Parents Rights On Transgender Policy

[lewisnotmiller]

At least in the countries where I have lived, I would say that assumption is quite fair, except that many medical professionals also wouldn't hesitate to violate the child's privacy and leak potentially life-threatening information to their parents straight out of the therapist's office explicitly for the purpose of upholding "religion and traditions."

One of the therapists I have seen firmly believes in conversion therapy and claims that "there's a story behind every homosexual." His views are not as prevalent as they used to be two or three decades ago, but he's still far from alone. As you said, there are unfortunately no good or safe options for many children (and young adults) in certain parts of the world.



Yep, I do believe Australia is doing immensely well on a global level in terms of acceptance and basic rights.

All makes sense.

It's tricky. There are a bunch of countries where trans people (heck, the entire LGBTQIA+ community to varying degrees) are horribly mistreated.

Sadly, whether parents are 'informed' or not becomes almost irrelevant when both the general culture and the specific state bodies have an anti-LGBTQIA+ bias.

I have no answers in those cases, since the real way to help is for the societies as a whole to change, and that's certainly not a simple or quick thing.

As you've correctly identified, my views are more limited in scope. More than happy to hear other perspectives, but my intent there would be to shut up and listen, rather than pretend I had answers.

 

[Callisto]

This is what I am thinking too, yet reaching a different conclusion.

There are those who think the parents should also be informed if the child presents any signs of homosexuality? Do you think the teacher should be required to inform the parents in that case?

What if the student doesn't exhibit any signs of sexual attraction to either sex? Should the teachers be required to inform the parents? (assuming a child past puberty of course).

What if the student is going through a bad break up? That can be really hard on a child, especially the first time. Should the teachers required to inform the parents about the child suffering from a bad break up?


I just don't think the school needs to report on their students inner emotional life.

Teachers don't need to interject themselves in those matters. If a child is in turmoil to the extent that teachers are concerned then that requires the parents too. How many here discussed their personal business with teachers? Most didn't. Parents should be aware if their child is confused or sexually active, regardless of orientation or identity. That's not something that should be hidden, it involves the kid's mental, emotional, and physical well being which the parents ARE a party to. When should a parent find out? Only after a child gets pregnant or acquires an STD or has some unfortunate experience? What if the child is being groomed? "Oh, they knew you would be mad to know they're X, but now that something went sideways or they need medical care, you can know now since you're legally responsible for their well being" Wtf.

Imagine being a parent and finding out your child is struggling in some way but others kept it from you. What parent wouldn't be upset, frustrated, heart broken and, yes, angry?

If abuse is a real risk then child protective services should be involved, and possibly the child removed from the household. If the home is unsafe, usually there are other indicators.

Most parents are not abusive. Any parent may struggle with a child's identity or orientation but that doesn't equate abuse. Parents being upset or worried or even angry does not equate abusive. Every child is fearful of disappointing their parents, every child who has ever lived has dreaded having to tell their parents something that they weren't going to like. Most of the time, parents are not abusive.

Hiding a child's concerns from their parents is not healthy and does nothing to improve family life. It's simply the wrong approach. You (not 'you' personally) want kids to feel safe? Approach the situation in a way that fosters better communication and family dynamics. Keeping info from them is counterproductive and will only fuel whatever problem may exist, if not create all new ones.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I really wasn't trying to straw man you. I was just sharing something. I am sorry if you thought it was an argument against anything you said, it wasn't.

All good, and in turn I apologise if I misinterpreted.

 

[fantome profane]

Teachers don't need to interject themselves in those matters. If a child is in turmoil to the extent that teachers are concerned then that requires the parents too. How many here discussed their personal business with teachers? Most didn't. Parents should be aware if their child is confused or sexually active, regardless of orientation or identity. That's not something that should be hidden, it involves the kid's mental, emotional, and physical well being which the parents ARE a party to. When should a parent find out? Only after a child gets pregnant or acquires an STD or has some unfortunate experience? What if the child is being groomed? "Oh, they knew you would be mad to know they're X, but now that something went sideways or they need medical care, you can know now since you're legally responsible for their well being" Wtf.

