LGBT Youth Scotland Faces Backlash Over Self-Harm Guidance

[Social Media]

 

LGBT Youth Scotland, a taxpayer-funded charity operating in schools across Scotland, has come under fire after a whistleblower alleged that volunteers were instructed to advise self-harming children to use “clean razor blades” rather than discouraging them from harming themselves. According to the whistleblower, managers at the charity defended the practice, arguing that if self-harm was a child’s “coping mechanism,” it would be wrong to “take that away from them.”

 

 

The individual, who had applied to volunteer with the organization, described these instructions as “shocking and callous.” They stated that when they questioned the policy in October 2023, they were dismissed by managers who insisted that some children had no other way of coping. The whistleblower feared that such guidance could easily be misinterpreted by vulnerable young people as encouragement to continue self-harming.

 

The complaint was reported to the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator (OSCR), which launched an inquiry into LGBT Youth Scotland. While the regulator has since dropped the investigation, it confirmed that it had engaged with the charity on the issue and that policies had been reviewed.

 

However, OSCR declined to specify what changes had been made, stating only that it was “satisfied” with the charity’s response.

 

The complaint about self-harm guidance was one of 13 concerns raised about LGBT Youth Scotland, obtained by The Times through a freedom of information request. Other concerns focused on the charity’s support for puberty blockers and its promotion of gender ideology in schools. Despite safety concerns leading to the ban of puberty blockers in certain cases, LGBT Youth Scotland had previously described such medical treatments as “wonderful.”

 

 

The charity receives over £1 million in taxpayer funding annually and is active in hundreds of schools. In addition to its work promoting LGBT inclusion, it operates youth groups, one-on-one support services, and an online chat service for children. Critics argue that its increasing influence in Scottish schools is contributing to what they describe as a “systematic erosion of child safeguarding.”

 

Ash Regan, an Alba Party MSP and former SNP minister, raised concerns in the Scottish Parliament about the role of LGBT Youth Scotland in education. “Mental health issues are serious, requiring professional clinical support, not left to volunteers trained in normalising dangerous practices,” she said. Regan also criticized OSCR for its lack of transparency regarding the inquiry and questioned who was overseeing the real-world impact of organizations like LGBT Youth Scotland on children.

 

The controversy over self-harm advice is just one in a series of scandals linked to the charity. Last year, Rosie Millard, chairwoman of the BBC’s Children in Need, resigned over the organization’s handling of a £466,000 grant awarded to LGBT Youth Scotland. She accused Children in Need’s chief executive, Simon Antrobus, of “dithering and delay” before ultimately cutting ties with the charity due to fears of bad publicity.

 

 

LGBT Youth Scotland has also faced scrutiny over past associations with individuals convicted of child abuse. In 2009, its former chief executive, James Rennie, was jailed as part of what was then described as Scotland’s largest paedophile ring. More recently, it emerged that convicted sex offender Andrew Easton had contributed to a “coming out” guide for the charity in 2010. Easton, who was not an employee or volunteer of LGBT Youth Scotland, later pleaded guilty to sharing indecent images of children, including babies.

 

In response to the ongoing criticism, LGBT Youth Scotland recently updated its articles of association, seemingly expanding its remit beyond its previous focus on supporting 13 to 25-year-olds. OSCR stated that it had not needed to use its formal powers in its investigation, meaning it was not required to publish a report on its findings. It insisted that it was satisfied with the charity’s response, which included reviewing and updating key policies.

 

However, there remains confusion over whether the specific complaint about self-harm guidance was addressed. OSCR stated that it had engaged with the charity on the matter, while a spokesman for LGBT Youth Scotland suggested that the complaint had not been part of the review. The spokesman said: “Some complaints that OSCR will have received will not have been shared with LGBT Youth Scotland as they will have deemed them either unsubstantiated or unverifiable, irrelevant, or outside of the purview of a tightly governance-focused inquiry.”

 

Despite the regulator’s assurances, concerns about LGBT Youth Scotland’s influence in schools continue to grow. Critics argue that an organization receiving substantial public funding must be subject to greater scrutiny, particularly when dealing with vulnerable children. The allegations surrounding self-harm guidance have only intensified the debate over the charity’s role in Scottish education and child safeguarding.

