‘Codifying intolerance and discrimination’ in school in the name of ‘parental rights’

Why are two Lander school board members attempting to single out a specific group of students, require teachers to treat them differently than the general student population and make it permissible for other students to harass them?

Opinion

Fremont County School District No. 1 in Lander had already satisfied the requirement for the new state “Parental Rights Law” when a proposed policy titled “ Transgender Considerations ” popped up on the board’s agenda. Board chair Jared Kail put forward the case that the district needs a policy to protect and guide staff in how they deal with transgender people.

Our district does need a policy, but not the one proposed by Kail and supported by vice-chair Scott Jensen. Instead of guiding staff, their policy forces educators to discriminate against students and to risk losing their jobs for creating a safe learning environment. The policy exacerbates an already hostile climate for transgender people and completely undercuts the basic right to a harassment-free school and workplace for these students and staff. All of this creates a barrier to education, isolates students, increases the risk of self harm, and forces effective teachers out of the profession.

The policy is demonstrably discriminatory in many ways beyond what I have room for here, but perhaps most obviously in how it sanctions the harassment of trans students.

“ Students may refer to another individual using whatever pronoun the speaker prefers, regardless of what the person being referred to prefers or requests,” the proposed policy states. “Pronouns used in the normal course of speech shall not be considered ‘bullying’ or ‘harassment’ under FCSD #1 policy. ”

What’s proposed contradicts the district’s current harassment policy .

“Harassment, intimidation or bullying means any intentional gesture or any intentional written, verbal or physical act,” the policy states, “that a reasonable person under the circumstances should know will have the effect of: 1. Harming a person physically or emotionally, damaging a person=s (sic) property or placing a person in reasonable fear of personal harm or property damage; 2. Insulting or demeaning a person or group of students causing substantial disruption in, or substantial interference with, the orderly operation of school; or 3. Is so sufficiently severe, persistent or pervasive that is (sic) creates an intimidating, threatening or abusive educational environment for a person or group of students.”

This creates an unacceptable exception that solidly ticks all three effects: according to the proposed policy, emotionally harming someone, insulting or demeaning a person, or creating an intimidating, threatening, and abusive educational environment is not harassment if it is happening to trans people.

Intentionally misgendering someone because of one’s “deeply held beliefs,” or any other reason, is still discriminatory and emotionally harmful, whether one intends for it to be or not. The right to a harassment-free education and harassment-free workplace supersedes one’s freedom to use discriminatory language towards others in an educational setting. People have a right to choose how they are known in school and parents have a right to know that their child will not be bullied in school. A policy that protects people who are harassing others is, as board member Aileen Brew succinctly put it, “codifying intolerance and discrimination.”

The policy also requires educators to communicate “all conversations between a student and a staff member … that indicate a student is considering changing or has changed his/her gender identity” in order to “provide parent(s)/guardian(s) proper information about the mental health of their children.”

This will not achieve its goal of alerting more parents to their child’s emotional state, but instead will isolate and force trans and questioning students back into the closet. This puts them at an even higher risk of suicidal ideation and cuts off important relationships with adults who currently help identify and direct students at risk of hurting themselves to school counselors. This would create a surveillance state in our schools for these young people that does not exist for any other student group.

Teachers are required to report any student showing signs of being in danger or being a danger to themselves or others. Every educator I know takes this responsibility with the utmost seriousness. But we are not mandatory reporters for the myriad of important life decisions students are making on a daily basis, and there is nothing inherently dangerous about exploring one’s own gender identity. Coming out as trans does not mean that a person is by default considering suicide or any other extreme measure. There are many trans students who are living healthy lives, despite increased risk factors and widespread discrimination against them.

Policing all students to support the ideological, political, or religious beliefs of select parents is not our job as educators.

Our job is to build positive relationships with students, create a sense of belonging and community, and to teach our curricula. We meet students where they are, whoever they are. We use a student’s preferred name and pronouns because we know that students learn better if they feel accepted and a part of the learning community. It has nothing to do with our personal beliefs; it is simply best educational practice and the safest practice for student well-being.

During the policy proposal debate, it was repeatedly pointed out that being trans puts a student in a higher risk category for suicide. This is certainly true, but glaringly absent from the discussion was how harassment, discrimination, and non-acceptance from peers and family contribute to this increased risk. Nor was there discussion on the developing research showing that trans students who are able to use their preferred name and pronouns consistently report less suicidal ideation.

Facts are absolutely essential in informing any policy specifically about transgender students. Yet not a shred of data or evidence was presented during the meeting to support the proposed policy. Also missing was any semblance of input from the queer community. Kail and Jensen consulted with the district’s lawyer, but did they bother to consult with the students and educators who will be most affected?

There are other ways beyond a prejudiced, disruptive policy to accommodate parents who are worried about how their child identifies. If parents would like to be kept informed by the school of a child’s request to use a preferred name or pronouns, or request that a school not honor their student’s preferences, there should be a clear pathway to do this. That is a right that parents have, but that burden needs to be placed on parents opting in, not on the general population of students, educators, and parents.

Opt-in policies are the way to address parental rights in schools, but why are they not being adopted by districts? Instead of common-sense, fair, and legal policies, politically and prejudice-driven board members continue to push for sweeping policies that take away the rights of other parents and students. The “parental rights” movement is not actually about parental rights; it is no less than a war against trans people’s right to exist. Policies like the ones created by Kail and Jensen are about using schools as a vehicle of eradication for something they believe is wrong.

I understand how incredibly difficult it might be for parents to hear their child is exploring their gender identity, and I have a huge amount of compassion for these people. We do need to find a way for these parents to trust schools to keep them informed. Schools try to meet parents the same way they meet students — wherever they are — and by providing what accommodations they can for specific circumstances. But that is not going to happen through damaging policies like this one, and it is not going to happen with board members actively tearing apart our educational institutions.

The language that Jensen in particular employs to describe educators is dangerous to our schools and society in general. During the meeting, and in a Facebook post and op-ed, he described LGBTQ+ supportive individuals and teachers, with no evidence, as “predatory adults” who are “looking to separate a child from a parent.”

As a teacher who worked closely with many LGBTQ+ students, I can unequivocally say I have never counseled a student to do anything but to try to understand their parents’ perspectives and to try and keep lines of communication open with parents. Nor have I ever lied to a parent or made any decisions on behalf of a student or their family. I have never heard of any educator in our district doing otherwise. The narrative that educators are “predatory” or are “grooming” children or are “pedophiles” because we have LGBTQ+ content in our schools is absolutely false. Such accusations are a betrayal of dedicated educators who are doing their damnedest to provide a safe and accessible education for every student.

These policies and the accompanying rhetoric are destroying the quality of education we are able to provide for any student, not just trans students. Even as our board discusses teacher recruitment and retention, good teachers are leaving the district or profession because of toxic policies that contradict professional training and practice. Content and critical thinking skills are being watered down in the political malaise engulfing our schools.

Will it take a lawsuit for our district leadership to understand how discriminatory this policy is? Or a student suicide to understand just how dangerous this policy is?
We urgently need to stop board members and other politicians who attack education and spread unfounded vitriol against community members. Please read the proposed policy and contact the FCSD#1 board and ask them to re-write this policy with some semblance of humanity. Please support reasonable candidates in the next election and vote these un-American bigots out of office.

The post ‘Codifying intolerance and discrimination’ in school in the name of ‘parental rights’ appeared first on WyoFile .