Imagine being a parent and finding out your child is struggling in some way but others kept it from you. What parent wouldn't be upset, frustrated, heart broken and, yes, angry?

If abuse is a real risk then child protective services should be involved, and possibly the child removed from the household. If the home is unsafe, usually there are other indicators.

Most parents are not abusive. Any parent may struggle with a child's identity or orientation but that doesn't equate abuse. Parents being upset or worried or even angry does not equate abusive. Every child is fearful of disappointing their parents, every child who has ever lived has dreaded having to tell their parents something that they weren't going to like. Most of the time, parents are not abusive.

Hiding a child's concerns from their parents is not healthy and does nothing to improve family life. It's simply the wrong approach. You (not 'you' personally) want kids to feel safe? Approach the situation in a way that fosters better communication and family dynamics. Keeping info from them is counterproductive and will only fuel whatever problem may exist, if not create all new ones.

There is a big difference between deliberately concealing something and being legally required to disclose something.

This is not about hiding anything, this is not about doing anything to actively conceal information. The question is who is legally required to report the information and who is not. And I don't think teachers should bear that responsibility.

 

[Soandso]

LMGTFY?

When it comes to the things I'm very opinionated or even passionate about, I can point to events or specific things that have happened that set a foundation for why my opinions are set the way they are. If I couldn't, what am I basing those opinions on? Feelings? Baseless suspicions? Certainly not reason

 

[lewisnotmiller]

It should be.
Children are a class that still has to get it's rights recognised.
Non whites had their struggle for rights, women had their struggle for rights, gays had their struggle for rights, currently trans people are struggling. Children are still considered widely right-less.

But people are complaining about "parents rights".

People....

That sounds like a version of 'them'. It might be worth you considering parental responsibility, and not just parents 'rights'.

Couple of more direct points.

1. Where there is a head injury in Australia, it is mandatory to report it to the parents. That isn't because of a rush to defend parent's rights. It's health and safety related because of the chance for delayed concussion. This reporting is formal, and includes a signing off by the parent.

2. If a child is being bullied (as in ongoing bullying), and an adult becomes aware of this, that adult should make the parent aware. Again, this is from a health and safety point of view, not 'parental rights'. I would expect that regardless of whether the adult is a teacher, coach, priest, relative or friend.

At some point, the child becomes a young adult, and capable of making their own choices. I'll readily admit I'm not sure where this point is, and in reality it's different for different kids. But if we talk about a twelve year old, they absolutely might not be the best placed person to make a decision pertaining to their own health and safety.

 

[Callisto]

There is a big difference between deliberately concealing something and being legally required to disclose something.

This is not about hiding anything, this is not about doing anything to actively conceal information. The question is who is legally required to report the information and who is not. And I don't think teachers should bear that responsibility.

By federal law, parents have a right to full access of their child's education record. In its entirety. And it's the parents, not the school, who must give informed consent for their child's record to be released to a third party. How is a parent suppose to give informed consent if they are denied information?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

This is what I am thinking too, yet reaching a different conclusion.

There are those who think the parents should also be informed if the child presents any signs of homosexuality? Do you think the teacher should be required to inform the parents in that case?

Required, as in by law?

No...indeed, I don't think I'd require them to inform parents if their child was presenting as a different gender. I know that might run contrary to how I've presented in this thread, but I'm taking more about what I think they 'should' do. Legal requirements are too clumsy, and harmful.

So, to the next question. Should the school inform parents if their child is presenting as homosexual?

Possibly...if it was a drastic change in behaviour, for example. Any drastic behavioural change should be a flag. But if you mean do I think a child who is reaching puberty starts showing attraction to same sex kids, then no.