 

Based on a report by The Times 2025-03-26

 

 

[Gsxrnz]

If they really want to do real self-harm to themselves, I suggest they get a job. 

[Jingthing]

This seems to be a semantics issue.

Some might read self harm and think that's the same as suicide.

No. There are many people that are cutters that cut for other reasons.

Obviously it's wrong to emphasize clean blades over seeking help to stop cutting.

On the other hand if a person is going to cut, I don't see a problem with suggesting clean blades.

There seems to be a lot of unnecessary sensationalism in this news item.

 

[newbee2022]

The summit of wokeness. Or culture going downhill 🥺

[digger70]

LGBT Youth Scotland Faces Backlash Over Self-Harm Guidance.

 

Self harm are only attention seekers. If the Really want attention use a dirty rusty blade. 🙏

[Harrisfan]

5 hours ago, Jingthing said:

This seems to be a semantics issue.

Some might read self harm and think that's the same as suicide.

No. There are many people that are cutters that cut for other reasons.

Obviously it's wrong to emphasize clean blades over seeking help to stop cutting.

On the other hand if a person is going to cut, I don't see a problem with suggesting clean blades.

There seems to be a lot of unnecessary sensationalism in this news item.

 

Who wants to cut themself? Self harm is not natural. 

[BangkokReady]

6 hours ago, Jingthing said:

This seems to be a semantics issue.

Some might read self harm and think that's the same as suicide.

No. There are many people that are cutters that cut for other reasons.

Obviously it's wrong to emphasize clean blades over seeking help to stop cutting.

On the other hand if a person is going to cut, I don't see a problem with suggesting clean blades.

There seems to be a lot of unnecessary sensationalism in this news item.

 

No.  It's very clear.  The issue is that instead of advising people not to self harm, they are advising them to do it with a clean razor blade.

 

If they really are failing to advise them not to do it, then that is a big issue.  "Don't do it, but if you have to, at least use clean implements, and then seek help", is one thing, but not advising against it is totally another.

 

I think it's once again an example of the "woke mind virus" and people's obsession with harming people in order to stop offending a minority.  I would imagine there's an element to not wanting to say that self-harm is bad, because that might upset self-harmers.  This is, of course, ridiculous and dangerous, much like many other woke policies.

 

That's why the article isn't "sensationalist".  If there are tax-payer funded groups that are meant to be helping vulnerable people, but instead they are actually encouraging them (in order to normalise behaviour to not upset others) it is a very big deal.

[BangkokReady]

4 hours ago, newbee2022 said:

The summit of wokeness. Or culture going downhill 🥺

 

Quite.  In order to prevent people with mental illness from feeling bad, they resist stopping other people from doing the same thing.

 

Imagine going to a doctor and asking for treatment for your illness, and the doctor says they won't help you because that would make it seem like there is something negative about having that sickness, which would make people with that sickness feel bad.  Same principle.

[Jingthing]

To be clear I think the proper thing to do is to advise to seek professional help for cutters.

That definitely indicates a psychological disorder that should be addressed. 

But there is no way that I believe for one second that people are calling this place saying they are going to commit suicide and getting the response well OK matey but be sure to use a sterile weapon. I think the article insidiously implies that and that is obviously NOT the policy there.

[BangkokReady]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

To be clear I think the proper thing to do is to advise to seek professional help for cutters.

That definitely indicates a psychological disorder that should be addressed. 

But there is no way that I believe for one second that people are calling this place saying they are going to commit suicide and getting the response well OK matey but be sure to use a sterile weapon. I think the article insidiously implies that and that is obviously NOT the policy there.

 

To be clear, nobody has mentioned suicide.  There is nothing that suggests suicide is anything to do with the story.

 

The story appears to be saying that, once again, a body that is charged with protecting vulnerable people is failing to do so, due to ideological issues.

 

They have the choice to protect a child or protect their ideology.  They choose to protect their ideology and endanger a child.  That is the key takeaway, not suicide.