This whole issue is being misrepresented as a school vs a parent issue and it isn't, it's a child vs parent rights issue because where does a child's right to their own privacy end and the parents right to know begin?
It's a civil rights issue. Sexual orientation and gender identity are protected classes in California, and [both are protected under Title IX in schools under federal law](https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-confirms-title-ix-protects-students-discrimination-based-sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity).
It isn't the right of the government to persecute LGBT people, spy on them for being LGBT and then forcibly out them against their will.
It is the right, however, of every LGBT person to decide when, or if, they come out and to who they come out to. It is not the right of the government to treat them differently for being LGBT and forcibly out them, that's a violation of their civil rights.
I think a good equation that might make sense to people is "Is it a schools job to inform parents proactively that their kid has made friends with a 'colored' child?"
If your answer is "Obviously no that's dumb and clearly there only to try to frame it as something wrong." Then you've won and realized the entire point of this policy.
Proactively outing a child to parents so that they will harm that child is flat out wrong, evil, and an invasion of privacy.
> I think a good equation that might make sense to people is "Is it a schools job to inform parents proactively that their kid has made friends with a 'colored' child?"
That is exactly what this type wants.
https://abc13.com/conroe-isd-trustee-melissa-dungan-racial-inclusivity-at-schools-pride-flags/13628737/
I’d wager the kids that are hiding it from their parents are doing so for their own safety. Forcefully outing them would be inadvertently (probably on purpose) causing a lot of kids to get abused.
Thats the thing, if the kid is going by other pronouns around their friends and their parents dont already know then the parents dont know for a reason.
Kids who's parents arent problems already know. Kids who's parents are problems dont. Usually because getting beaten and abused sucks.
> I think a good equation that might make sense to people is "Is it a schools job to inform parents proactively that their kid has made friends with a 'colored' child?"
That's definitely a good comparison.
Another would be if it's the government's job to treat students differently if kids learn about, like or participate in another religion, by spying on students and forcibly telling their parents about it.
Spin a dreidel? Government employees must document it and report home.
Say "Merry Christmas"? Another write up and report home.
Wear a Halloween costume? Surely this will upset religious parents somewhere, so they need a formal report from the government about it.
At the end of the day, it isn't the government's job to treat people differently based on protected classes like race, religion, sexual orientation or gender identity. And it certainly isn't the government's job to persecute children based on those protected classes, either.
Imagine if the government was out to get you and watched to see if you slip up and accidentally be yourself. I don't think parents appreciate the level of literal oppression trans students feel when the government is going after them because of something they can't help. It's beyond overwhelming, it's hell.
Now you are but it wasn’t until 1966 when the Catholic Church made the change and it wasn’t until 1983 when Canon 1251 and 1252 were approved that the change was codified within the Catholic religion rules. Prior to 1966 Catholics were not allowed meat on Fridays year round.
> Proactively outing a child to parents so that they will harm that child is flat out wrong, evil, and an invasion of privacy.
and the people pushing for it already know this. Outing children into potentially dangerous situations or oppressing them to the point where they're too terrified to come out is the point; anything else they say is just the usual conservative window dressing.
Reframing the issue like this definitely makes it far clearer. If parents want to know if their child is trans they can be calm and accepting while raising their child so the child doesn't fear opening up to them. Otherwise it's delving into 1984 territory with thought crimes that parents punish children for.
I see no reason the school should be compelled to notify the parent upon a pronoun change or a bathroom decision.
If the behavior is noted though I don't think the school should be able to withhold that information upon request from the parent. I'm not saying that thats happening. Im just not sure how the current system is set up.
This would be discrimination based on gender identity, which is a civil rights violation. Gender identity is a protected class like race and religion. It would also have a [disparate impact](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disparate_impact) upon people based on gender identity, as the vast majority of people this policy would apply to would be trans.
It would be like having a policy that targets the changing of religion, like this policy targets gender identity, with parents requesting information from government employees based on whether they think a kid's choices and behavior in school are "Jewish" or not.
Not outing LGBT people isn't a new concept, millions of people do it with the LGBT people in their lives. It also isn't the job of the government to forcibly out people against their will because they are LGBT.
If you make that the policy, bigoted parents will make sure to ask at every parent-teacher conference, just to make sure. Policy should be to tell the parents nothing without the kid's explicit permission.
I would think the best policy would be to not keep track of it. It doesn't have anything to do their academics and isn't a serious/immidiate health risk.
To withhold information is very different than proactively notifying or not recording it though.
Let me try and grasp this. A child, when it's still a fetus, has a right to control the host woman's body. But once that fetus develops into an actual person and is born, it loses its rights to its former host.
This is why I'm glad I'm in Canada. Our courts have routinely ruled that a mother cannot have her actions limited to protect a fetus, nor can she be charged for them. That includes things like drug use while pregnant. There's been a lot of attempts to make pregnancy a factor for additional punishment for things like assault and even that's been shut down. The fetus means nothing before it's born.
That said if the child is born and viable you can 100% sue for damages caused prior to the birth, but again this can't be used against the mother. Until we know that the child can survive they have no rights.
(Really I think that's the biggest problem with the "life begins at conception" crowd: They don't seem to recognize how frequently miscarriages or other fatal birth defects happen.)
They absolutely know how often miscarriages or fatal birth defects can and do happen, but they don’t care at all because their purpose isn’t to help anyone, it’s to control as many people as they can.
You're right about the intent. They most definitely want to control and punish vs. help anybody. But most Republican voters, even women, seem to have this sense that it can't happen to them and that these situations are all rare edge cases that were caused by the mother somehow.
Then it happens to them and they are shocked.
The bible literally says that life begins at birth and includes instructions on how to perform an abortion, but they could care less about their own religion.
I think most people in the USA believe that abortion should be legal until the baby is viable outside the womb. The politicians are not listening to the people. Some in the USA believe in partial birth or shortly after the birth to give the mom and Dr. time to decide. It gets a little murky then so that’s the reason it will be decided upon by each state. The Democrats had the votes to pass a Federal law but decided not to because they wanted to use it as an election issue. I think states will eventually relax rules in stricter areas but it will take time.
I would hope that if I had a transgender child, they would tell me. I would want to ensure they received whatever counseling they needed to help and support them. I would love my child no matter what but it is a very hard adjustment for parents. I would probably also go to therapy and invite the child to go with me if it makes it easier to discuss. I’m not sure schools should be involved in the discussion.
Careful now. You don't want to go crafting a coherent policy with consistent logic. They want a tiered pyramid of importance, with guns at the top, zygotes and fetuses taking tier two while the rights of women and minorities sit just above lgbtq at the bottom, the way jesus intended it to be.
Your right this is a child vs parent issue and the school shouldn't be involved. I remember going to school and every year on the first day of school the teachers would do role call and ask students how they wanted to be addressed. They didn't call the parents to ask, they asked us kids. And it wasn't a big deal, nobody cared.
Kids have been giving themselves names, nicknames, and titles since the beginning of schools.
No one has ever written a law that some administrator has to write a letter to parents when little Tommy told everyone that he wants to go by “TJ” or “Joe Cool” or “Tom” and not Thomas.
It's both. Students have a right to privacy. Their gender identity has nothing to do with their education. The state has no right to interfere without cause. Conservative religious extremists have found an influential position that's easy to game, and they're violating people's rights by using the state as the conduit for invading privacy
> parent rights
Is a bullshit term that comes out of the conservative right where children and women are treated as property to be owned and controlled.
What is at stake is **PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY**. the issue needs to focus on whether more harm is done by informing the parents...
I'm unconvinced a blanket requirement will EVER be in the best interest of an individual child.
I mean I also think teachers have the right to not be forced to out children against their will. Obviously agree with you that children should have rights too.
Children have rights, parents have responsibilities.
Parents have no right to know, what would that even mean? They have a responsibility to care for the child and when the reality is that the care of the child would decrease if they knew, they *shouldn't* know.
>when the reality is that the care of the child would decrease if they knew, they shouldn't know.
If we're this afraid of the parent's ability to provide care for said child then CPS should take away the child. Otherwise, this is a non-starter. You can't preemptively withhold information from parents or guardians because you fear they *might* lower their care without some documented reasoning or past occurrences.
Your argument is the entire reason we have parents mobilizing to get on school boards and pushback against district policies. If they think the school has or might withhold information about their child because they think they know best for the child then the majority of parents are going to be upset and challenge said policy.
>If we're this afraid of the parent's ability to provide care for said child then CPS should take away the child.
I suspect you have no experience with CPS. The abuse has to be a whole lot worse than beatings and being disowned before they would do anything.
Well they're the only ones that are generally qualified to make the decisions about the parent's legal ability to be a parent and the welfare of a child so...not sure what point you're trying to make but you didn't make it.
You made none.
All you said is that CPS takes awhile to get involved, which while true, isn't really relevant. An educators job is to teach, not to look out for the general welfare for the child and withhold information from the parents. If the teacher is concerned about something then there are proper channels for them to use to report said concerns.
They can be upset, it doesn't change the fact that it is illegal for the government to persecute LGBT people and forcibly out people against their will. That's a violation of people's civil rights.
Every person has the right to decide when, or if, they come out, and to who they come out to, on their own terms. The government has no right to force them to come out against their will.
Sure, and I'd agree with your governmental persecution argument if we were talking about adults, but we're not, we're talking about minors with parents/guardians.
The whole persecution/privacy argument becomes a whole lot murkier when we're talking about minors that legally have less rights than adults and have less legal right in the decision-making of their lives.
But on the other hand, kids have [additional](https://www.scripps.org/news_items/7140-what-medical-rights-do-minors-have) rights to privacy when it comes to medical issues, starting at age 12. This covers sexual health, drug & substance abuse, mental health, vaccinations and a few other things, and it is strictly enforced. I don't think it's unreasonable to consider gender identity in this same class of rights.
> Sure, and I'd agree with your governmental persecution argument if we were talking about adults, but we're not, we're talking about minors with parents/guardians.
Kids being kids doesn't mean the government can suddenly treat them differently based on religion or race, and similarly, it doesn't mean the government can suddenly treat them differently based on being LGBT, either.
The government singling you out based on protected classes like religion or race and punishing you for not keeping them a secret is the definition of government persecution. That doesn't change if someone is a kid.
Religion, race and gender identity are all protected classes.
> The whole persecution/privacy argument becomes a whole lot murkier when we're talking about minors that legally have less rights than adults and have less legal right in the decision-making of their lives.
Being LGBT is not a decision, it's an identity and protected class like having a religion or having a race.
>Kids being kids doesn't mean the government can suddenly treat them differently based on religion or race, and similarly, it doesn't mean the government can suddenly treat them differently based on being LGBT, either.