What if the student doesn't exhibit any signs of sexual attraction to either sex? Should the teachers be required to inform the parents? (assuming a child past puberty of course).

Nope.

What if the student is going through a bad break up? That can be really hard on a child, especially the first time. Should the teachers required to inform the parents about the child suffering from a bad break up?

Not required as in by law. But potentially yes, depending on how extreme the child's reaction is, the impact on their mental health and schoolwork, etc.

I just don't think the school needs to report on their students inner emotional life.

Fair enough.

Anyone who has my daughter's for over half of her waking hours has a duty of care, and a responsibility. As do I. Us adults should be trying to work together to raise balanced children with a sense of safety, community and consistency.

I know...idealistic. I'm more passionate about children than most topics.

 

[Stevicus]

I studied teaching for four years, and was a psych major on top of it. It gave me zero preparation for dealing with a transgender student who was finding their situation difficult.

Whereas I've invested 15 years in trying to understand my eldest daughter.

If we want to judge parents by the lowest common denominator, they should all have their kids removed from them. I'm assuming you're not suggesting that, right?

No, I never said all, and I never said that anyone should have their kids removed from them - except in cases of abuse, neglect, or other forms of mistreatment. I was only questioning the notion that "becoming a parent" somehow imbues a human being with greater wisdom or understanding on that basis alone.

However, to answer your point here, I would suggest that (even if I don't know you personally) you come across as reasonably intelligent, sane, rational, and socially responsible. Would it be fair to say that you had those qualities before your daughter was born? Were there any significant changes, personality-wise or anything that might have altered your rational understanding of the world at the time? I'm just curious, because I often hear the argument that "you have to be a parent to understand," but on the other side of the coin, one can also argue that "you have to be a child of abusive parents to understand." Not every kid grows up in a warm, loving environment provided by sane, intelligent people.

It's for this reason that I tend to side with the kids in matters like this. Some kids might run away, and get into even worse situations - or they might get caught and sent back to their parents. I think if kids want to find some way out of a hellish situation, there should be provisions made for them to safely and easily do so.

 

[fantome profane]

People....

That sounds like a version of 'them'. It might be worth you considering parental responsibility, and not just parents 'rights'.

Couple of more direct points.

1. Where there is a head injury in Australia, it is mandatory to report it to the parents. That isn't because of a rush to defend parent's rights. It's health and safety related because of the chance for delayed concussion. This reporting is formal, and includes a signing off by the parent.

2. If a child is being bullied (as in ongoing bullying), and an adult becomes aware of this, that adult should make the parent aware. Again, this is from a health and safety point of view, not 'parental rights'. I would expect that regardless of whether the adult is a teacher, coach, priest, relative or friend.

At some point, the child becomes a young adult, and capable of making their own choices. I'll readily admit I'm not sure where this point is, and in reality it's different for different kids. But if we talk about a twelve year old, they absolutely might not be the best placed person to make a decision pertaining to their own health and safety.

This really is the problem, being transgender can't really be compared to an illness, or an injury, or other health problems. I understand it is difficult for the people experience it, especially when they are young, but it is a unique situation.

Required, as in by law?

No...indeed, I don't think I'd require them to inform parents if their child was presenting as a different gender. I know that might run contrary to how I've presented in this thread, but I'm taking more about what I think they 'should' do. Legal requirements are too clumsy, and harmful.

Then I think we are much in agreement. I have been arguing against teachers being required by law to inform parents.

If you were to ask me if teachers should be allowed to inform parents ....

... then I would start pulling at my hair and making strange grunting sounds.

Because I really really don't know. All I can say is that teachers (or anyone) should think very carefully before doing that.

 

[fantome profane]

By federal law, parents have a right to full access of their child's education record. In its entirety. And it's the parents, not the school, who must give informed consent for their child's record to be released to a third party. How is a parent suppose to give informed consent if they are denied information?

