A Christian teacher who was suspended from a school after calling a transgender boy a girl, has been banned from teaching.
Joshua Sutcliffe, 33, was ruled by the Teaching Regulation Authority (TRA) to have failed to treat a pupil with ‘dignity and respect’ by ‘misgendering’ them.
According to The Telegraph, the former math teacher at Oxford’s The Cherwell School acknowledged to not using the kids’ chosen pronouns when applauding a group of children during a math class.
In 2017, Mr. Sutcliffe was placed on administrative leave after stating, “Well done girls,” to a group of students. He later claimed that this was an error and that he immediately apologized. Later, he filed a lawsuit alleging discrimination and constructive dismissal against the school.
The TRA found that, despite his denials, it was “more likely than not” that he addressed the transgender student using female pronouns in various contexts when he was employed at the school between 2015 and 2018.
Mr. Sutclliffe said he is ‘devastated’ by the ruling to ban him from teaching and plans to appeal, the newspaper reports.
While he was struck off for misgendering the pupil, they also found that he expressed views against gay marriage when quizzed by a student.
He was also found to have failed to ‘consider the potential impact’ on his pupils, particularly those who are LGBT, of a statement that being gay was wrong.
The math instructor began working at the boys-only St. Aloysius’ College in Islington, north London, in September 2018. A allegation that the instructor had exposed students to a video with “inappropriate comments” was upheld.
His comments that there is a “growing problem in today’s society that men are not masculine enough” were among several about masculinity that drew criticism, and those complaints were sustained.
Mr. Sutcliffe, who was initially suspended after discussing the matter on ITV’s This Morning in 2017, told The Telegraph that he is ‘devastated’ by his ban and that he plans to challenge the decision with help from the Christian Legal Centre.
He said: ‘I believe affirming children in gender confusion in the classroom is psychologically damaging for them. I refuse to go against my conscience and cause a child harm and refuse to apologise for that.’
The TRA ruling stated however: ‘The panel was satisfied that the conduct of Mr. Sutcliffe fell significantly short of the standard of behaviour expected of a teacher.’
After being found guilty of unacceptable professional conduct, a decision to ban him from teaching was made on behalf of Gillian Keegan, the Education Secretary, by the TRA’s decision maker Alan Meyrick.
‘In my view, it is necessary to impose a prohibition order in order to maintain public confidence in the profession,’ Mr Meyrick said.
The landmark ruling comes amid schools waiting for the first detailed Government guidance over how to respond to transgender pupils. It is expected to say that teachers can refuse to use alternative pronouns demanded by students.
Mr. Sutcliffe came under fire for his appearance on TV as it was ruled that he did not safeguard the pupil’s wellbeing when he used a female pronoun to describe them on the show.
Mr. Meyrick added: ‘A published decision, in light of the circumstances in this case, that is not backed up by full remorse or insight, does not in my view satisfy the public interest requirement concerning public confidence in the profession.’
Mr. Sutcliffe has been banned from teaching indefinitely, preventing him from getting a job in the profession at any school, sixth-form college, or children’s home in England. He can apply to have the ban revoked from 2025.
A spokesman for the Department for Education said: ‘We do not comment on specific cases or individuals.
‘More broadly, the Education Secretary is working closely with the minister for women and equalities to support schools in relation to children who are questioning their gender, following calls from schools, teachers, and parents.
‘This guidance will clarify schools’ legal position and the importance of involving parents when making any decisions relating to their child.’