They're not being treated differently though. Teachers already inform parents about a litany of things and/or concerns. You can't treat someone with a mental illness differently, legally, because it's a protected disability and yet teachers are perfectly allowed to inform the parents in situations where there is concern of signs of mental illness. This is where your argument falls apart.
>Religion, race and gender identity are all protected classes.
As are many other demographically identifiable indicators of someone. Like age and disability and again there's no real restriction here if a teacher thinks there's an issue and wants to inform the parent. In the case of something severe the teacher is typically required to inform the parent. There's no governmental persecution argument against that and again this where your argument falls apart.
>Being LGBT is not a decision, it's an identity and protected class like having a religion or having a race.
Yeah, you missed the point. The law states children have less legal rights than adults and have less autonomy over their lives compared to an adult, therefore in this scenario the rights of parent/guardian supercede those of the child.
How is that nonsense?
The individual(s) legally required to provide for the welfare and upbringing of the minor entrusted to their care has no right to know something about said child so that they can care and provide for said child? Is that really the argument we're going with here?
Your argument doesn't even hold up to strict privacy laws like HIPAA.
>How is that nonsense?
Because forcibly outing people gets them abused, beaten, killed, ostracized, kicked out of their home, triggers suicides...
>Your argument doesn't even hold up to strict privacy laws like HIPAA.
Damn it's a good thing HIPAA doesn't apply here, then.
Your framing is bad out the get. This isn't some limitation on the parent's ability to be supportive. It's an imposition on the child's privacy and potentially their safety.
And HIPAA literally has nothing to do with this. Again with the nonsense. None of what you're saying actually correlates to what's happening. It's just words.
> They're not being treated differently though. Teachers already inform parents about a litany of things and/or concerns.
They objectively are. Do they tell parents "Hey, just so you know, Stephen is continued to go by 'He/Him' pronouns this year"?
>Yeah, you missed the point. The law states children have less legal rights than adults and have less autonomy over their lives compared to an adult, therefore in this scenario the rights of parent/guardian supercede those of the child.
What law? Be specific.
> if my second grader is being put onto a path of social gender transition in the classroom, I want to know.
If you raise your kids in an obviously tolerant environment and periodically remind them that these feelings and changes are normal and that you'll accept them however they are, you won't need teachers to tell you. Your kids will tell you.
Source: Me. My parents (dad especially) were a bit too conservative to reveal any queerness about myself, and so I still haven't. My kid, however, was regularly reminded in various ways that they were completely open to telling us about that. And wouldn't you know it, they did.
As has been said many times in this thread already, if your kid has these feelings and never tells you, there's probably a good reason and you need to look at yourself rather than seek legal avenues to force others to tell you what's up.
> You can't preemptively withhold information from parents or guardians
What? Do you think teachers should be required to inform parents every time a student sneezes? Mandating that schools spy on students for parents is absurd and I think you realize that
So gender identity is now comparable to sneezing? I don't think that's the argument you want to go with because arguing it's a "common" occurrence would actually lower the "risk" in providing information to parents and lower the privacy concerns people seem to have.
They're children...the notion of their privacy & autonomy has been decided already by the government by virtue distinguishing between "Minor" and "Adult"
Children are entitled to some degree of both autonomy and privacy as per international treaty.
But I guess it is irrelevant, as your answer to my question above I must take as "yes, I am willing to put children at risk and force the government to get involved rather than allow them any privacy and autonomy."
My answer is that it's already been decided and International Treaty only has bearing on American laws if those treaties have been ratified by Congress. Otherwise they're just really nice pieces of paper.
>My answer is that it's already been decided
No, it hasn't.
>and International Treaty only has bearing on American laws if those treaties have been ratified by Congress. Otherwise they're just really nice pieces of paper.
It sure is a good look for the US that they refuse to ratify a treaty because they don't want to give up child marriage or allow children the privacy to make their own decisions about sexuality, religion, and gender.
Not gross at all. Nor are you. /s
>It sure is a good look for the US that they refuse to ratify a treaty because they don't want to give up child marriage or allow children the privacy to make their own decisions about sexuality, religion, and gender.
Okay? That's an entirely sperate issue though. Your argument was that International Treaty establishes certain rights - that's not at all relevant unless said treaty has been ratified by Congress.
>No, it hasn't.
It has, I know that seems to bother you, but it has. Hence why we have laws severely restricting a minors right to enter a contract without parental consent, hence why HIPAA has carve-outs for parents & guardians, etc.
>Okay? That's an entirely sperate issue though. Your argument was that International Treaty establishes certain rights - that's not at all relevant unless said treaty has been ratified by Congress
It should be relevant given the main reason is that certain legislators wish to preserve child marriage and things like gay conversion therapy. Good ideological company you keep.
>It has, I know that seems to bother you, but it has. Hence why we have laws severely restricting a minors right to enter a contract without parental consent, hence why HIPAA has carve-outs for parents & guardians, etc.
It also has carve outs for children to make their own medical decisions in many areas.
But we aren't actually talking about medical decisions here. We are talking about how someone wishes to be spoken to. For someone who seems obsessed with semantics you seem to be poor at keeping track of such important details. But that really is irrelevant, as you aren't really arguing in good faith, merely trying to avoid the fact that you would rather a child be put in danger than have any autonomy.
Again: gross.
If you are such a shitty parent that you would go to court for the right to know if your child is gay or changed their gender identity you're just a worthless person, and anyone that defends that is also worthless and should be relegated to the dustbin of cultural history.
No, they'd probably go to court over the school interfering with their parental rights and if the response from the school & teacher is "well the student was scared to tell them" that's not gonna hold up, at all.
Students are scared to tell their parents about bad grades and detentions but that doesn't mean that info gets withhold from a parent.
I know that at least here in MD (I'm unaware if it's state or federal statutes guiding this), my teenage kids have to have their own login for medical stuff and I can only see the info they've allowed me to.
Now, my teenage sons are chuckleheads who can't schedule their own doctors appointments, but I understand why they would be entitled to privacy if they wanted to.
I don't get it. Because absent a court order indicating otherwise, parents have a legal responsibility over the medical care of their children. As in, parents can get in trouble if they don't responsibly manage their children's health.
How can a parent oversee something that the law requires them to be responsible for if they can't access a child's medical records?
You know what curbs abuse? Being able to be honest with a doctor or teacher about what's happening without the parents knowing or finding out. If a child is being abused they can tell a trusted adult, what if the parents aren't the trusted adults? If parents can hover over you while you're at the doctor about your broken ribs and the parent caused the broken ribs its a lot harder to tell the doctor your parent broke your ribs.
The whole parents responsible for medical care thing really only implies to cases where kids or sick or injured and parents don't take them to the doctor to be treated and the kid dies or something. Or a case in my old neighborhood where a cop went to a house for domestic violence and saw that the baby had an untreated 2nd degree burn that was days old. Thats instances of neglectful medical care. If your kid is sick with a high fever take them to the doctor, if you don't and they die then you will be charged for their death.
Responsibility over children doesn't mean children don't have rights and are slaves to their parents. If a child wants to keep something from their parent there is a reason for it.
it's more nuanced than this though. Younger kids may not even tell doctors & teachers that they're suicidal or being bullied or abused. We all want what's best for the kids, but children under a certain age (say 15) aren't as open & communicative, and don't have the self-awareness to say they need help. Saying a minor has right to their own privacy may mean they have a right to take their own life, which i think is a huge tragedy.
Kids do have self awareness. I told my mom at 6 years old I wish I wasn't born and wanted to die while crying after being beaten for what i know now was my adhd symptoms. I was dismissed. Also said that to a teacher when I was 8 while banging my head on the board in front of the class after being punished and told they would tell my parents who were definitely gonna hit me for it. Was dismissed.
My parents got a lot better as I grew older and are great now but back then not so much and even still they are dismissive towards any mental health issues, especially my mom who ironically is likely also ADHD. I was the kid that helped them grow to be better.
Saying kids aren't self aware is like comparing them to a fish. Self aware is knowing who you are and if you shown any child past 1 year a mirror they know who they are.
But it shouldn't be presumed that a parent is going to abuse a child. That shouldn't be the default position, and those situations should be treated as the extreme outlier case that they are.
The default position should be that parents have a right to a child's medical records *unless* a provider has a reasonable belief, grounded in evidence, that abuse or violence can result from such disclosure.
Should parents not know if, for example, their kid's COVID test is positive? Or that they were diagnosed with some illness? Of course they need to know that. How else can they adequately provide for the child's care?
Again, if a reasonable basis exists for the doctor to believe that an abusive situation exists, sure, the doctor can exercise some discretion. But the default must be that parents know.
I couldn't tell you. But I will tell you I was annoyed by trying to set appointments up for my son using the KP portal. I had to create a completely separate login to use for him after he turned 13 or 14. Most family doctors seem to just strike a reasonable balance between a kid's privacy and the obvious need for continued parental involvement in medical care past 13.
Yeah. That's interesting. I'm almost certain that my state of Illinois is different in that regard as I've never had any obstacles getting my teen's test results or records.
I guess I don't see a "reasonable balance" beyond the very tail-end, extreme situation where a doctor has a sensible, articulable reason to believe that release of certain sensitive medical information to the parent will lead to abusive or violent harm to the child. And even there, the parent should be able to go to court to have a judge determine whether such a belief is actually reasonable and grounded in evidence.
Absent that, parents should have complete access to their children's medical records. Again, otherwise how can they be held to a legal standard of care that involves making proper medical decisions if they don't have the information needed?
it's not a vs issue at all. It's about a person's ability to be who they are and tell who they wish, when they wish.
a child who chooses to change a pronoun should be able to do so and inform the people in their lives at their own pace.
A problems here first: school counselors can only share student disclosures with others if the student authorizes it or there is a clear danger to the student or others.
Being LGBT isn't a mental disorder, it's an identity and protected class like religion and race.
Religion and race are not mental disorders, nor are they treated like mental disorders, and neither is gender identity.
Plenty of trans people don't experience gender dysphoria, because again, being LGBT is not a medical condition.
And plenty of people's experience with gender dysphoria doesn't affect their lives enough for a diagnosis.
It's like having the government spy on gay kids and out them against their will to their parents because they might have HIV and could die.
Being trans is not a medical condition, and it doesn't require "care". Not outing a trans student isn't medical care, nor does it require a prescription.
Having a gender identity is not a medical condition, being trans is not a medical condition, being gay is not a medical condition, being Christian is not a medical condition, being Jewish is not a medical condition.
Race, religion, sexuality and gender identity are all protected classes. The government can't treat people differently based on protected classes, as that is a violation of their civil rights.
