Why is it that we never hear of laws requiring schools to notify parents if their child decides to write left-handed, or to become vegetarian, or to become religious, or become/do almost ANY OTHER THING that a child might decide to change. Here's a thought. How about requiring that schools call parents when their child decides to bully another for simply being themselves?
I look forward to SCOTUS preserving that stay -- or explaining in detail how forcing schools to help parents abuse their children is a good thing . . .
Once again a conservative religious group is putting its nose where it does not belong. I do not understand how this in anyway benefits them. To me it violates their own tenants. If I were them I would look inward and ask how this benefits anyone. It certainly does not benefit those they want to out. It only puts more of a target on the backs of these children for ridicule and psychological damage. Any parent that can’t recognize their own child’s proclivities is either not willing to see what is in front them or are unwilling to deal with it. I would love to start an investigation into this organization and see what’s behind the door.
Bluntly, it doesn't matter. Either way puts trans students at significant risk of unwanted outing and strips them of privacy rights.
I'm old enough to remember when children would be told that if there was trouble at home to find an authority figure to talk to - including, specifically, "a trusted teacher." Now, amid all the pushing for outing laws, that advice should be "except a teacher - unless you can be absolutely certain they will never mention to anyone at any time, even in passing, even at the risk of their career."
The only acceptable version I can see is (B) with the word "their" replaced with "the student's."
Does the Supreme Court even have jurisdiction here? Isn't this only about STATE laws? Therefore the California Supreme Court would have final jurisdiction.
The reactionaries will claim "freedom of religion" (as they invariably do) and appeal to SCOTUS on the basis that it involves a basic Constitutional protection.
Why is it that we never hear of laws requiring schools to notify parents if their child decides to write left-handed, or to become vegetarian, or to become religious, or become/do almost ANY OTHER THING that a child might decide to change. Here's a thought. How about requiring that schools call parents when their child decides to bully another for simply being themselves?
I mean, right?
I look forward to SCOTUS preserving that stay -- or explaining in detail how forcing schools to help parents abuse their children is a good thing . . .
/sarc
Once again a conservative religious group is putting its nose where it does not belong. I do not understand how this in anyway benefits them. To me it violates their own tenants. If I were them I would look inward and ask how this benefits anyone. It certainly does not benefit those they want to out. It only puts more of a target on the backs of these children for ridicule and psychological damage. Any parent that can’t recognize their own child’s proclivities is either not willing to see what is in front them or are unwilling to deal with it. I would love to start an investigation into this organization and see what’s behind the door.
It benefits them because they get power and control. That's what it's always been about. Controlling other people.
True, but I would still like to peel back inside to see what’s underneath
There are abusive parents, as many of us know. This is dangerous.
Can someone help me understand what is meant by "forced outing" in the following scenario?
If a student opens up to a teacher or counselor that they are trans, does this mean that:
(A) a school can establish a job requirement that the teacher/employee MUST notify the parents even if the teacher doesn't want to.
Or
(B) The teacher CAN notify the parents (or not) at their discretion but cannot be required to by the school or forbidden from doing so by law.
The law claims A, but this way.
...a school MUST establish a job requirement that the teacher/employee MUST notify the parents even if the teacher doesn't want to...
Bluntly, it doesn't matter. Either way puts trans students at significant risk of unwanted outing and strips them of privacy rights.
I'm old enough to remember when children would be told that if there was trouble at home to find an authority figure to talk to - including, specifically, "a trusted teacher." Now, amid all the pushing for outing laws, that advice should be "except a teacher - unless you can be absolutely certain they will never mention to anyone at any time, even in passing, even at the risk of their career."
The only acceptable version I can see is (B) with the word "their" replaced with "the student's."
That lower court judge needs to spend five minutes in the shoes of the kids whose lives his ruling threatens. I doubt he'd last even that long.
If this goes to SCOTUS we're cooked.
They just won't stop will they? They hate all LGBTQIA+ people so much that they will do anything to hurt us and make us follow their stupid rules.
Does the Supreme Court even have jurisdiction here? Isn't this only about STATE laws? Therefore the California Supreme Court would have final jurisdiction.
The reactionaries will claim "freedom of religion" (as they invariably do) and appeal to SCOTUS on the basis that it involves a basic Constitutional protection.