I am not, nor have I ever suggested denying parents access to their child's school record. But I am saying teachers should not be required to report everything the child tells them, or eveything they have overheard. If they see a boy with a pink princess pencil case, or carrying a backpack like a purse, they don't need to send up a flare.

 

[Valjean]

The child Is their ward, but not their property, His opinions, thoughts and identity are his own. As Debate Slayer pointed out, informing parents could lead to undesirable consequences.
Who's in a better position to judge the particulars of a situation, the student or the school administration?

Should the parents be informed of the student's political or religious leanings, or if he changes into
cowboy boots when he gets to school? What if he's caught reading Proust?

 

[Heyo]

People....

That sounds like a version of 'them'. It might be worth you considering parental responsibility, and not just parents 'rights'.

Couple of more direct points.

1. Where there is a head injury in Australia, it is mandatory to report it to the parents. That isn't because of a rush to defend parent's rights. It's health and safety related because of the chance for delayed concussion. This reporting is formal, and includes a signing off by the parent.

2. If a child is being bullied (as in ongoing bullying), and an adult becomes aware of this, that adult should make the parent aware. Again, this is from a health and safety point of view, not 'parental rights'. I would expect that regardless of whether the adult is a teacher, coach, priest, relative or friend.

At some point, the child becomes a young adult, and capable of making their own choices. I'll readily admit I'm not sure where this point is, and in reality it's different for different kids. But if we talk about a twelve year old, they absolutely might not be the best placed person to make a decision pertaining to their own health and safety.

and

Required, as in by law?

No...indeed, I don't think I'd require them to inform parents if their child was presenting as a different gender. I know that might run contrary to how I've presented in this thread, but I'm taking more about what I think they 'should' do. Legal requirements are too clumsy, and harmful.

So, to the next question. Should the school inform parents if their child is presenting as homosexual?

Possibly...if it was a drastic change in behaviour, for example. Any drastic behavioural change should be a flag. But if you mean do I think a child who is reaching puberty starts showing attraction to same sex kids, then no.

This is what it is about. It may not have been stated but I have a suspicion the OP was inspired by
Amendment to ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill in Florida requires schools to out students to their parents within six weeks

A new amendment to Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” bill would require schools to inform parents of their children’s sexual orientation within six weeks of learning the student isn’t straight, NBC affiliate WFLA reported on Monday.

A local government that is already hostile towards everyone who is not straight mandates teachers to out their pupils to the parents "because the parents have a right to know". Nope - the kids have a right to privacy that is violated here.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I would agree. So then why would a patient go to a "gender affirmation" session? Sounds like the diagnosis has been made before the patient has been seen?

Probably because a lot of healthcare providers are bigoted ****s and will throw needless obstacles and barriers in your way to getting treatment even after you've been jumping through needless hoops and barriers to get treated. For me the worst was a wrongful diagnosis of psychotic disorder:nos, something that no one else saw but yet something that required extensive, excessive and unnecessary screening to rule that out. And even in California, an informed consent state, when I first moved here the first endo I saw refused to get my prescription for hormones started here, citing bs excuses as his reason (such as saying an e-signed document by a therapist in Indiana wasn't good enough because he wanted it hand signed).
So, yeah. It's pretty nice to not get your healthcare served with a side of bigotry. Especially in rural settings people just don't have the options or choices of providers.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

LMGTFY?

What does that mean?

 

[fantome profane]

What does that mean?

let me google that for you.

A snarky way of saying I am not going to answer your question.

 

[Debater Slayer]

You're not saying anything salient. It's a two party system, it's a given political postering comes from both. People feeling forced to vote with one or another isn't the same as people taking their cues from either party. Many form their own opinion and, if at all, settle for voting with the party that comes closest to their position.

This doesn't contradict anything I said. Actually, I explicitly said as much here:

The vast majority of the efforts to ban and protect gender-affirming care have come from the GOP and the Democratic Party, respectively. This is why I mentioned the former. Even many of the people who support neither party vote for either in elections because they know that, realistically, their vote will only have a tangible effect if it goes to either party.