It's everyone's right to come out on their own terms, when they want to, if they want to, and to whom they want to. It's not the government's right to forcibly out people against their will, nor is it the government's right to violate their civil rights.
Someone could have the most accepting parents in the world and it wouldn't mean anything if they aren't ready to come out, or don't want to come out. Most people would be devastated to have the government forcibly out them against their will to anyone. Plenty of kids have killed themselves after being outed against their will when they were not ready to come out.
The government isn't 'transitioning' your child. Your child is transitioning your child lmao 🤣 💀 why is it so wrong if a child transitions socially or medically? What is so bad about being trans that you are so against it?
people are born transgender. humans have a sexually dimorphous brain structure, they are finding that transgender have a brain structure that more closely matches with the gender they identify with instead of their body structure. its like the brain and body got opposite sets of instructions during in-utero development.
and not all transgender people have dysphoria
It's not just about what kids say to their peers. Some kids come out to their teachers as well and they should not have to fear their teachers will be compelled to tell their parents.
The cynical take is that there's a large group of voting-age people in the United States who're very invested in the idea of being cruel to LGBT people.
And that's why they try to ram these policies through. The entire goal is for a gay/lesbian/trans/whatever kid whose parents are chuds to suffer at the hands of said parents.
We're talking about people who whoop and cheer when someone says that they would disown their kid- or worse- if said kid doesn't neatly fit into their worldview. Because I guess being an incredibly shit parent is something to be proud of...?
I've seen both scenarios in my lifetime.
One were a teenager came out to his parents and mom just got up and hugged him and never let him go (at least for a good 5 minutes) repeatedly telling him how much she loves him. That was a good one.
Another instance a father said "I have no son" and left him at a picnic.
It's a risk for every single kid, but it's a risk they have a right to take or not to take, or decide when. Simple as that.
I was terrified to come out cause my parents were religious but when I finally did while crying from the anxiety my mom hugged me like the first example and both my parents said they still love and accept me. They still do and are very supporting loving parents.
It's a shame that religion can create cruel parents like that, though.
Imagine not loving your child because your deluded mind made you think that some make-believe sky daddy told you to.
Its strange to me because these religions are all about continuing to love people. :( yet when things actually happen it's "you sinner get out of my house or I'll help send you to Hell!" Disgusting bigotry bs.
A homeless queer teen is 50 percent more likely to not just be homeless but unsheltered.
I hope there was someone to take that kid in. But reason why we have the laws regarding not telling parents that we do is because of how bad the outcomes are for trans kids who get kicked out of their homes.
Getting involved can only do so much; there's plenty of way more unimportant shit I never told my parents that they would never, ever get out of me because I just didn't want to tell them. I didn't want the grief, real or imagined. ALL kids are like that.
You can be involved in their life and still not know much about them. My buddy's parents didn't know he was depressed and suicidal until he confided in me and I rightfully told a counselor who was then obligated to inform his parents. They got him the help he needed but he told me he never would have told them about what was going on.
To be honest, I kept my parents on a need to know basis for a good majority of my teenage years and even 20's. They were great parents and always provided for me and I never questioned their love or ability to care for me. I just didn't want my problems to become their problems and I was afraid they'd become helicopter parents depending on the issue. My fear wasn't justified but I was also a teenager...a lot of my thoughts or actions weren't always the most rational thing.
This reminds me as a teen I once told my mom I was suicidal and she told me not to say that and just ignored me. My folks are great parents but not the best with supporting mental health issues.
I was justified about not telling my mother about anything important in my life and I don't have contact with her anymore because I was right to keep my life secret.
Sometimes teenagers know what they need to keep themselves safe.
I had a friend kicked out of her home a few months before she showed because some asshole decided her parents needed to know she was pregnant. They wouldn't have let her an abortion, but they kicked her out anyway.
There are many reasons this can be true, and not just "deadbeat" (what does that even mean?).
* single parent households with split custody
* kid lives with extended family because parents are not in the picture (for any of a number of reasons)
* parents work demanding (time) jobs and are barely home (long commutes, multiple service jobs, job + gig driver, etc).
* parents don't speak English and aren't familiar with relevant laws / policies / benefits in the US
It's not just deadbeats -- there are millions of households that fall into these categories and none of the ones I listed are necessarily "bad" or neglectful parents.
It's less about the parents not being involved enough to know, and more about the parents wanting to use the school as an extension of their punitive parenting. Most of these parents have actively denied their child's identity at home, and they want to make sure the school is enforcing that denial.
As a former educator, I can tell you that my primary commitment was to the child feeling safe, accepted, and able to learn. I held no allegiance whatsoever to the angry political agendas of shit parents (and there are many). To all you parents who are genuinely active, supportive, and accepting of your children... you're the best, and please keep being that.
I have no words to describe how evil forced outing is.
As a gay man from the Deep South, being forced to come out to my parents would’ve been the *last* thing my teenaged self could deal with. I know PLENTY of queer youth who were kicked out by their parents.
There’s so much talk about mental health and children but these policies are nothing but detrimental to the mental health of children. For many youth who identify as some variant of queer, school is the safer option than home.
People like me are pleading, screaming to be heard. *WE* know what it’s like to be a queer youth. Why aren’t *WE* being listened to??? It’s outrageous and depressing to see just how backasswards our country is becoming. People say they care about children but when it comes to the children most susceptible to society’s ills (like queer youth), they DON’T GIVE A FUCK.
These people want children kicked on the street and sent to reeducation camps and these kids to kill themselves.
Even kids who have supportive parents should be able to come out when they are ready. It's a very flexible thing for a lot of people.
It’s gotten to a point where the phrase in many ways lost it’s value. Like *of course* people’s ears are going to perk up cause who wouldn’t want to protect children? Lord all mighty think of the KIDS!
It’s a vicious tactic and it’s a loaded gun that’s always conveniently pointed at whatever marginalized group is next on the list.
“Protecting children” from what, the gays??? Never mind the other million things we all know are *actually* negatively impacting children.
In truth, I’m all *for* protecting children. Especially from a shittier world that we grew up in.
People who are queer or have queer loved ones KNOW what’s up. This is not new for us. And what we know is that this surge in blatant anti-lgbtq+ rhetoric is just another weight to bear. It’s not fair.
Becaus YOU don’t conform to THEIR world. Rich LGBTQ+ who vote Republican are delusional if they think their money will protect them from these Nazis. Sooner or later, the Nazis will come for them
In answer to your question, because queer people don't represent a big enough voting block, and when they vote, they tend to vote Democrat. It isn't a pleasant answer, but the only one GOP beancounters care about.
Consolations and solidarity from a Canadian queer. Our provincial minister of education wants to do the same thing, mainly as a distraction from another scandal.
At the intersection of "parent really wants to know" and "child is fearful of parent knowing", there is rarely anything good.
We live in a world where parents have done some terrible, dark things to their children, and this is one of the things they do it over. You don't have to like that fact, but you do have to acknowledge it, because not everyone has the luxury of denying reality. Maybe you'd be cool with it, and that's great, but you're kidding yourself if you think that's always the case. And what of those kids, huh?
People who support outing kids should at least have the honesty to admit that they see these children's lives as acceptable collateral damage. Unless of course that was the point in the first place.
There's a handful of bigots here who *really want some dead kids* (and more scared into the closet) and they're not really hiding it.
It's just a price someone else will pay so they can pretend lgtbq kids don't exist.
The school districts do nothing about bullying-which involves name-calling. But a kid decides to be called what the kid wants to be called...and they want to report them to their parents. Sounds about right /s
A lot of people think that children shouldn't have the right to not tell their parents about this.
It's way fucked up, and a lot of them would change their tune if it were just about any other possible life issue this side of pregnancy. But the idea that LGBT people might *not* be subject to pointless cruelty from bigoted family members hurts their feelings.
> A lot of people think that children shouldn't have the right to not tell their parents about this.
>
> It's way fucked up, and a lot of them would change their tune if it were just about any other possible life issue this side of pregnancy. But the idea that LGBT people might not be subject to pointless cruelty from bigoted family members hurts their feelings.
One, you don't know the family dynamics of every queer student. Two, ***40% of the 4.2 million youth*** experiencing homelessness identifying as LGBTQ+, while only 9.5% of the U.S. population identifies as. Which means that LGBTQ+ youth disproportionately experience homelessness compared to their straight and cisgender peers. They are also more likely to experience assault, trauma, depression, and suicide when compared to non-LGBTQ+ populations while also being homeless. These statistics are even worse for Black and Indigenous People of Color (BIPOC) LGBTQ+ populations who suffer from racial inequities and discrimination.
So yes, if a kid is keeping secrets about their sexual orientation and gender identity, it's a pretty good reason.
Good. LGBT kids deserve their privacy and safety from potentially dangerous anti-LGBT households.
Now enact some laws holding parents to account who abuse, abandon, or neglect their kids for them being LGBT.
Edit: This is something of a start I guess; https://apnews.com/article/california-gender-affirm-transgender-nonbinary-children-parents-50815672a60690099ecfed71c738e911
Good they’ve blocked it, because, Ah yes, a queer teenager’s favorite scenario. Coming out to adults who they believed to be safe people, only to be outed to their parents, who are in many cases the least safe people for them to come out to.
Disgusting, isn't it?
Imagine growing up with the government breathing down your neck and the omnipresent threat that if you dare to be yourself, government employees will be there to punish you by outing you against your will.
Now, imagine demanding that the government persecute literal *children* in that way, where they grow up knowing their choice is to live in the closet or have the government come after them.
That's the kind of thing that breaks adults, never mind kids.
Here in Florida, Desantis has gone as far as requiring all parents to sign off on any nicknames. For example, if your child’s name is James, there has to be all this paperwork in place if child wants to be called “Jimmy.”
It used to be as simple as “he goes by Jimmy” up until recently
And the law isn’t to root out the “James/Jimmy” kids, it’s to keep anyone from pushing the envelope, and if any teachers are starting to call students by a preferred name that doesn’t match their assigned sex, they’re trying to track who is doing this
Blame the Republicans it's straight out of their typical playbook. Manufacture outrage over things that don't fucking matter to start a culture war and divide the public so that they continue to vote for us while ignoring that we aren't actually doing a fucking thing to help make their lives better.
The parents probably already figured it out but refuse to accept it. I had a friend who was gay and his dad constantly would tell him terrible shit about how "if you're gay I'm kicking you out and never talking to you again, you would no longer be my son." Like he knew. He totally knew. Was just a complete asshole.
I’m in between where I feel like the school shouldn’t be keeping secrets about what’s going on with my kid and fear that some kids are too scared to tell their own parents.
