How does the government plan to keep children safe in education?

This isn’t just a technical update. It goes to the heart of how schools understand risk, relationships, technology and identity, and how they support children through some of the most complex pressures of growing up.

Deuteronomy 6:7 commands us to impress the commands of the Lord on our children: ​“Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up.” Parental responsibility for children’s formation does not stop at the school gate. These proposals, due to take effect from September 2026, raise important questions for parents, churches and school leaders alike. The consultation closes on 22 April 2026.

Sponsored

New language for new risks

One clear focus is online safety. The guidance proposes moving away from the vague and outdated term ​“sexting”, replacing it with clearer language about ​“consensual and non-consensual self-generated intimate images and videos” and explicitly including AI-generated content such as deepfakes. This reflects the reality that highly realistic fake material is now easy to create and share, often with devastating consequences for young people.

Alongside this, the guidance strengthens references to misogyny, recognising its role in normalising sexual harassment and harmful sexual behaviour. A government-commissioned survey found that 71% of 16 – 18-year-olds regularly hear sexual insults directed at girls. This shift signals a desire not just to respond to harm after the fact but also to guard hearts and culture upstream. As Proverbs reminds us, ​“Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it.” (Proverbs 4:23)

Gender questioning children

Under the new draft, schools would receive clearer guidance on how to respond to pupils who are questioning their gender, with decisions framed around the child’s best interests, usually involving parents and, where relevant, clinical advice. While the use of ​“usually” rather than ​“always” in relation to parental involvement raises concerns, this nevertheless represents a step in the right direction in recognising the central role of families.

Importantly, the guidance upholds the UK Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Equality Act 2010, maintaining that single-sex spaces such as toilets, changing rooms and accommodation should only be used by those of that biological sex, regardless of gender identity. While children may be able to socially transition with parental agreement, this does not extend to accessing opposite-sex single-sex spaces, and the guidance is also clear that single-sex sport should be maintained above the age of 11, where fairness and safety considerations apply.

Many welcome the move towards clarity, but concerns remain that key concepts such as ​“social transition” are left undefined, potentially giving schools too much discretion without firm boundaries. The debate therefore centres on whether the guidance strikes the right balance between safeguarding vulnerable children — especially girls- and protecting the dignity, safety and fairness owed to all pupils.

Spotting vulnerability earlier

The consultation also sharpens how schools are encouraged to identify early signs of risk. Repeated removal from class or placement on part-time timetables are highlighted as potential indicators of vulnerability, including child exploitation. 

The draft guidance also places much greater emphasis on children who are persistently absent from education, making clear that repeated or prolonged absence should be treated as a potential safeguarding concern. Time away from school is increasingly understood as a risk factor linked to neglect, exploitation and serious harm, particularly where children are already vulnerable or known to services.

This emphasis sits alongside the government’s wider reforms in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which point towards significantly stronger oversight of children who are not in school, including those who are home educated. The direction of travel is clear: improved tracking, stronger information-sharing between schools and local authorities, and earlier intervention where concerns arise. While it is important to address trends such as the Lost Boys crisis, this should be balanced with proportionality and parental responsibility. 

It is important for parents and carers to know that the guidance provides necessary clarifications around the legal definitions of rape and sexual assault, and stronger recognition that victims of child sexual exploitation may be punished for actions they were coerced into. The guidance also makes clear that serious violence between children can itself be a safeguarding issue, requiring a trauma-informed response for all children involved

Why responding matters

Beyond the headline debates, the guidance proposes clearer thresholds for when mental health concerns become safeguarding matters; stronger expectations around filtering, monitoring and cybersecurity; recognition of new risks posed by generative AI; and improved safeguarding for children in alternative provision and SEND settings. There are also technical but important updates on safer recruitment, work experience and trainee teachers.

For parents, school leaders, governors and church communities, these proposals go beyond administrative tweaks. They shape how schools think about identity, vulnerability, relationships and technology. The gender questioning section in particular has quickly become a flashpoint because it intersects with deeply held beliefs about sex, gender, fairness and child welfare. We should not waste this opportunity to ​“speak the truth in love” (as Ephesians 4:15 puts it) rather than criticise from the sidelines. 

Churches and families who want to respond to the consultation should consider whether the statutory language is clear, balanced and protective of all children, whether it respects parental roles, and what impact it will have on how schools operate day-to-day. You can find our guide to responding to the consultation below.