Assuming, in this case, transgender rights are high enough on their personal concerns. Trans rights are simply not a priority for many voters. E.g. this Gallup poll indicates LGBT rights don't rank in the top 10 concerns of Americans. Which is why it's fools folly when people reduce the trans rights debate to being left vs right. Lots of people who vote Republican are pro-choice and pro-LGBTQ, lots who vote Democrat are not. They vote with the party that comes closest to representing issues that are their priority.

It is still a fact that most of the anti-trans legislation is being advanced by the GOP. Nothing you've said here contradicts that, and most people whose safety and access to medical care are at stake are going to recognize which party is more likely to endanger those. The GOP were predicted to have a "red wave" in the 2022 Congressional elections and only managed to win the House after overturning Roe v. Wade. They failed to take into account how damaging that would be for their electability.

I don't believe that opinion polls are a highly reliable indication of social or political trends, but since you cited one, the polls below show a stark divide about trans issues along party lines. I see no reason to downplay or dismiss this just because there isn't an absolutely perfect correlation between a person's party affiliation and their stances on trans issues.

Americans’ Complex Views on Gender Identity and Transgender Issues

Most favor protecting trans people from discrimination, but fewer support policies related to medical care for gender transitions; many are uneasy with the pace of change on trans issues.

www.pewresearch.org

Deep partisan divide on whether greater acceptance of transgender people is good for society

There is no public consensus on whether greater social acceptance of transgender people is good or bad for society.

www.pewresearch.org

CBS News poll analysis: How do people view book bans, trans rights issues as GOP presidential primary fight ramps up?

For many Republicans, there's a pushback against the perceived overreach of today's diversity and inclusion efforts.

www.cbsnews.com

Also, if LGBT issues are not even a top-10 priority for most voters, why is one of the country's two main parties focusing so much on said issues, especially trans issues? Are the GOP wasting time, money, and effort by making those some of their most frequent talking points, then? I really hope so. I hope the efforts prove largely futile and don't garner them any considerable number of votes, but I doubt it. We'll see.

Pointing out neither side is entirely correct is not an attack. The needle will not move as long as people can't or won't admit to the hyperbole and radicalism found in their own camp. Seeing any observation as an "attack" serves no useful purpose..

I didn't say "any observation" was an attack; I specified that I was talking about what I see as an often overused and misplaced notion of "both sides." Of course "neither side" is entirely correct. No one is, short of a perfect human—and that doesn't exist. Again, in so many arguments concerning American politics, I see this kind of pointing out the obvious but not going into further details, and I often find it to be a distraction from the core issues and a dilution of the gravity of the currently stark differences between the positions of "both sides" on many issues.

Well, that didn't happen here, so I don't know what you're on about.

You did use the words "hysteria" and "radicalism" without directly specifying what positions you were describing. The former is especially not a well-defined one; it is a malleable wild card that can be invoked to dismiss an argument on emotionally charged grounds without evaluation of its logical or factual merit.

If you're incapable of seeing it then there's no point in discussion.

I can see what you were arguing; I just disagree. People can be quite capable of seeing an argument but still finding it unconvincing.

Federal law now recognizes same sex marriage and desegregation, so are you saying states should disregard it because some places don't agree with either one? Who cares whether federal laws change if people have your attitude of only acknowledging it IF it echoes your personal stance?

No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that federal law is not my political or moral guideline, and whether or not it allows something doesn't dictate my own views on what is moral or what should or shouldn't ideally be legal. I supported same-sex marriage before it was federally legalized in 2015, and I would continue to support it if the ruling were overturned—which is now a possibility given that the reversal draft for Roe v. Wade mentioned that ruling.

Only 330 million people out of nearly eight billion in the world are bound by federal law. For the remaining 7.67 billion, we could, more or less, live our whole lives as if it didn't even exist.

