Government Secrets from Parents and AB 1955 Propaganda
I am tired of this topic. I would like to spend my time working to improve outcomes for our students and fix their failing buildings. However, our State Legislature, California Department of Education, Office of the Attorney General, and now even local politicians have taken the issue so far that I have no choice but to use my time to inform our community once again about how the government is trying to keep secrets from you about your children and what you can do to stay informed.
As you may have heard, Governor Newsom signed AB 1955 into law on July 15. Rushed through the legislative process via an unconstitutional gut and amend (which I will get to in another post), our unscrupulous legislators took action on this bill within a week of its introduction and gave the public little to no time to digest what was happening.
Dishonestly framed as an “anti-outing” statute, AB 1955 prohibits districts from requiring school personnel to disclose information to parents about a child experiencing gender dysphoria. The law runs afoul of FERPA and the the United States Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment protection of parents' fundamental right to make decisions about their children's care, custody, and control. The statute is being challenged in court. The statute purports to enshrine in legislation the controversial secrecy policy adopted by most districts via CSBA-proposed Administrative Regulation 5145.3. (Our district’s version is here.)
Our Assemblyman was recently asked about his co-sponsorship of AB 1955. When called out for his dishonest response, Mr. Muratsuchi accused the man questioning him of lying, and rallied the Democratic party to come to his aid. Local politicians, the same group who followed the same blind leader in March 2023 when they were told a book was banned (it wasn’t) and that the board was bigoted (we’re not), echoed the same misinformation spouted by Muratsuchi throughout our community.
Here’s the deal: If you’re on the side of the government establishing a confidential relationship with children and keeping secrets from parents, we’re not going to agree and you can stop reading now.
Here’s what parents need to know (bear with me):
The State Legislature passed AB 1266 in 2013. This bill added Ed Code section 221.5(f), which says: “A pupil shall be permitted to participate in sex-segregated school programs and activities, including athletic teams and competitions, and use facilities consistent with his or her gender identity, irrespective of the gender listed on the pupil’s records.”
The California Department of Education (“CDE”) published an FAQ page for AB 1266, in which CDE recommends creating dummy files for kids who want to go by a different name or gender, and to keep that information secret from parents unless the child consents to the school sharing it with parents. (See FAQ 7 & 8). CDE FAQs do not have the force of law or administrative regulations that have gone through a proper adoption process. Further, creating separate files and concealing them from parents is a clear violation of FERPA, which means the US Department of Education is prohibited from giving federal funds to any school that implements such a practice.
The Office of the Attorney General (“OAG”) published “Know Your Rights” guidance in which it instructs children that their school does not have a right to disclose their gender identity to their parents, claiming that privacy rights from parents are found in the United States and California Constitutions (untrue).
Multiple school districts throughout California implemented parental notification policies after discovering that districts were using a secret document to guide children through “gender transitions” without parental knowledge (like this document used by our district, which I mentioned in a previous post). None of these policies discussed outing a gay or lesbian child, despite representations by the authors of AB 1955 to the contrary. The policies did require parental notification when changes were made to a student’s official or unofficial records, which would include a student adopting a new identity at school. I won’t rehash the very serious health concerns that accompany gender dysphoria, but I have spoken about them here and I strongly recommend anyone who hasn’t spent time researching these issues to watch this video. When politically convenient, politicians conflate sexual orientation and gender identity despite them being very, very different. As a person who lost a friend to suicide due to his feeling that he could not be honest with his parents about his sexual orientation, I am extremely sensitive to this issue. I also know multiple families who have lost children to suicide after transition. This is very serious. It requires careful and compassionate exploration, and should not be weaponized to score political points. I will not share my email to PFLAG that went ignored in March 2023 here, but I will in the future if the community continues to smear me in an attempt to discredit the logical and legal arguments I am making.
The State realized it was going to lose its lawsuit against Chino Valley and had already been enjoined from requiring teachers to lie to parents in a similar case in the Southern District of California in Mirabelli v. Olson, and took abrupt action to pass the procedurally and substantively unconstitutional AB 1955.
AB 1955 prohibits districts from requiring employees to disclose information about a child’s gender identity to a child’s parents without that child’s consent. Its proponents argue that this does not require teachers to lie to parents—it merely says a district can’t require a teacher to tell a child’s parents if the child is going by a new identity. But what happens if a teacher offers the information voluntarily to a parent without the child’s consent? Well, when you combine the findings in AB 1955, which purport to create a constitutional privacy right in children from their parents (“(g) Pupils have a constitutional right to privacy when it comes to sensitive information about them, and courts have affirmed that young people have a right to keep personal information private”) with the CDE guidance, OAG guidance, Administrative Regulation 5145.3, and current practices on the advice of the law firms representing school districts in California, it certainly appears that such a teacher would face legal consequences for doing so.
What about producing written records? It certainly seems that the current practice of advising districts to keep confidential files separate from a student’s official records (many districts hide these documents in the counselor’s office for secondary grades and in the administrative office for elementary) runs afoul of FERPA, and that AB 1955 doubles down on this violation. If a district cannot require disclosure of information about a child’s gender identity to that child’s own parents, that means the district cannot require our records clerks to provide the information upon request of a parent. I think the Legislature knows this is a FERPA violation, and that’s why they added the caveat, “unless otherwise required by state or federal law.” So what happens if a clerk provides all the records to a parent, including the confidential student support plan document? Based on AB 1955, CDE guidance, OAG guidance, Administrative Regulation 5145.3, and current practices on the advice of the law firms representing school districts in California, it certainly appears that such a clerk would face legal consequences for doing so. By the way, I don’t know what our district’s practice is with respect to maintaining the confidential student support plan document because they wont brief us on the practice despite my previous requests, and they only provide minimal information in closed session, which is completely inappropriate for this kind of information.
To summarize: School districts are and have been keeping secrets from parents, and AB 1955 makes it even more difficult for district personnel to be honest and forthcoming with parents about what is going on with their children at school. Anyone claiming that AB 1955 does not require teachers to lie to parents is trying to be cute and deceptive with the law. AB 1955 is the bill that drove Elon Musk out of California once and for all, due to state’s relentless attempts to drive a wedge between parents and their children.
I’ve heard from some that “if you don’t know what’s going on with your kid, that’s your fault.” This kind of emotional blackmail demonstrates a lack of understanding of the issues. Gender ideology is being pushed into schools via mandatory curriculum, including CHYA. Our district uses Positive Prevention Plus, and kids are getting formally introduced to the ideology in 7th grade health class. Some teachers introduce the concepts in much younger grades. When you teach a young child that they can be born in the wrong body and that if they feel uncomfortable in puberty it’s because they’re supposed to be the opposite sex, you can cause very serious confusion that often leads to irreversible physical harm. Parents must know when this is going on.
We need to know what professional development training is given to our administrators, counselors, and teachers on this subject and specifically AB 1955. It cannot be concealed under attorney/client privilege. We need to know, as a community, what our government employees are being told to do with respect to keeping secrets about our children, and we deserve a public briefing from our attorneys on this issue. Our teachers deserve to know if they are going to be sued for lying or not lying to parents. Our parents deserve to know if their kids are being led down a path that could lead to permanent physical harm. It is legally and morally wrong to pretend that this is not a problem.
In addition to advocating for a public briefing on how our district intends to respond to AB 1955, you can submit a request for your student’s records to the district. You are entitled to those records under FERPA and California Education Code sec. 51101(a)(10).
This is a perfect opportunity for our Board and District to show our community that we are transparent and can be trusted with your children and your money.
As always, I don’t speak for the Board and no one else speaks for me.
