Families need not sit idly by while it inserts itself into American schools, nor should they.
Families need not sit idly by while it inserts itself into American schools, nor should they.
C alifornia isn’t the only locality to bring radical gender ideology into its schools. Urban and rural public-school districts nationwide are doing the same. Last year, Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS), for example, updated their Gender Identity Guidance document, and it is a progressive wish list of troubling policies.
Perhaps most glaringly, but not at all uncommon, the MPS guidance document ensures that “individuals are allowed to have access to restrooms and locker rooms that correspond to their gender identity.” Students can also participate in overnight trips, during which they can “utilize facilities and accommodations that correspond with their gender identity.”
To put that bureaucratic speak bluntly, this policy allows adolescent boys to attend overnight trips with girls, stay in the same hotel rooms with them, and wash in the same showers with them. Lest any reader think this baseless fearmongering, elsewhere in Wisconsin, Sun Prairie Area School District is facing an investigation after an 18-year-old student who identifies as transgender exposed himself to 14-year-old girls in locker-room showers. This policy is a gross dereliction of the duty of adults to protect girls and young women, and Milwaukee Public Schools provides one of the most egregious examples.
Beyond such lunacy, the document even threatens staff or students who may object. If any staff member shows “persistent refusal to respect an individual’s name” or “pronouns,” it will be treated as harassment or bullying up to the point of “corrective action.” Milwaukee Public Schools students can threaten teachers and destroy district property with impunity, but if they acknowledge biological reality or refuse to undress next to a student of the opposite sex, they’ll face the consequences.
Finally, the guidance reminds teachers to “get permission from the student before communicating with parents/guardians” as the student should “choose who is involved in conversation about their transitions.” While the aforementioned policies are galling, this usurpation of authority is really the crux of the issue. If a student wants to transition, it is neither the teacher’s nor the school’s role to shepherd that child into doing so.
Going beyond such directives, the MPS guidance also gives tips for how teachers can hide such information from parents, reminding teachers to be careful about the name and language they use “when contacting parents/guardians” on the phone or email. The document also reminds teachers and students that parents may check homework and so should consider covertly altering the name and pronouns used on such materials. Or a good compromise might be to only use biological pronouns and given names on classwork that teachers can present during parent-teacher conferences to continue the ruse.
As of August 2024, the organization Parents Defending Education has identified over 1,000 districts across the country that include policies compelling staff to keep transitions secret from their parents. Such policies represent nothing but contempt from school personnel toward parents — the belief, overtly stated or not, that a teacher or administrator knows better and can better care for this child than those parental rubes.
Thankfully, we’re not without recourse. There are several avenues through which families can contest such policies. And considering these policies are bordering on ubiquitous, it’s incumbent on all policy-makers, not just Californians, to address this issue.
One avenue for recourse is legislative. State lawmakers can and should clarify that school districts must defer to parents when children struggle with gender-identity issues. They can do this by implementing laws indicating that the right to determine the names and pronouns used for the child while at school is reserved to the parent and shall not be interfered with by the state or other government entity.
Policy-makers can also target state-level curricula and frameworks, regulating what schools may and may not teach minor students about gender ideology. Health-education frameworks in many states — like New Jersey for example — include instruction that one’s “gender identity” may not match one’s “gender assigned at birth.” Were Wyoming to include young-earth creationism in science classes or Vermont to introduce astrology, it would cause public outcry. So too should gender theory in public-school curricula — particularly without parental notification or a chance for parents to opt their child out.
Even at the local level, school-board members can pass policies that promote parental rights and transparency. For example, the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL) has written several model policies that prohibit staff from using alternate names and pronouns without written authorization from parents, that require parental notification if a student will be sharing accommodations during an overnight school trip with a member of the opposite sex, that provide the right for parents to opt out when controversial topics will be taught, that prohibit political and controversial displays in the classroom, and plenty more.
An additional avenue to combat extreme policies is via the law. Parents have a constitutional right to raise their children. Public schools are bound by tradition and law to inform parents of their children’s medical and behavioral issues and to respect their decisions. School districts should know that when they implement policies of secrecy from parents, they could be sued, and they could lose. Beyond this, school districts that force their teachers to use students’ preferred name and pronouns risk facing First Amendment legal challenges, particularly if they infringe on teachers’ religious liberty. Organizations like WILL and Alliance Defending Freedom have already taken such cases to court.
Far from being a culture-war distraction, fights over gender ideology in schools are arguably one of the most consequential issues facing American education. They affect what role schools versus parents should play in a child’s life; they affect whether our teachers can affirm basic truths about reality and follow their religious conscience; and they affect each individual child who may be rushed into life-altering social and medical decisions without due consideration and parental involvement. Families need not sit idly by while gender ideology inserts itself into American schools, nor should they.
Cory Brewer is an attorney at the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, where she works on the nationwide initiative Restoring American Education. Daniel Buck is a senior visiting fellow at the Fordham Institute.