Yes, they need to be evaluated, and not by someone who's "gender affirming" with a rubber stamp but a licensed professional who will objectively confirm whether the child has dysphoria.

Gender-affirming care is provided by licensed professionals. The idea of a professional who is "'gender affirming' with a rubber stamp" is almost always hinged on hyperbole, edge cases, and political messaging. Yes, I agree that a child should be evaluated by licensed professionals, not by one of the minority of edge cases.

Considering parents are entirely responsible for the well-being of their children, they need to be informed. Full stop.

I quoted the post below and asked you for your thoughts on it. You didn't address any of the concerns in it.

Hi. Trans person here. Imma just share my perspective then unwatch this thread im not in a good mental space to talk deeply about this issue. It's not always safe to talk to parents about being trans. It really ain't. I am not trying to say most parents wouldn't be supportive or would be horrible to their kids. But if they were obviously supportive likely the kid would have already told the parent. I mean thats what most kids would do if they trans they tell folk they trust. That way they can explore it comfortably without being ridiculed for it. I've seen lots of bad things happen from kids being outted as lgbt to unaccepting parents. Suicide, disownment, a classmate being placed into conversion therapy... All 3 I've had happen to fellow lgbt classmates growing up and in one disownment case the person was a lesbian that was kicked out her home for bringing another girl to a dance. In a more perfect world parents should know. Cuz it's normal for kids to experiment and explore themselves. But sadly we are not in that world. I wish I could say parents can be told. But I cannot in good conscience say telling a parent would be a good idea. If the child is not telling the parent there's a good reason.

The overwhelming majority of parents are not abusive [...]

It seems to me that a ruling that all schools are supposed to follow should cover all cases, not just the majority. That's where nuance and case-by-case details come in.

These are statistics from the CDC:

Child abuse and neglect are common.
At least 1 in 7 children have experienced child abuse or neglect in the past year in the United States. This is likely an underestimate because many cases are unreported. In 2020, 1,750 children died of abuse and neglect in the United States.

Fast Facts: Preventing Child Abuse & Neglect |Violence Prevention|Injury Center|CDC

Adolescents and adults are often unaware that teens experience dating violence

www.cdc.gov

Then there's this:

• 4 million child maltreatment referral reports received in 2021.
• Child abuse reports involved 7.2 million children.
• 90.6% of victims are maltreated by one or both parents.
• Only 2.9 million children received prevention & post-response services.
• 156,576 children received foster care services.

Child Maltreatment & Neglect Statistics | American SPCC

Statistics show that child maltreatment and neglect are increasing, and are often an effect of parental alcoholism or substance abuse. Learn the facts on child neglect at our Learning Center.

americanspcc.org

Almost 4 million children were involved in maltreatment investigations in 2020, according to data from the Department of Health and Human Services. Out of those investigations, more than 618,000 children were found to be victims of abuse or neglect. More than 77% of the perpetrators of the abuse are parents of the victims.

How many children are victims of abuse or neglect in the US?

Almost 4 million children were involved in maltreatment investigations in 2020, according to data from the Department of Health and Human Services.

usafacts.org

I have no doubt that most parents in the US are loving, responsible, and supportive of their children. However, as I said, a ruling that all schools are supposed to follow should take all cases into account, and the above statistics combined with the increasing anti-LGBT hostility in the political climate and in legislation lead me to believe that the possibility of abuse after a school outs an LGBT child should absolutely be taken into account in such a general and far-reaching ruling.

[...] and IF there is evidence the parents are abusive then the emphasis should be on having the family monitored from the jump, as with a mandatory social worker and working with family/child protective services as the given situation may dictate. If abuse is a real possibility, then that's a situation that likely merits removing the child from their parents. Doing things behind parents' backs, especially if they're abusive, is playing with fire and will needlessly escalate a situation. Denying parents knowledge of their child's health and concerns impedes responsible parents.

