3 min read
- Rev Dr Bernard Randall’s appeal is on hold pending another case’s outcome.
- Randall faced job loss after advocating for independent thinking on LGBT ideology.
- He was later cleared by all major safeguarding authorities.
- The delay relates to Kristie Higgs’ case, dismissed for social media posts on school teachings.
Rev Dr Bernard Randall, a chaplain at a school, is stuck in a waiting game as his legal fight has been paused because a judge wants to see the outcome of another similar case first. Dr. Randall’s ordeal started after he gave a talk at Trent College in 2019, sparking controversy for urging students to think independently about LGBT ideology.
After the talk, things went downhill for him. Dr. Randall was dismissed, later reinstated, then furloughed during the pandemic, and ultimately made redundant. Adding insult to injury, he was flagged to Prevent, the government’s counter-terrorism strategy, a move that has since been retracted with Dr. Randall cleared by all major safeguarding authorities including the Teaching Regulation Authority (TRA) and the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS).
Now, his appeal to fight his job loss has been delayed. The judge is waiting for another case to be decided in October. This case involves Kristie Higgs, who also lost her job for sharing her thoughts on social media about what kids learn in school about relationships and gender.
Dr. Randall expressed his frustration over the delay, likening the waiting to “a form of torture.” He underscored the broader implications of his and Higgs’ cases, voicing concern over the influence of gender identity and queer theory in schools, which he views as a direct challenge to Christian values and freedom of speech.
He’s especially worried about teachings in schools that he feels go against Christian beliefs. Dr. Randall has asked the Church of England for help, but so far, he feels left out in the cold.
Andrea Williams from the Christian Legal Centre, helping Dr. Randall and Mrs. Higgs, says it’s crucial they win. She believes if they don’t, anyone who disagrees with certain ideas in schools might face serious problems, like losing their jobs.
As this legal drama unfolds, it represents not just the personal plight of two individuals but a significant crossroads for educational policy, religious freedom, and the limits of free speech within the hallowed halls of schools across the nation. The outcomes of these cases could redefine the boundaries of what can be said, taught, and believed in educational settings, making this a watershed moment for all involved.