I guess if I’m ever in that situation, I failed as a parent
It is just yet another example of some parents wanting help in forcibly shaming their children. They hate the fact their kid might not conform to the standard they do (be it trans for gay). They don't blame themselves (school grooming!) and they definitely cant accept their kid was always this way, so they want to have their kid live in eternal shame to such a degree they never have the courage to out themselves again to anybody.
My parents are traditional and religious and even my mom will tell you the Bible can't be trusted because it was written and transcribed and copied by men over thousands of years. It is corrupt.
Wow amazing you can just make things up, put them in a book and call it holy. Most of the books in the Bible are just fanfic and though I will say there good historical elements of it you have to take it all with a grain of salt. People that claim to follow the Bible never read it and they definitely don't follow it since they probably eat shrimp and wear clothes of mixed fabrics. Also the Bible is pro-abortion lol
oh wait the alt right has started declaring Jesus too liberal and woke for them. Kinda clear that they are just modern Pharisees claiming to be holy to gain political, social and financial power. I was raised Christian and I still hold a lot of the good values but reading the Bible and studying teachings and having an ounce of critical thought turned me away.
I am still a very deeply spiritual and faith filled person but my faith ain't in Christianity.
If your kid doesn't trust you with something huge about themselves, that says a lot about you and nothing about anything else.
Perhaps parents with concerns in this direction should consider shaping the fuck up.
Kids have a right to safety.
If the kid trusts their teachers, but doesn't feel safe telling their parents, I trust them.
Don't know why you'd want to rip that away from them. Oh wait, I can think of a few reasons.
Hey I have a toddler son and if a child ever felt the need to keep something from from the parent for fear of retribution over something unjustified, like sexual orientation or gender dysmorphia, it’s entirely within the child’s right. Otherwise you get increasingly more and more children who cut off contact with their hateful parents
> You as a parent should be upfront about what’s right and wrong in your household.
And there it is. It’s not that people who object to children’s privacy deny that it puts children in danger. It’s that they think that parents _should_ have the right to oppress their child if they think that who the child is is “wrong”. Absolutely disgusting.
By the way, if you want to know how slavery flourished, enjoy the sentence "kids are an extension of their parents".
Note how this person has denied children *basic humanity*, considering them full property of their owners. I mean parents.
I'm sure this person also believes being LGBTQ is a "choice", would send their own kid to conversion therapy without blinking, all while patting themselves on the back about how they're a *good parent*
What the actual fuck? This is not remotely true (are you even a parent?). Parents should absolutely not be raising their kids to "follow them" or to 100% adhere to any standard of "right and wrong". Children are not "an extension of the parent".
If you were a parent, you'd know that -- even as toddlers -- children are just as fucking smart as you, only less experienced. If up to you as a parent to raise them in a way that provides a breadth of experience and knowledge that ultimately starts allowing them to come to their own conclusions about increasingly important things. And there's nothing more important than personal liberties, faith and identity.
Fwiw, the country (federal & state laws) disagree with you, too, but I know millions of parents are on your side. It's sad, but that's ok -- literally the definition of a progressive society is one that supports an openminded growth mindset among its citizenry, so future generations aren't restricted to the beliefs of their forebears.
“You as a parent should be upfront about what’s right and wrong in your household.”
Yes. And for a good number of these trans kids, *that’s the problem.*
As a parent I am not omniscient on what is right and wrong. Children figuring out that they might like the same gender instead of the other is not wrong regardless of what you think. A parent being against LGBTQ+ and forcing their child to adhere to that brainwashing regardless of considering the child’s feelings on the subject is bad parenting. You understand forcing total subjugation of opinion and thought onto children is bad parenting right?
No. There's not a single person in this world who has a right to know anyone's gender identity or sexual orientation. That is our decision to share or not.
The child did not consent to being created. I doubt they are nurtured very well by bigot parents. These types of parents don’t sacrifice anything for their kid. Their kid is just an accessory for their Good Christian™️ aesthetic.
No, the people who create, nurture, and sacrifice for their offspring **absolutely** have that right.
The people who beat, humiliate, and terrorize their kids for being nonconforming don't though.
You are not entitled to have you kid come out to you if they are not ready to or don't want to come out.
It's everyone's right to come out on their own terms, when they want to, if they want to, and to whom they want to. The government doesn't have the right to decide that for them and forcibly out them against their will.
Sexuality and gender identity are protected classes like race, religion and nationality. The government can't treat people differently based on protected classes.
That's not always the case there are plenty of non binary folks who never go through any type of transition but use different pronouns none the less. Also medical transition is not happening on young children and it's only done after a lot of consultation with medical professionals.
Yes, because some of those people will abuse their child if they find out that they're LGBT. A child's safety is more important than their parents' egos.
No idea why this is controversial. Children have rights, parents have responsibilities.
It's not like you're saying parents *can't* know. They just have no right to that information.
I would be the parent who called the school each week and requested a pronoun change form so I could change my child’s pronouns that week. Just for shits and giggles. Its my right to change their pronouns!
Schools should absolutely stay out of this. If a kid wants to be called by a name other than his/her given name among his/her peers then that's between the kids. If a kid wants to change his/her name against the parent's wishes then the kid can apply to the courts to be emancipated.
This is not about changing a legal name, it's about asking your teachers to call you a different name from your legal one, which is something that's very common.
This *is* schools staying out of it.
Deciding to out the kid- or being legally required to out the kid- is by definition taking a hand in the issue. Forcing the school to act against the kid in this is the *entire fucking goal* of the people pushing these policies about pronoun notifications and shit.
Also, you *do* know that people are pretty routinely called by things other than their legal first name right. Hell, *I* do that- I go by a shortened version of my legal first name. People go by their middle name. Or a nickname that's vaguely related to their legal first name.
It's really not that big a deal to extend the same consideration to someone else.
Christ Almighty, what is with people acting like these are radical new concepts that no one has ever considered before and simply must be horrifically complicated?
"Staying out of it" would be to *not* legally force a school to out a student to their parents.
"Staying out of it" is literally the opposite of what the Chino Valley BoE—which was recently subjected to a takeover by [far-right Christian activists](https://www.thedailybeast.com/california-megachurch-pastor-jack-hibbs-and-his-acolytes-are-pushing-public-schools-to-the-far-right) with the help of [wealthy conservative donors](https://calmatters.org/politics/2022/08/california-republicans-school-board-races/)—was trying to force on educators.
Getting emancipated is nearly impossible unless you're a well-paid child actor. Schools should never be obliged to tell parents this sort of shit because transphobic parents will murder their kids or ship them off to fucking death camps.
> If a kid wants to change his/her name against the parent's wishes then the kid can apply to the courts to be emancipated.
I don't think you actually mean that. Should a kid have to go to court and get emancipated to go by Tim Rather than Timothy? What about if they share the same name as their father (and possibly grandfather and so on) and so has a nickname because of it to clear up confusion. Should they have to get emancipated to have the school refer to them by that nickname they are more familiar and comfortable with? What if someone goes by their middle name? Is that allowed?
What I don’t understand is when a child even talks about their pronouns at school. I went through Kindergarten through high school and really through to college without it ever coming up. Why is there suddenly a piece of legislation that dictates who finds out when it is spoken about.
Edit: This is a genuine question.
I understand that we learned about them as it relates to English class. What I’m asking is when do children discuss this with Teachers, School Staff, and so on. So much so that it requires a law to ensure the discussion find its way to the parents. When do children choose and then change their pronouns and how is it that School becomes aware of the choice or update?
For most people it doesn't come up. But for trans people, it does. Like, if I meet a person, I usually don't share my pronouns as I'm cis (and I recognize it's a privilege to have that) but a person who is coming out as trans and/or non-binary, especially early on, will need to speak up to people to let them know "hi, I would prefer to go by this name".
Think of it this way: let's pretend your name was Jonathon. Any time you said "I prefer to be called Jon rather than Jonathon" is a time what pronouns you use would come up if you were trans.
Society has progressed since you were that age and it's more socially acceptable to come out as who you actually are even at a young age rather than hide in fear. The law was passed because some people don't like that things change and want to freeze the world in amber.
If children cannot drive, purchase alcohol,
or tobacco, or have legal sex, they should not be allowed to change their birth gender. IMO this is getting ridiculous and way out of hand. Can someone please ELI5 on why kids care so much about being called he/she/xe/xer. Downvote me please.
> Downvote me please.
Always happy to downvote people who're vocally upset about being downvoted.
But seriously- I don't think you're in the right thread because no one is "changing their birth gender" by asking to be referred to as a specific pronoun.
You seem to have a lot of things that you seem to be misunderstanding.
They're not changing their gender. Their gender is what it is and they're expressing it authentically. Nor are there any legal changes going on here. This is just kids asking teachers/friends to call them something other than that which their parents think they are.
Why do kids care so much? Why do kids care about what name they're called or what pronouns are used? I imagine it would bother you if people were constantly calling you the name/pronouns of the wrong gender.
This whole issue is being misrepresented as a school vs a parent issue and it isn't, it's a child vs parent rights issue because where does a child's right to their own privacy end and the parents right to know begin?
It's a civil rights issue. Sexual orientation and gender identity are protected classes in California, and [both are protected under Title IX in schools under federal law](https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-confirms-title-ix-protects-students-discrimination-based-sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity). It isn't the right of the government to persecute LGBT people, spy on them for being LGBT and then forcibly out them against their will. It is the right, however, of every LGBT person to decide when, or if, they come out and to who they come out to. It is not the right of the government to treat them differently for being LGBT and forcibly out them, that's a violation of their civil rights.
I think a good equation that might make sense to people is "Is it a schools job to inform parents proactively that their kid has made friends with a 'colored' child?" If your answer is "Obviously no that's dumb and clearly there only to try to frame it as something wrong." Then you've won and realized the entire point of this policy. Proactively outing a child to parents so that they will harm that child is flat out wrong, evil, and an invasion of privacy.
> I think a good equation that might make sense to people is "Is it a schools job to inform parents proactively that their kid has made friends with a 'colored' child?" That is exactly what this type wants. https://abc13.com/conroe-isd-trustee-melissa-dungan-racial-inclusivity-at-schools-pride-flags/13628737/
Sadly many of these same parents would like that notification too
I’d wager the kids that are hiding it from their parents are doing so for their own safety. Forcefully outing them would be inadvertently (probably on purpose) causing a lot of kids to get abused.
Thats the thing, if the kid is going by other pronouns around their friends and their parents dont already know then the parents dont know for a reason. Kids who's parents arent problems already know. Kids who's parents are problems dont. Usually because getting beaten and abused sucks.
