Lawyers Train School Districts How to Deceive Parents
In November of 2021, the Ventura County Office of Education hosted a webinar over Zoom for area public school educators on “the legal and practical considerations for ‘affirming’ the identities of transgender and ‘gender diverse’ students” in school. This webinar offers a rare peek into how county offices of education in California are training staff on student gender changes. This webinar was comprehensive, lasting three hours, with 94 slides in the presentation. A copy of the webinar has been published on a whistleblower website and provided to us:
The webinar was led by two attorneys from a law firm that advises public school districts in California. The audience included public school district administrators and other educators from Los Angeles, Santa Clara and Ventura Counties. During the presentation, school officials were:
Encouraged to give students “get to know you” forms at the start of the school year to elicit students to declare their personal pronouns.
Encouraged to stop the use of gendered words like “mom and dad” and instead use gender-neutral terms like “parents” in the name of inclusivity.
Told that parents have the right to opt their children out of comprehensive sex education, but the opt out does not apply to LGBT-inclusive curriculum if it is taught outside of sex education.
Instructed that students have a right to privacy that trumps a parent’s right to know.
Suggested that if the district decided not to inform parents or seek their consent about name and gender changes, administrators should avoid keeping written records of conversations with students about their gender because parents would then have a right to view them:
Suggested that gender affirming documents such as the Gender Support Plan, which we mentioned in a previous article, and instructions to teachers for carrying it out, could be maintained “in personal possession,” thus purposely evading the scope of a parent’s right to view their child’s student records. The writers of this substack actually do not know what “in personal possession” means – are they encouraging teachers to take it home? If anyone knows, please contact us.
Suggested that to honor a student’s request to not inform parents, schools can issue two student ID cards – one with the student’s legal name and another with the student’s chosen name – thus enabling the student to intentionally deceive their parents about their gender/name change:
Suggested temporarily changing a student’s name before sending out mass mailings to families, then changing the name back to the student’s chosen name to continue the deception.
Reminded that students must be allowed to use sex-segregated facilities such as the locker room or bathrooms based on their stated gender identity, not based on their legal sex:
Reminded that students must be allowed to participate on the sex-segregated sports team consistent with their stated gender identity, not based on their biological or legal sex.
Recommended that if parents complain that their biological son or daughter has to use a bathroom, locker room or sex-segregated facility with a trans student of the opposite sex, the school can offer the non-trans student the use of a private or single-stall restroom or changing area. The district “cannot prevent a transgender student from using gendered facilities because other students may be uncomfortable.”
The sum of advice given was that districts are not required to disclose to parents their child’s expressed wish to be called by a name other than their birth name and to be identified by a gender other than their birth sex at school.
More concerning, the speakers suggested several practices schools could use to deceive parents of their child’s name and gender change. We have been told by several parents that they did not learn about their child’s gender transition until well after their school was informed.
Even more egregious, the speakers described the scenario where gender ideology can be taught to students without prior parental notice if it is taught outside of comprehensive sex education:
The “California Healthy Youth Act” is California’s comprehensive sex education law passed in 2015. The new CA sex education requirement includes a comprehensive LGBT module that contains information about gender identity ideology. Note the highlighted bullet stating that although parents can opt their child out of sex ed class and the school has to notify parents of this right, the opt out notification requirement only applies to formal sex education curriculum. Thus it suggests that gender identity ideology can be included in non-sex education subjects like P.E., during “anti-bullying” or Social Emotional Learning (SEL) training, and during academic classes like history and English Language Arts, and parents would not have the opportunity to opt their child out or be notified of the instruction in advance.
We believe this legal deception is fundamentally at odds with other laws that mandate that parents must provide prior written consent before their child submits to a test or survey that asks questions about sexual behavior, attitudes, personal beliefs, or practices in family life or morality. See for example California Education Code 51513:
No test, questionnaire, survey, or examination containing any questions about the pupil’s personal beliefs or practices in sex, family life, morality, and religion, or any questions about the pupil’s parents’ or guardians’ beliefs and practices in sex, family life, morality, and religion, shall be administered to any pupil in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, unless the parent or guardian of the pupil is notified in writing that this test, questionnaire, survey, or examination is to be administered and the parent or guardian of the pupil gives written permission for the pupil to take this test, questionnaire, survey, or examination.
Why would a school be allowed to expose children as young as pre-Kindergarten to information about gender identity or sexual orientation without a parent’s prior knowledge or consent? Please note that if the same material were taught in grades 7 through 12 as part of comprehensive sex education, or included in a student survey or test, then the parent would have to be notified and allowed to opt their child out.
If you think this type of deception should not be allowed to go on in your child’s schools, contact the Ventura County Office of Education and let them know what you think:
Cesar Morales, Superintendent of VCOE: <email@example.com>
Rachel Ulrich, Board of Education President, Area 1: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Mike Teasdale, Board of Education Trustee, Area 2: <Mike@MikeTeasdale.com>
Mark Lisagor, Board of Education Trustee, Area 3: <email@example.com>
Arleigh Kidd, Board of Education Vice-President, Area 4: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Ramon Flores, Board of Education Trustee, Area 5: <email@example.com>
Ask your child’s principal or your district’s Superintendent or school board members what the policies are in your area. We have provided the names and email addresses of Burbank, Glendale and La Canada Unified School Districts at the bottom of previous articles.
In the meantime, start asking your children specific questions about what they are learning, what videos they’ve watched, what handouts they are getting, and what they are learning. Feel free to share this article with other parents.
The Gender Identity K-12 Team