In a debate revolving around whether parents should be notified when children express transgender or gender dysphoria tendencies at school, a controversial issue has sparked discussions. On Thursday, June 13th, a bill named AB1955, proposed by the vice chairman of the LGBTQ caucus in the California legislature, was swiftly passed in the state senate. However, opponents argue that this proposal undermines parental rights.
AB1955 stipulates that schools are prohibited from devising or implementing policies, rules, or administrative regulations that disclose a student’s sexual orientation, gender transition, or any related information to parents, guardians, or any other individual without the student’s consent, unless the law prescribes otherwise. The bill also invalidates any “parental notification” policies implemented by school districts.
Introduced by Democratic State Assemblyman Chris Ward from San Diego, AB1955 aims to protect students, particularly LGBTQ+ students, from potential safety threats arising from living in unwelcoming homes.
During Thursday’s debate, Republican lawmakers contended that the state government should not restrict school districts from enforcing “parental notification” policies, emphasizing schools’ obligation to maintain transparency with parents and involve them in their children’s upbringing.
After over an hour of deliberation, the bill was passed along party lines as the Democrats overwhelmingly dominate both houses of the California legislature.
Republican State Senator Scott Wilk previously expressed concerns on “X” (formerly Twitter), stating that the proposal directly impacts parental supervision and guidance over the fundamental rights of their children’s upbringing. He argued that the proposal should have undergone appropriate hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee rather than “strategically” fast-tracking approval with limited public awareness, deeming it unjust.
Ward had previously mentioned that the purpose of AB1955 is to address confidentiality policies that could harm children without restricting schools from informing parents in cases where children are in danger.
Across the United States, various regions are engaging in discussions regarding transgender and gender diverse topics in school settings. California’s existing laws mandate schools to provide education on transgender and gender diversity.
In July last year, the Chino Valley Unified School District in California passed a “parental notification” policy, setting off a series of similar policies in multiple school districts.
Many parents attending meetings across different school districts have expressed their desire for the implementation of “parental notification” policies. They are concerned that underage students might undergo hormone therapy or gender reassignment surgery without parental knowledge, potentially leading healthy children astray and causing irreparable distress.
Sonja Shaw, the Chair of CVUSD’s Board of Education, explained in an interview that the policy the district enacted is basic. For instance, if students wish to use a different name or pronouns corresponding to a different gender, parents must be informed. If a child wants to use gender-specific restrooms, parents also need to be notified.
She emphasized that she advocates for parents’ rights to guide their children’s growth and participate in educational and health-related decisions concerning their children. Considering there’s a legal drinking age, dealing with significant changes in sexual orientation or gender identity for minors is undoubtedly challenging.
On the other hand, California Governor, Attorney General, and other officials believe that the “parental notification” policy is discriminatory and poses risks to the safety and privacy of transgender students. Hence, legal actions have been taken to prevent school districts from notifying parents.
With the AB1955 bill swiftly progressing through legislation to prohibit the “parental notification” policy, it is set to return to the State Assembly for further consideration at the committee and full legislative levels before being presented to the Governor for signing.
Civil organizations have stated that individuals striving to defend parental rights still have a chance to challenge the passage of AB1955 by contacting legislators and the Governor through messages, emails, phone calls, and urging them to oppose the proposal.