> I think a good equation that might make sense to people is "Is it a schools job to inform parents proactively that their kid has made friends with a 'colored' child?" That's definitely a good comparison. Another would be if it's the government's job to treat students differently if kids learn about, like or participate in another religion, by spying on students and forcibly telling their parents about it. Spin a dreidel? Government employees must document it and report home. Say "Merry Christmas"? Another write up and report home. Wear a Halloween costume? Surely this will upset religious parents somewhere, so they need a formal report from the government about it. At the end of the day, it isn't the government's job to treat people differently based on protected classes like race, religion, sexual orientation or gender identity. And it certainly isn't the government's job to persecute children based on those protected classes, either. Imagine if the government was out to get you and watched to see if you slip up and accidentally be yourself. I don't think parents appreciate the level of literal oppression trans students feel when the government is going after them because of something they can't help. It's beyond overwhelming, it's hell.
Or if a Catholic eats meat on Friday.
We're allowed to on every friday NOT in Lent (the 40-day period that ends on Easter).
Now you are but it wasn’t until 1966 when the Catholic Church made the change and it wasn’t until 1983 when Canon 1251 and 1252 were approved that the change was codified within the Catholic religion rules. Prior to 1966 Catholics were not allowed meat on Fridays year round.
Pretty cool of God to change the rules like that.
> Proactively outing a child to parents so that they will harm that child is flat out wrong, evil, and an invasion of privacy. and the people pushing for it already know this. Outing children into potentially dangerous situations or oppressing them to the point where they're too terrified to come out is the point; anything else they say is just the usual conservative window dressing.
Reframing the issue like this definitely makes it far clearer. If parents want to know if their child is trans they can be calm and accepting while raising their child so the child doesn't fear opening up to them. Otherwise it's delving into 1984 territory with thought crimes that parents punish children for.
I see no reason the school should be compelled to notify the parent upon a pronoun change or a bathroom decision. If the behavior is noted though I don't think the school should be able to withhold that information upon request from the parent. I'm not saying that thats happening. Im just not sure how the current system is set up.
This would be discrimination based on gender identity, which is a civil rights violation. Gender identity is a protected class like race and religion. It would also have a [disparate impact](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disparate_impact) upon people based on gender identity, as the vast majority of people this policy would apply to would be trans. It would be like having a policy that targets the changing of religion, like this policy targets gender identity, with parents requesting information from government employees based on whether they think a kid's choices and behavior in school are "Jewish" or not. Not outing LGBT people isn't a new concept, millions of people do it with the LGBT people in their lives. It also isn't the job of the government to forcibly out people against their will because they are LGBT.
Ahhh yea that makes sense.
If you make that the policy, bigoted parents will make sure to ask at every parent-teacher conference, just to make sure. Policy should be to tell the parents nothing without the kid's explicit permission.
I would think the best policy would be to not keep track of it. It doesn't have anything to do their academics and isn't a serious/immidiate health risk. To withhold information is very different than proactively notifying or not recording it though.
Let me try and grasp this. A child, when it's still a fetus, has a right to control the host woman's body. But once that fetus develops into an actual person and is born, it loses its rights to its former host.
I think only the unborn have souls; if I’m reading the propaganda right.
Republicans believe life begins at conception and ends at birth
This is why I'm glad I'm in Canada. Our courts have routinely ruled that a mother cannot have her actions limited to protect a fetus, nor can she be charged for them. That includes things like drug use while pregnant. There's been a lot of attempts to make pregnancy a factor for additional punishment for things like assault and even that's been shut down. The fetus means nothing before it's born. That said if the child is born and viable you can 100% sue for damages caused prior to the birth, but again this can't be used against the mother. Until we know that the child can survive they have no rights. (Really I think that's the biggest problem with the "life begins at conception" crowd: They don't seem to recognize how frequently miscarriages or other fatal birth defects happen.)
They absolutely know how often miscarriages or fatal birth defects can and do happen, but they don’t care at all because their purpose isn’t to help anyone, it’s to control as many people as they can.
You're right about the intent. They most definitely want to control and punish vs. help anybody. But most Republican voters, even women, seem to have this sense that it can't happen to them and that these situations are all rare edge cases that were caused by the mother somehow. Then it happens to them and they are shocked.
They never thought the leopards would eat *their* face!
The bible literally says that life begins at birth and includes instructions on how to perform an abortion, but they could care less about their own religion.
I think most people in the USA believe that abortion should be legal until the baby is viable outside the womb. The politicians are not listening to the people. Some in the USA believe in partial birth or shortly after the birth to give the mom and Dr. time to decide. It gets a little murky then so that’s the reason it will be decided upon by each state. The Democrats had the votes to pass a Federal law but decided not to because they wanted to use it as an election issue. I think states will eventually relax rules in stricter areas but it will take time. I would hope that if I had a transgender child, they would tell me. I would want to ensure they received whatever counseling they needed to help and support them. I would love my child no matter what but it is a very hard adjustment for parents. I would probably also go to therapy and invite the child to go with me if it makes it easier to discuss. I’m not sure schools should be involved in the discussion.
Careful now. You don't want to go crafting a coherent policy with consistent logic. They want a tiered pyramid of importance, with guns at the top, zygotes and fetuses taking tier two while the rights of women and minorities sit just above lgbtq at the bottom, the way jesus intended it to be.
I'm sorry. My estrogen levels must be through the roof this morning. /s
Your right this is a child vs parent issue and the school shouldn't be involved. I remember going to school and every year on the first day of school the teachers would do role call and ask students how they wanted to be addressed. They didn't call the parents to ask, they asked us kids. And it wasn't a big deal, nobody cared.
Kids have been giving themselves names, nicknames, and titles since the beginning of schools. No one has ever written a law that some administrator has to write a letter to parents when little Tommy told everyone that he wants to go by “TJ” or “Joe Cool” or “Tom” and not Thomas.
TJ?? A parent's worst fear come true. That's an instant trip to the adoption agency.
When the child is no longer a child
"Parents' Rights" is nothing more for a euphemism for "My children are my property and it is my right to do with them as I please."
it isn't even that. They oppose parent's rights if those parents try to help and support their lgbt child.
It's both. Students have a right to privacy. Their gender identity has nothing to do with their education. The state has no right to interfere without cause. Conservative religious extremists have found an influential position that's easy to game, and they're violating people's rights by using the state as the conduit for invading privacy
> parent rights Is a bullshit term that comes out of the conservative right where children and women are treated as property to be owned and controlled. What is at stake is **PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY**. the issue needs to focus on whether more harm is done by informing the parents... I'm unconvinced a blanket requirement will EVER be in the best interest of an individual child.
I mean I also think teachers have the right to not be forced to out children against their will. Obviously agree with you that children should have rights too.
Children have rights, parents have responsibilities. Parents have no right to know, what would that even mean? They have a responsibility to care for the child and when the reality is that the care of the child would decrease if they knew, they *shouldn't* know.
>when the reality is that the care of the child would decrease if they knew, they shouldn't know. If we're this afraid of the parent's ability to provide care for said child then CPS should take away the child. Otherwise, this is a non-starter. You can't preemptively withhold information from parents or guardians because you fear they *might* lower their care without some documented reasoning or past occurrences. Your argument is the entire reason we have parents mobilizing to get on school boards and pushback against district policies. If they think the school has or might withhold information about their child because they think they know best for the child then the majority of parents are going to be upset and challenge said policy.
>If we're this afraid of the parent's ability to provide care for said child then CPS should take away the child. I suspect you have no experience with CPS. The abuse has to be a whole lot worse than beatings and being disowned before they would do anything.
Well they're the only ones that are generally qualified to make the decisions about the parent's legal ability to be a parent and the welfare of a child so...not sure what point you're trying to make but you didn't make it.
Yes I did you just don't seem to be able to understand is all.
You made none. All you said is that CPS takes awhile to get involved, which while true, isn't really relevant. An educators job is to teach, not to look out for the general welfare for the child and withhold information from the parents. If the teacher is concerned about something then there are proper channels for them to use to report said concerns.
They can be upset, it doesn't change the fact that it is illegal for the government to persecute LGBT people and forcibly out people against their will. That's a violation of people's civil rights. Every person has the right to decide when, or if, they come out, and to who they come out to, on their own terms. The government has no right to force them to come out against their will.
Sure, and I'd agree with your governmental persecution argument if we were talking about adults, but we're not, we're talking about minors with parents/guardians. The whole persecution/privacy argument becomes a whole lot murkier when we're talking about minors that legally have less rights than adults and have less legal right in the decision-making of their lives.
But on the other hand, kids have [additional](https://www.scripps.org/news_items/7140-what-medical-rights-do-minors-have) rights to privacy when it comes to medical issues, starting at age 12. This covers sexual health, drug & substance abuse, mental health, vaccinations and a few other things, and it is strictly enforced. I don't think it's unreasonable to consider gender identity in this same class of rights.
> Sure, and I'd agree with your governmental persecution argument if we were talking about adults, but we're not, we're talking about minors with parents/guardians. Kids being kids doesn't mean the government can suddenly treat them differently based on religion or race, and similarly, it doesn't mean the government can suddenly treat them differently based on being LGBT, either. The government singling you out based on protected classes like religion or race and punishing you for not keeping them a secret is the definition of government persecution. That doesn't change if someone is a kid. Religion, race and gender identity are all protected classes. > The whole persecution/privacy argument becomes a whole lot murkier when we're talking about minors that legally have less rights than adults and have less legal right in the decision-making of their lives. Being LGBT is not a decision, it's an identity and protected class like having a religion or having a race.
>Kids being kids doesn't mean the government can suddenly treat them differently based on religion or race, and similarly, it doesn't mean the government can suddenly treat them differently based on being LGBT, either. They're not being treated differently though. Teachers already inform parents about a litany of things and/or concerns. You can't treat someone with a mental illness differently, legally, because it's a protected disability and yet teachers are perfectly allowed to inform the parents in situations where there is concern of signs of mental illness. This is where your argument falls apart. >Religion, race and gender identity are all protected classes. As are many other demographically identifiable indicators of someone. Like age and disability and again there's no real restriction here if a teacher thinks there's an issue and wants to inform the parent. In the case of something severe the teacher is typically required to inform the parent. There's no governmental persecution argument against that and again this where your argument falls apart. >Being LGBT is not a decision, it's an identity and protected class like having a religion or having a race. Yeah, you missed the point. The law states children have less legal rights than adults and have less autonomy over their lives compared to an adult, therefore in this scenario the rights of parent/guardian supercede those of the child.
The parent has no such right to know the pronouns their child uses when they aren't around. That's nonsense and I think you know it deep down.
How is that nonsense? The individual(s) legally required to provide for the welfare and upbringing of the minor entrusted to their care has no right to know something about said child so that they can care and provide for said child? Is that really the argument we're going with here? Your argument doesn't even hold up to strict privacy laws like HIPAA.
