themselves at home, so schools play an important role in offering judgement-free platforms to open their eyes and allow discussions to take place at break times, and that can include praying. If I was a headteacher, I know what I'd prefer between choosing the exploration of prayer to privately obsessing over Andrew Tate or the latest potentially dangerous beauty trend on unregulated social media channels. Birbalsingh may think she has her pupils on a tight leash and walk towards the path of being a model citizen, but I fear those restrictions she is imposing will backfire on her, and the school, in the long-term.

In other news, let's talk about gender identity... Dr Hilary Cass, a renowned physician and specialist in paediatric disability, published a 'landmark report' which highlights that some children have been exposed to unethical medical and psychological solutions to aid life-altering changes to their identity. The findings are both compelling and alarming, yet also seen as a vital intervention to this sort of practice which could impact more young people in the future. As I write this, governments in Westminster and the devolved UK nations are holding their own debates deciding whether to bring forward its recommendations to law and/or guidance.

While Cass's report will justifiably be seen as a watershed moment for paediatric science, sadly, socially at least, it has already fallen on deaf ears. Inevitably, discussions, on the one hand, have been hijacked by commentators, politicians and some self-proclaimed 'women-rights campaigners' who are treating it as a "victory for women, children and common sense," as though it should be the main piece of evidence on the subject, no other paper matters. On the other side of the equally boisterous argument, the report is seen as transphobic, ignoring the needs of young people who have a strong desire for safer and easier access to puberty blockers, threatening that their mental health be much the poorer if their needs aren't heard or taken seriously.

The problem we have here is that while both arguments are valid, they are without merit unless we have proper evidence. Very few can deny the significant health risks invasive treatments such as taking puberty blockers can have on children. But we don't truly know the extent of how young people feel generally about their identity for there to be a case for easier access. We are led to believe, for example, that there is an 'explosion' of young referrals to a gender clinic in London, but is that a true reflection on what schools are actually seeing? As the topic has become so mainstream, even if a tiny number of children are interested in it, it is normal for them to want to talk about it openly, even if it's asking innocent questions about the principles. I dare wonder how teachers balance the following of risk-adverse government guidance and having parents angrily pointing fingers at them for even raising it in class. 

Whether it is about religion or gender identity, children don't seem to be allowed to relax, sit in silent reflection and make sense of things that could profoundly matter to them. They are instead drowning in polar opposite ideologies that are unlikely to suit their needs or personalities. Without the ability to relax or to freely express their thinking processes, they are only going to get frustrated, rebel and make rash and regretful decisions. Their desire for clarity trumps all. 

Certainly, steer them away from vapes, social media and alcohol, where evidence (by researchers or anecdotal) shows their potential dangers on young people. But when it comes to things where a 'right' and 'wrong' is more blurred, all it can take is for responsible adults to lend an open ear and heart, and offer friendly guidance (without judgement). The rest will be fun and games. We are too quick to take a child's view as final when, in fact, they're just curious. Give them that freedom to explore and they will thank you for it.