Dozens, including school counselors and psychiatrists, testified Tuesday against a bill in the Ohio Senate that would force schools to notify parents on “sexuality” content, and possibly on a student’s sexuality, calling it “censorship” and potentially risky for students.
“Young people are people who are entitled to their own privacy,” said Mallory Golski, of the Kaleidoscope Youth Center. “Young people are people who should have the freedom to read stories that reflect their own lives and experiences.”
Ohio House Bill 8 could be up for a vote this week, as the bill seeks to put the control of education more into parent’s hands, by allowing them to opt out of certain curricula based on the “sexuality” content. According to one of the bill’s sponsors, state Rep. D.J. Swearingen, R-Huron, school districts would also be “prohibited from keeping changes in the health of the student from their parent, and the school district is also prohibited from encouraging the student to hide these issues from their parents.”
Amanda Erickson, also of the Kaleidoscope Youth Center, worried about the impact the bill will have on teachers, who may not only be required to speak with parents about information they were told by a student, but could also be impacted themselves, based on their own life choices.
Erickson herself trained as a teacher, before she moved on to the nonprofit sector after graduation. A career in a classroom did not appeal to her after the efforts of the Ohio legislature, now and in the past.
“Why would I want to be a teacher in Ohio when my legislators are so obsessed with gender and sexuality that they do not have time to pass legislation that would actually improve our schools,” Erickson asked of the Senate Education Committee.
Erickson also argued that the law might ban her and others from putting family pictures on her desk, as it might suggest a discussion she’s not allowed to have.
“Since this bill does not define ‘sexual concepts’ or ‘gender ideology,’ there are those who would argue that my wedding photo or the questions it could prompt would qualify as one or the other,” Erickson said.
The committee heard from some that currently are in the education field with members of the Ohio School Psychologists Association and the Ohio School Counselor Association both submitting in opposition to the bill, saying the bill is “not workable,” and ignores parents as an already “key tenet” in a student’s education.
Heather Fairs, a high school counselor and OSCA board member, said House Bill 8 crosses a boundary “to the point of creating unworkable requirements for school counselors that could be detrimental to students.”
Fairs said exceptions needed to be inserted into the bill for potential child abuse and neglect.
“A school counselor’s office is a safe space for students who see value in a neutral listener as they talk through their thoughts or their feelings,” Fairs told the committee.
A mandatory disclosure clause in HB 8 could destroy needed resources and trust for students, according to Fairs.
“What if the student was to come to actually talk about the relationship with their parent?” Fairs asked. “Rushing the disclosure of these concerns could exacerbate the tension between the parent and the student.”
The OSPA, representing more than 800 school psychologists, expressed “strong concerns” about HB 8, according to executive director Rachel Chilton, who said it would create a “professional conflict” for school psychologists.
The requirement that school staff notify parents of a change to a student’s “mental, emotional, or physical health or well-being,” including changes requested by a student to their assigned gender identification, violates the National Association of School Psychologist’s professional ethics standards, Chilton told the committee.
That standards directs school psychologists to “respect the right of privacy of students with regard to sexual orientation, gender identity or transgender status and not share that information with anyone without that individual’s permission.”
Resolving that conflict would involve an exemption to the parental disclosure requirements in the bill, similar to the exemptions Fairs said would help school counselors. The bill as written would force psychologists to choose between “the provision of competent and ethical care or following state law,” according to Chilton.
“It ignores a solid body of research as to the dangers inherent in depriving a vulnerable population of needed psychological care and the potential for suicide because of it,” Children told the committee.
A handful of individuals submitted testimony in support of the bill, focusing on the idea that parents should control the decision-making when it comes to their children, even when it comes to school matters.
One of the supporters was Lisa Chaffee, who is a lead party in a federal lawsuit against Hilliard City Schools, in which parents decry “federal bureaucracies” for attempting to change the anti-discrimination Title IX to include sexual orientation and gender identity. The lawsuit, which was mentioned in a national study of censorship laws and their impacts, claim teacher are allowed to “specifically solicit from children … private, intimate conversations about sexual behaviors” and other question. The lawsuit also claims religious practices are being questioned at the school district.
Chaffee took a similar tack in speaking up for HB 8.
“Activists teachers are having conversations with students they are not qualified to have nor should they be having on moral grounds,” Chaffee told the committee. “The topics of sex and sexual identity are between children and parents.”
As testimony went forward, committee chair state Rep. Andrew Brenner, R-Delaware, said he felt the need to stem some fears about the bill’s clauses. He said the bill still allows local school districts to have discretion over the bill, saying Ohio’s status as a Home Rule state will still come into play.
“All this is basically saying is that we don’t want public school teachers to encourage students to withhold information from their parents,” Brenner said.
The bill could be up for a vote out of the majority Republican committee as soon as Wednesday, when an “if needed” meeting of the committee is scheduled. If passed, it moves on to the Senate floor for a full vote.
The Senate is set to have it’s last scheduled floor session of the year Wednesday afternoon.
Originally published by the Ohio Capital Journal. Republished here with permission.