I agree that parents who show indications of being abusive should be investigated. Sometimes things are not so cut-and-dried, though, and a parent who might not otherwise be abusive might become so in regards to the specific issues of their child's sexual or gender identity. In many societies and communities, this could also happen with other highly sensitive issues like religious affiliation, where a child's deconversion could lead to life-changing consequences for them.

Continuing in the next post due to the character limit.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Continued.

Ahh, ok. I didn't interpret @YmirGF's comment that way. I was looking at it solely in reference to you in the hypothetical.

In the hypothetical, I said I wouldn't be able to out a child in good conscience knowing they could be abused because of it. You think a teacher should be fired for having this hesitation or unwillingness to endanger a child? What do you suggest instead, then? Because I don't think "just tell the parents even when you know they could abuse the kid" is a great alternative. If you can't think of a third option, I'm not sure why you would support firing a teacher in that specific situation.

I do agree with their comment, "A parent simply saying they think their child is delusional could be construed as being abusive to the ideologically unhinged." Which isn't a stretch. As it is, anytime anyone doesn't agree 100% with trans activism, their comments are labeled as an "attack" and "transphobic" when its not the case at all.

"Trans activism" seems to have also become another malleable wild card of a term, getting invoked without an accompanying delineation of exactly what the person using it includes in the term.

Is it "trans activism" to say that some LGBT children could face abuse at home due to being outed? Or to say that a child who claims to identify with another gender should be evaluated by professionals to determine whether they have gender dysphoria or are non-binary instead of immediately and definitively being called "delusional"?

Should any teacher be removed for having an opinion that differs from the parents? No. This is also a per case basis.

I agree, especially that it is a case-by-case issue. I don't think there's a "one size fits all" answer here.

I wouldn't want a teacher thinking it's ok to advance their religious, political or other beliefs & ideology, even if they're similar to my own. If the teacher is using their position for anything other than to teach the subject they were hired for, then yes, they're going to have a problem.

I agree, but I don't think the ruling that is the subject of this thread is related to that. In this case, staying silent doesn't seem to me necessarily equivalent to the teacher's usage of their position for anything. The ruling only states that they're not required to report a child's claimed gender identity.

 

[Callisto]

I am not, nor have I ever suggested denying parents access to their child's school record. But I am saying teachers should not be required to report everything the child tells them, or eveything they have overheard. If they see a boy with a pink princess pencil case, or carrying a backpack like a purse, they don't need to send up a flare.

No one is arguing that every little thing needs to be reported. Things on par with a pink pencil case is not at issue, gender identity is not a trivial matter.

Rather, it's when something is a noteworthy significant change, on par with behavioral changes or it's evident something is impacting their grades. Suddenly changing pronouns when previously there was no indication of gender confusion, wanting to be called a different name that clearly is not a nickname (it's not Thomas asking to be called Tom, he wants to be called Beverly); and observing changes in behavior enough for the teacher to note rather than write off as typical childhood eccentricities all kids move in and out of all the time.

If something merits the teachers attention so that they feel they need to monitor and approach the child about it to assess what's going on means it's something the parents should know about. Informing parents isn't the same as raising an alarm, it simply means letting them know changes were observed and what the teacher's opinion is. That's not far different than a pediatrician noticing something during an exam and telling the parents, "I noticed X. It will likely resolve itself, but if you notice Y or Z occur, let me know and I'll run some tests. Until then, I don't think it's anything to worry about."

 

[fantome profane]

That's not far different than a pediatrician noticing something during an exam and telling the parents, "I noticed X. It will likely resolve itself, but if you notice Y or Z occur, let me know and I'll run some tests. Until then, I don't think it's anything to worry about."

It is different than a pediatrician noticing something.

Comparisons and analogies are very tricky in this area. You can't compare this to a mole that might turn out to be cancer, you can't compare this to a disease or an illness. You can't have someone run some tests. It is a personal emotional issue that goes right to the core of who someone is.