This week an Ohio school district forced a teacher to resign because she refused to use the preferred gender names and pronouns chosen by her students instead of their given names (read here).The teacher’s refusal was based on her perception that it violated her religious beliefs (it’s unclear what religious beliefs these were). Still, the basis for her refusal is not the point. The forced resignation underscores how committed school systems are to the growing trend of allowing children to make critical, independent decisions that should only be made with the support and guidance of adults.
 
We think (or hope) that everyone can agree that one of the critical objectives of education during the formative years of school, whether delivered by the school or parents, is to teach a child how to make good decisions and to understand the consequences of bad decisions. Good decisions generally come from drawing on experience, which children obviously lack. As every parent knows, children will naturally migrate to decisions that fit their wants. The only thing that helps guide them to the best decision is an adult who can protect them from the consequences they cannot see. The schools seem to have forgotten this. They are making it worse by first allowing children to make gender and transition choices and then building and defending policies that exclude parents from knowing their children’s decisions. 
 
We are now at a point where schools allow and actually encourage children to choose their gender as quickly as they pick their nicknames. They defend this under the blanket of inclusiveness and psychological health while ignoring the potential health and psychological risks resulting from how they’re doing it. Schools are not in a position to assess any potential underlying social and psychological conditions that may exist. That is best done with the involvement of the family they look to exclude. Schools, including FCPS, claim that the lack of parental notification is necessary to protect children from a potentially dangerous home environment. Are schools equipped to do this? Are schools following the best path if they decide without fully knowing what other clinical conditions may exist in that child’s life? Are schools acting in the child’s and family’s best interests if they presuppose the family is “non-supportive” and assume the child is at risk merely because the child tells them it is?
 
We believe the answer to these questions is no, but parents must decide. Policy 443 puts the children in the role of decision-maker, facilitates the conscious exclusion of parents, and puts the schools in the primary, and sometimes only, provider of guidance. Parents who agree should push back and/or let us know if they would like to help support changing this in FCPS.