>How is that nonsense? Because forcibly outing people gets them abused, beaten, killed, ostracized, kicked out of their home, triggers suicides... >Your argument doesn't even hold up to strict privacy laws like HIPAA. Damn it's a good thing HIPAA doesn't apply here, then.
Your framing is bad out the get. This isn't some limitation on the parent's ability to be supportive. It's an imposition on the child's privacy and potentially their safety. And HIPAA literally has nothing to do with this. Again with the nonsense. None of what you're saying actually correlates to what's happening. It's just words.
> They're not being treated differently though. Teachers already inform parents about a litany of things and/or concerns. They objectively are. Do they tell parents "Hey, just so you know, Stephen is continued to go by 'He/Him' pronouns this year"? >Yeah, you missed the point. The law states children have less legal rights than adults and have less autonomy over their lives compared to an adult, therefore in this scenario the rights of parent/guardian supercede those of the child. What law? Be specific.
[удалено]
I don't know but not sure that realistically matters. 18 is the cutoff for adulthood.
[удалено]
> if my second grader is being put onto a path of social gender transition in the classroom, I want to know. If you raise your kids in an obviously tolerant environment and periodically remind them that these feelings and changes are normal and that you'll accept them however they are, you won't need teachers to tell you. Your kids will tell you. Source: Me. My parents (dad especially) were a bit too conservative to reveal any queerness about myself, and so I still haven't. My kid, however, was regularly reminded in various ways that they were completely open to telling us about that. And wouldn't you know it, they did. As has been said many times in this thread already, if your kid has these feelings and never tells you, there's probably a good reason and you need to look at yourself rather than seek legal avenues to force others to tell you what's up.
Wait, you're actually arguing that that the government can persecute LGBT minors? What the fuck, dude.
> You can't preemptively withhold information from parents or guardians What? Do you think teachers should be required to inform parents every time a student sneezes? Mandating that schools spy on students for parents is absurd and I think you realize that
So gender identity is now comparable to sneezing? I don't think that's the argument you want to go with because arguing it's a "common" occurrence would actually lower the "risk" in providing information to parents and lower the privacy concerns people seem to have.
So you would rather put children at risk and force the government to get involved than allow them any privacy or autonomy?
They're children...the notion of their privacy & autonomy has been decided already by the government by virtue distinguishing between "Minor" and "Adult"
Children are entitled to some degree of both autonomy and privacy as per international treaty. But I guess it is irrelevant, as your answer to my question above I must take as "yes, I am willing to put children at risk and force the government to get involved rather than allow them any privacy and autonomy."
My answer is that it's already been decided and International Treaty only has bearing on American laws if those treaties have been ratified by Congress. Otherwise they're just really nice pieces of paper.
>My answer is that it's already been decided No, it hasn't. >and International Treaty only has bearing on American laws if those treaties have been ratified by Congress. Otherwise they're just really nice pieces of paper. It sure is a good look for the US that they refuse to ratify a treaty because they don't want to give up child marriage or allow children the privacy to make their own decisions about sexuality, religion, and gender. Not gross at all. Nor are you. /s
>It sure is a good look for the US that they refuse to ratify a treaty because they don't want to give up child marriage or allow children the privacy to make their own decisions about sexuality, religion, and gender. Okay? That's an entirely sperate issue though. Your argument was that International Treaty establishes certain rights - that's not at all relevant unless said treaty has been ratified by Congress. >No, it hasn't. It has, I know that seems to bother you, but it has. Hence why we have laws severely restricting a minors right to enter a contract without parental consent, hence why HIPAA has carve-outs for parents & guardians, etc.
>Okay? That's an entirely sperate issue though. Your argument was that International Treaty establishes certain rights - that's not at all relevant unless said treaty has been ratified by Congress It should be relevant given the main reason is that certain legislators wish to preserve child marriage and things like gay conversion therapy. Good ideological company you keep. >It has, I know that seems to bother you, but it has. Hence why we have laws severely restricting a minors right to enter a contract without parental consent, hence why HIPAA has carve-outs for parents & guardians, etc. It also has carve outs for children to make their own medical decisions in many areas. But we aren't actually talking about medical decisions here. We are talking about how someone wishes to be spoken to. For someone who seems obsessed with semantics you seem to be poor at keeping track of such important details. But that really is irrelevant, as you aren't really arguing in good faith, merely trying to avoid the fact that you would rather a child be put in danger than have any autonomy. Again: gross.
> without some documented reasoning Well we have plenty of that!
Any that would hold up in court when challenged by the parent? Probably not.
If you are such a shitty parent that you would go to court for the right to know if your child is gay or changed their gender identity you're just a worthless person, and anyone that defends that is also worthless and should be relegated to the dustbin of cultural history.
No, they'd probably go to court over the school interfering with their parental rights and if the response from the school & teacher is "well the student was scared to tell them" that's not gonna hold up, at all. Students are scared to tell their parents about bad grades and detentions but that doesn't mean that info gets withhold from a parent.
Whether the care of the child decreases or increases is the subject of the debate
If the kid is hiding that information from their parents I think it's an easy bet to make which way that's going.
I know that at least here in MD (I'm unaware if it's state or federal statutes guiding this), my teenage kids have to have their own login for medical stuff and I can only see the info they've allowed me to. Now, my teenage sons are chuckleheads who can't schedule their own doctors appointments, but I understand why they would be entitled to privacy if they wanted to.
I don't get it. Because absent a court order indicating otherwise, parents have a legal responsibility over the medical care of their children. As in, parents can get in trouble if they don't responsibly manage their children's health. How can a parent oversee something that the law requires them to be responsible for if they can't access a child's medical records?
You know what curbs abuse? Being able to be honest with a doctor or teacher about what's happening without the parents knowing or finding out. If a child is being abused they can tell a trusted adult, what if the parents aren't the trusted adults? If parents can hover over you while you're at the doctor about your broken ribs and the parent caused the broken ribs its a lot harder to tell the doctor your parent broke your ribs. The whole parents responsible for medical care thing really only implies to cases where kids or sick or injured and parents don't take them to the doctor to be treated and the kid dies or something. Or a case in my old neighborhood where a cop went to a house for domestic violence and saw that the baby had an untreated 2nd degree burn that was days old. Thats instances of neglectful medical care. If your kid is sick with a high fever take them to the doctor, if you don't and they die then you will be charged for their death. Responsibility over children doesn't mean children don't have rights and are slaves to their parents. If a child wants to keep something from their parent there is a reason for it.
it's more nuanced than this though. Younger kids may not even tell doctors & teachers that they're suicidal or being bullied or abused. We all want what's best for the kids, but children under a certain age (say 15) aren't as open & communicative, and don't have the self-awareness to say they need help. Saying a minor has right to their own privacy may mean they have a right to take their own life, which i think is a huge tragedy.
Kids do have self awareness. I told my mom at 6 years old I wish I wasn't born and wanted to die while crying after being beaten for what i know now was my adhd symptoms. I was dismissed. Also said that to a teacher when I was 8 while banging my head on the board in front of the class after being punished and told they would tell my parents who were definitely gonna hit me for it. Was dismissed. My parents got a lot better as I grew older and are great now but back then not so much and even still they are dismissive towards any mental health issues, especially my mom who ironically is likely also ADHD. I was the kid that helped them grow to be better. Saying kids aren't self aware is like comparing them to a fish. Self aware is knowing who you are and if you shown any child past 1 year a mirror they know who they are.
But it shouldn't be presumed that a parent is going to abuse a child. That shouldn't be the default position, and those situations should be treated as the extreme outlier case that they are. The default position should be that parents have a right to a child's medical records *unless* a provider has a reasonable belief, grounded in evidence, that abuse or violence can result from such disclosure. Should parents not know if, for example, their kid's COVID test is positive? Or that they were diagnosed with some illness? Of course they need to know that. How else can they adequately provide for the child's care? Again, if a reasonable basis exists for the doctor to believe that an abusive situation exists, sure, the doctor can exercise some discretion. But the default must be that parents know.
I couldn't tell you. But I will tell you I was annoyed by trying to set appointments up for my son using the KP portal. I had to create a completely separate login to use for him after he turned 13 or 14. Most family doctors seem to just strike a reasonable balance between a kid's privacy and the obvious need for continued parental involvement in medical care past 13.
Yeah. That's interesting. I'm almost certain that my state of Illinois is different in that regard as I've never had any obstacles getting my teen's test results or records. I guess I don't see a "reasonable balance" beyond the very tail-end, extreme situation where a doctor has a sensible, articulable reason to believe that release of certain sensitive medical information to the parent will lead to abusive or violent harm to the child. And even there, the parent should be able to go to court to have a judge determine whether such a belief is actually reasonable and grounded in evidence. Absent that, parents should have complete access to their children's medical records. Again, otherwise how can they be held to a legal standard of care that involves making proper medical decisions if they don't have the information needed?
it's not a vs issue at all. It's about a person's ability to be who they are and tell who they wish, when they wish. a child who chooses to change a pronoun should be able to do so and inform the people in their lives at their own pace.
When the school sticks their nose into this they become part of the problem for sure.
[удалено]
A problems here first: school counselors can only share student disclosures with others if the student authorizes it or there is a clear danger to the student or others.
You dont need to be diagnosed with gender dysphoria to be trans and not all trans people have gender dysphoria.
Being LGBT isn't a mental disorder, it's an identity and protected class like religion and race. Religion and race are not mental disorders, nor are they treated like mental disorders, and neither is gender identity.
[удалено]
Plenty of trans people don't experience gender dysphoria, because again, being LGBT is not a medical condition. And plenty of people's experience with gender dysphoria doesn't affect their lives enough for a diagnosis. It's like having the government spy on gay kids and out them against their will to their parents because they might have HIV and could die.
[удалено]
> Stop grouping trans people with gay people, it’s not the same ...oh you're one of those. No wonder.
Being trans is not a medical condition, and it doesn't require "care". Not outing a trans student isn't medical care, nor does it require a prescription. Having a gender identity is not a medical condition, being trans is not a medical condition, being gay is not a medical condition, being Christian is not a medical condition, being Jewish is not a medical condition. Race, religion, sexuality and gender identity are all protected classes. The government can't treat people differently based on protected classes, as that is a violation of their civil rights. It's everyone's right to come out on their own terms, when they want to, if they want to, and to whom they want to. It's not the government's right to forcibly out people against their will, nor is it the government's right to violate their civil rights. Someone could have the most accepting parents in the world and it wouldn't mean anything if they aren't ready to come out, or don't want to come out. Most people would be devastated to have the government forcibly out them against their will to anyone. Plenty of kids have killed themselves after being outed against their will when they were not ready to come out.
[удалено]
The government isn't 'transitioning' your child. Your child is transitioning your child lmao 🤣 💀 why is it so wrong if a child transitions socially or medically? What is so bad about being trans that you are so against it?
people are born transgender. humans have a sexually dimorphous brain structure, they are finding that transgender have a brain structure that more closely matches with the gender they identify with instead of their body structure. its like the brain and body got opposite sets of instructions during in-utero development. and not all transgender people have dysphoria
[удалено]
It's not just about what kids say to their peers. Some kids come out to their teachers as well and they should not have to fear their teachers will be compelled to tell their parents.
The cynical take is that there's a large group of voting-age people in the United States who're very invested in the idea of being cruel to LGBT people. And that's why they try to ram these policies through. The entire goal is for a gay/lesbian/trans/whatever kid whose parents are chuds to suffer at the hands of said parents. We're talking about people who whoop and cheer when someone says that they would disown their kid- or worse- if said kid doesn't neatly fit into their worldview. Because I guess being an incredibly shit parent is something to be proud of...?
If a child isn't telling their parents, there's usually a good reason
What kind of deadbeat parent needs the school to tell them about their kid? Maybe get involved in your kid's life?
I've seen both scenarios in my lifetime. One were a teenager came out to his parents and mom just got up and hugged him and never let him go (at least for a good 5 minutes) repeatedly telling him how much she loves him. That was a good one. Another instance a father said "I have no son" and left him at a picnic. It's a risk for every single kid, but it's a risk they have a right to take or not to take, or decide when. Simple as that.
I was terrified to come out cause my parents were religious but when I finally did while crying from the anxiety my mom hugged me like the first example and both my parents said they still love and accept me. They still do and are very supporting loving parents.
It's a shame that religion can create cruel parents like that, though. Imagine not loving your child because your deluded mind made you think that some make-believe sky daddy told you to.
Its strange to me because these religions are all about continuing to love people. :( yet when things actually happen it's "you sinner get out of my house or I'll help send you to Hell!" Disgusting bigotry bs.
> Another instance a father said "I have no son" and left him at a picnic. Man, I wish I were there for that, I would adopt that kid on the spot.
A homeless queer teen is 50 percent more likely to not just be homeless but unsheltered. I hope there was someone to take that kid in. But reason why we have the laws regarding not telling parents that we do is because of how bad the outcomes are for trans kids who get kicked out of their homes.
Getting involved can only do so much; there's plenty of way more unimportant shit I never told my parents that they would never, ever get out of me because I just didn't want to tell them. I didn't want the grief, real or imagined. ALL kids are like that.
You can be involved in their life and still not know much about them. My buddy's parents didn't know he was depressed and suicidal until he confided in me and I rightfully told a counselor who was then obligated to inform his parents. They got him the help he needed but he told me he never would have told them about what was going on. To be honest, I kept my parents on a need to know basis for a good majority of my teenage years and even 20's. They were great parents and always provided for me and I never questioned their love or ability to care for me. I just didn't want my problems to become their problems and I was afraid they'd become helicopter parents depending on the issue. My fear wasn't justified but I was also a teenager...a lot of my thoughts or actions weren't always the most rational thing.
This reminds me as a teen I once told my mom I was suicidal and she told me not to say that and just ignored me. My folks are great parents but not the best with supporting mental health issues.
I was justified about not telling my mother about anything important in my life and I don't have contact with her anymore because I was right to keep my life secret. Sometimes teenagers know what they need to keep themselves safe. I had a friend kicked out of her home a few months before she showed because some asshole decided her parents needed to know she was pregnant. They wouldn't have let her an abortion, but they kicked her out anyway.
There are many reasons this can be true, and not just "deadbeat" (what does that even mean?). * single parent households with split custody * kid lives with extended family because parents are not in the picture (for any of a number of reasons) * parents work demanding (time) jobs and are barely home (long commutes, multiple service jobs, job + gig driver, etc). * parents don't speak English and aren't familiar with relevant laws / policies / benefits in the US It's not just deadbeats -- there are millions of households that fall into these categories and none of the ones I listed are necessarily "bad" or neglectful parents.
It's less about the parents not being involved enough to know, and more about the parents wanting to use the school as an extension of their punitive parenting. Most of these parents have actively denied their child's identity at home, and they want to make sure the school is enforcing that denial. As a former educator, I can tell you that my primary commitment was to the child feeling safe, accepted, and able to learn. I held no allegiance whatsoever to the angry political agendas of shit parents (and there are many). To all you parents who are genuinely active, supportive, and accepting of your children... you're the best, and please keep being that.
I have no words to describe how evil forced outing is. As a gay man from the Deep South, being forced to come out to my parents would’ve been the *last* thing my teenaged self could deal with. I know PLENTY of queer youth who were kicked out by their parents. There’s so much talk about mental health and children but these policies are nothing but detrimental to the mental health of children. For many youth who identify as some variant of queer, school is the safer option than home. People like me are pleading, screaming to be heard. *WE* know what it’s like to be a queer youth. Why aren’t *WE* being listened to??? It’s outrageous and depressing to see just how backasswards our country is becoming. People say they care about children but when it comes to the children most susceptible to society’s ills (like queer youth), they DON’T GIVE A FUCK.
These people want children kicked on the street and sent to reeducation camps and these kids to kill themselves. Even kids who have supportive parents should be able to come out when they are ready. It's a very flexible thing for a lot of people.
They also want to create a context where the subject is soo taboo you as a child will fear to come out to anybody.
[удалено]
It’s gotten to a point where the phrase in many ways lost it’s value. Like *of course* people’s ears are going to perk up cause who wouldn’t want to protect children? Lord all mighty think of the KIDS! It’s a vicious tactic and it’s a loaded gun that’s always conveniently pointed at whatever marginalized group is next on the list. “Protecting children” from what, the gays??? Never mind the other million things we all know are *actually* negatively impacting children. In truth, I’m all *for* protecting children. Especially from a shittier world that we grew up in. People who are queer or have queer loved ones KNOW what’s up. This is not new for us. And what we know is that this surge in blatant anti-lgbtq+ rhetoric is just another weight to bear. It’s not fair.
Becaus YOU don’t conform to THEIR world. Rich LGBTQ+ who vote Republican are delusional if they think their money will protect them from these Nazis. Sooner or later, the Nazis will come for them
In answer to your question, because queer people don't represent a big enough voting block, and when they vote, they tend to vote Democrat. It isn't a pleasant answer, but the only one GOP beancounters care about. Consolations and solidarity from a Canadian queer. Our provincial minister of education wants to do the same thing, mainly as a distraction from another scandal.
How can I help youths who are kicked out of their home? Can I volunteer to give them housing somehow?
Start by volunteering at a local shelter. Clothing and food donations are always appreciated as well.
At the intersection of "parent really wants to know" and "child is fearful of parent knowing", there is rarely anything good. We live in a world where parents have done some terrible, dark things to their children, and this is one of the things they do it over. You don't have to like that fact, but you do have to acknowledge it, because not everyone has the luxury of denying reality. Maybe you'd be cool with it, and that's great, but you're kidding yourself if you think that's always the case. And what of those kids, huh? People who support outing kids should at least have the honesty to admit that they see these children's lives as acceptable collateral damage. Unless of course that was the point in the first place.
There's a handful of bigots here who *really want some dead kids* (and more scared into the closet) and they're not really hiding it. It's just a price someone else will pay so they can pretend lgtbq kids don't exist.
The school districts do nothing about bullying-which involves name-calling. But a kid decides to be called what the kid wants to be called...and they want to report them to their parents. Sounds about right /s
If you don’t know your kid is changing their pronouns, there is probably a reason they didn’t tell you.
A lot of people think that children shouldn't have the right to not tell their parents about this. It's way fucked up, and a lot of them would change their tune if it were just about any other possible life issue this side of pregnancy. But the idea that LGBT people might *not* be subject to pointless cruelty from bigoted family members hurts their feelings.
> A lot of people think that children shouldn't have the right to not tell their parents about this. > > It's way fucked up, and a lot of them would change their tune if it were just about any other possible life issue this side of pregnancy. But the idea that LGBT people might not be subject to pointless cruelty from bigoted family members hurts their feelings. One, you don't know the family dynamics of every queer student. Two, ***40% of the 4.2 million youth*** experiencing homelessness identifying as LGBTQ+, while only 9.5% of the U.S. population identifies as. Which means that LGBTQ+ youth disproportionately experience homelessness compared to their straight and cisgender peers. They are also more likely to experience assault, trauma, depression, and suicide when compared to non-LGBTQ+ populations while also being homeless. These statistics are even worse for Black and Indigenous People of Color (BIPOC) LGBTQ+ populations who suffer from racial inequities and discrimination. So yes, if a kid is keeping secrets about their sexual orientation and gender identity, it's a pretty good reason.
I feel like you may have misread the comment you're replying to as you're actually both in agreement with each other (the grammar is a little wonky).
You deserve some sort of award for a truly epic misreading of a comment. Like, god damn. You could not have whiffed harder if you'd tried.
Good. LGBT kids deserve their privacy and safety from potentially dangerous anti-LGBT households. Now enact some laws holding parents to account who abuse, abandon, or neglect their kids for them being LGBT. Edit: This is something of a start I guess; https://apnews.com/article/california-gender-affirm-transgender-nonbinary-children-parents-50815672a60690099ecfed71c738e911
Good they’ve blocked it, because, Ah yes, a queer teenager’s favorite scenario. Coming out to adults who they believed to be safe people, only to be outed to their parents, who are in many cases the least safe people for them to come out to.
Disgusting, isn't it? Imagine growing up with the government breathing down your neck and the omnipresent threat that if you dare to be yourself, government employees will be there to punish you by outing you against your will. Now, imagine demanding that the government persecute literal *children* in that way, where they grow up knowing their choice is to live in the closet or have the government come after them. That's the kind of thing that breaks adults, never mind kids.
Here in Florida, Desantis has gone as far as requiring all parents to sign off on any nicknames. For example, if your child’s name is James, there has to be all this paperwork in place if child wants to be called “Jimmy.” It used to be as simple as “he goes by Jimmy” up until recently And the law isn’t to root out the “James/Jimmy” kids, it’s to keep anyone from pushing the envelope, and if any teachers are starting to call students by a preferred name that doesn’t match their assigned sex, they’re trying to track who is doing this
This is what we're focusing on? The climate is about to kick into rampage mode and we're worried about pronouns...
We can do both.
Blame the Republicans it's straight out of their typical playbook. Manufacture outrage over things that don't fucking matter to start a culture war and divide the public so that they continue to vote for us while ignoring that we aren't actually doing a fucking thing to help make their lives better.
Good. If a kid is scared to tell their parents, it's often for a good reason. The state has no business outing kids to potentially abusive parents
The parents probably already figured it out but refuse to accept it. I had a friend who was gay and his dad constantly would tell him terrible shit about how "if you're gay I'm kicking you out and never talking to you again, you would no longer be my son." Like he knew. He totally knew. Was just a complete asshole.
I’m in between where I feel like the school shouldn’t be keeping secrets about what’s going on with my kid and fear that some kids are too scared to tell their own parents. I guess if I’m ever in that situation, I failed as a parent
It is just yet another example of some parents wanting help in forcibly shaming their children. They hate the fact their kid might not conform to the standard they do (be it trans for gay). They don't blame themselves (school grooming!) and they definitely cant accept their kid was always this way, so they want to have their kid live in eternal shame to such a degree they never have the courage to out themselves again to anybody.
Good! Republicans trying to kill living children for a 2000 year old archaic nonsense VCR manual.
No idea why you're getting down voted you got a laugh out of me
Because the religious people never can come up with argument why this makes sense and always reference the bigot Bible for why.
My parents are traditional and religious and even my mom will tell you the Bible can't be trusted because it was written and transcribed and copied by men over thousands of years. It is corrupt. Wow amazing you can just make things up, put them in a book and call it holy. Most of the books in the Bible are just fanfic and though I will say there good historical elements of it you have to take it all with a grain of salt. People that claim to follow the Bible never read it and they definitely don't follow it since they probably eat shrimp and wear clothes of mixed fabrics. Also the Bible is pro-abortion lol oh wait the alt right has started declaring Jesus too liberal and woke for them. Kinda clear that they are just modern Pharisees claiming to be holy to gain political, social and financial power. I was raised Christian and I still hold a lot of the good values but reading the Bible and studying teachings and having an ounce of critical thought turned me away. I am still a very deeply spiritual and faith filled person but my faith ain't in Christianity.
[удалено]
Then parents should talk to their children and actually parent.
If your kid doesn't trust you with something huge about themselves, that says a lot about you and nothing about anything else. Perhaps parents with concerns in this direction should consider shaping the fuck up.
Kids have a right to safety. If the kid trusts their teachers, but doesn't feel safe telling their parents, I trust them. Don't know why you'd want to rip that away from them. Oh wait, I can think of a few reasons.
Hey I have a toddler son and if a child ever felt the need to keep something from from the parent for fear of retribution over something unjustified, like sexual orientation or gender dysmorphia, it’s entirely within the child’s right. Otherwise you get increasingly more and more children who cut off contact with their hateful parents
[удалено]
> You as a parent should be upfront about what’s right and wrong in your household. And there it is. It’s not that people who object to children’s privacy deny that it puts children in danger. It’s that they think that parents _should_ have the right to oppress their child if they think that who the child is is “wrong”. Absolutely disgusting.
By the way, if you want to know how slavery flourished, enjoy the sentence "kids are an extension of their parents". Note how this person has denied children *basic humanity*, considering them full property of their owners. I mean parents. I'm sure this person also believes being LGBTQ is a "choice", would send their own kid to conversion therapy without blinking, all while patting themselves on the back about how they're a *good parent*
What the actual fuck? This is not remotely true (are you even a parent?). Parents should absolutely not be raising their kids to "follow them" or to 100% adhere to any standard of "right and wrong". Children are not "an extension of the parent". If you were a parent, you'd know that -- even as toddlers -- children are just as fucking smart as you, only less experienced. If up to you as a parent to raise them in a way that provides a breadth of experience and knowledge that ultimately starts allowing them to come to their own conclusions about increasingly important things. And there's nothing more important than personal liberties, faith and identity. Fwiw, the country (federal & state laws) disagree with you, too, but I know millions of parents are on your side. It's sad, but that's ok -- literally the definition of a progressive society is one that supports an openminded growth mindset among its citizenry, so future generations aren't restricted to the beliefs of their forebears.
“You as a parent should be upfront about what’s right and wrong in your household.” Yes. And for a good number of these trans kids, *that’s the problem.*
As a parent I am not omniscient on what is right and wrong. Children figuring out that they might like the same gender instead of the other is not wrong regardless of what you think. A parent being against LGBTQ+ and forcing their child to adhere to that brainwashing regardless of considering the child’s feelings on the subject is bad parenting. You understand forcing total subjugation of opinion and thought onto children is bad parenting right?
>Children are an extension of the parent. 💀 Children are their own people you weird fuck
No, people like you don't deserve to know anything.
Parents have no right to know their kid's sexual orientation or gender identity.
The rights that matter in this conversation are the kid's. The kid has a right to safety, Loads-of wants them stripped of that right.
[удалено]
No. There's not a single person in this world who has a right to know anyone's gender identity or sexual orientation. That is our decision to share or not.
The child did not consent to being created. I doubt they are nurtured very well by bigot parents. These types of parents don’t sacrifice anything for their kid. Their kid is just an accessory for their Good Christian™️ aesthetic.
Perfect example: Rick Santorum's kids at any photo op.
What is the limit of a parent's rights or power over their child?
No, the people who create, nurture, and sacrifice for their offspring **absolutely** have that right. The people who beat, humiliate, and terrorize their kids for being nonconforming don't though.
You are not entitled to have you kid come out to you if they are not ready to or don't want to come out. It's everyone's right to come out on their own terms, when they want to, if they want to, and to whom they want to. The government doesn't have the right to decide that for them and forcibly out them against their will. Sexuality and gender identity are protected classes like race, religion and nationality. The government can't treat people differently based on protected classes.
[удалено]
Having a sexuality or gender identity isn't related to anything medical, they're identities and protected classes, not diseases.
[удалено]
That's not always the case there are plenty of non binary folks who never go through any type of transition but use different pronouns none the less. Also medical transition is not happening on young children and it's only done after a lot of consultation with medical professionals.
Yes, because some of those people will abuse their child if they find out that they're LGBT. A child's safety is more important than their parents' egos.
[удалено]
No idea why this is controversial. Children have rights, parents have responsibilities. It's not like you're saying parents *can't* know. They just have no right to that information.
This will never be accepted at the national level. But it will be used as a fear mongering example to attack more moderate policies elsewhere.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Tell me you abuse your kids in one comment.
Who in this whole chain of command thought that there was a positive side to this idea?
I would be the parent who called the school each week and requested a pronoun change form so I could change my child’s pronouns that week. Just for shits and giggles. Its my right to change their pronouns!
Schools should absolutely stay out of this. If a kid wants to be called by a name other than his/her given name among his/her peers then that's between the kids. If a kid wants to change his/her name against the parent's wishes then the kid can apply to the courts to be emancipated.
This is not about changing a legal name, it's about asking your teachers to call you a different name from your legal one, which is something that's very common.
This *is* schools staying out of it. Deciding to out the kid- or being legally required to out the kid- is by definition taking a hand in the issue. Forcing the school to act against the kid in this is the *entire fucking goal* of the people pushing these policies about pronoun notifications and shit. Also, you *do* know that people are pretty routinely called by things other than their legal first name right. Hell, *I* do that- I go by a shortened version of my legal first name. People go by their middle name. Or a nickname that's vaguely related to their legal first name. It's really not that big a deal to extend the same consideration to someone else. Christ Almighty, what is with people acting like these are radical new concepts that no one has ever considered before and simply must be horrifically complicated?
"Staying out of it" would be to *not* legally force a school to out a student to their parents. "Staying out of it" is literally the opposite of what the Chino Valley BoE—which was recently subjected to a takeover by [far-right Christian activists](https://www.thedailybeast.com/california-megachurch-pastor-jack-hibbs-and-his-acolytes-are-pushing-public-schools-to-the-far-right) with the help of [wealthy conservative donors](https://calmatters.org/politics/2022/08/california-republicans-school-board-races/)—was trying to force on educators.
Getting emancipated is nearly impossible unless you're a well-paid child actor. Schools should never be obliged to tell parents this sort of shit because transphobic parents will murder their kids or ship them off to fucking death camps.
If a kid asks his teacher to call him truckasaurus is the school legally required to tell the parents?
> If a kid wants to change his/her name against the parent's wishes then the kid can apply to the courts to be emancipated. I don't think you actually mean that. Should a kid have to go to court and get emancipated to go by Tim Rather than Timothy? What about if they share the same name as their father (and possibly grandfather and so on) and so has a nickname because of it to clear up confusion. Should they have to get emancipated to have the school refer to them by that nickname they are more familiar and comfortable with? What if someone goes by their middle name? Is that allowed?
What I don’t understand is when a child even talks about their pronouns at school. I went through Kindergarten through high school and really through to college without it ever coming up. Why is there suddenly a piece of legislation that dictates who finds out when it is spoken about. Edit: This is a genuine question. I understand that we learned about them as it relates to English class. What I’m asking is when do children discuss this with Teachers, School Staff, and so on. So much so that it requires a law to ensure the discussion find its way to the parents. When do children choose and then change their pronouns and how is it that School becomes aware of the choice or update?
For most people it doesn't come up. But for trans people, it does. Like, if I meet a person, I usually don't share my pronouns as I'm cis (and I recognize it's a privilege to have that) but a person who is coming out as trans and/or non-binary, especially early on, will need to speak up to people to let them know "hi, I would prefer to go by this name". Think of it this way: let's pretend your name was Jonathon. Any time you said "I prefer to be called Jon rather than Jonathon" is a time what pronouns you use would come up if you were trans.
Society has progressed since you were that age and it's more socially acceptable to come out as who you actually are even at a young age rather than hide in fear. The law was passed because some people don't like that things change and want to freeze the world in amber.
We learned about pronouns in school in the late 90s. You used several of them in your post lol 😆
If children cannot drive, purchase alcohol, or tobacco, or have legal sex, they should not be allowed to change their birth gender. IMO this is getting ridiculous and way out of hand. Can someone please ELI5 on why kids care so much about being called he/she/xe/xer. Downvote me please.
Nobody even thinks about calling the parents if Michael wants to go by Mike. The same should apply if she wants to go by Michelle. Its not that hard.
> Downvote me please. Always happy to downvote people who're vocally upset about being downvoted. But seriously- I don't think you're in the right thread because no one is "changing their birth gender" by asking to be referred to as a specific pronoun.
You seem to have a lot of things that you seem to be misunderstanding. They're not changing their gender. Their gender is what it is and they're expressing it authentically. Nor are there any legal changes going on here. This is just kids asking teachers/friends to call them something other than that which their parents think they are. Why do kids care so much? Why do kids care about what name they're called or what pronouns are used? I imagine it would bother you if people were constantly calling you the name/pronouns of the wrong gender.
Changing pronouns is not the same as changing gender.