Do Parents Need More Rights in the Education of Their Children?

This question - parental rights at school - is something of a hot topic over on Twitter. 

What rights DO parents have now and what else should they be able to do/know? 

We'll ignore the silliness of banning books - you can simply tell the library "no books for my kid" or give them a list. I can't imagine a librarian would be happy either way but if some controlling parent wants it, I would guess so.  

In the Washington State Legislature, there is a newly passed bill - that came from an initiative -  "a  parents bill of rights" at schools. Over at the Washington Policy Center, they were foaming at the mouth at any legislator that had issues with it and loudly applauding its passage. 

We can go through the whole thing but from my read about 80% of what is in there is already law. Some are calling this bill an "enhancement." From the Spokesman-Review:

Sen. Lisa Wellman, D-Mercer Island, said roughly 90% of these rights already exist under state or federal law, but acknowledged how confusing it can be to find and understand them.

“This initiative seeks to clarify all these rights and inform parents in plain and straightforward terms what they can expect to know about their children while they’re in school,” she said.

I do agree that districts - who SHOULD make it easy for parents to understand the ins and outs of student activities - are not doing a great job and I would posit it's on purpose. Districts appear to want to keep parents at arm's length.  

However:

- Want to see curriculum? Already possible.

- Your child's school academic record? Already possible.

- Opt out of sex education? Yup.

- School calendar? Yup.

Your child's school health record (meaning healthcare at school by a district employee)? That might be trickier as at age 13 kids have some control.

According to the Spokesman-Review:

Parents can also opt their children out of assignments related to the students’ sexual experiences or the family’s religious or political beliefs.

But I wonder about a couple of sections:

Public school records include all of the following:
(A) Academic records including, but not limited to, test and assessment scores in accordance with RCW 28A.230.195;7
(B) Medical or health records;
(C) Records of any mental health counseling

To note, parents retain their right to make their own medical decisions for their child younger than 13. 

Also:

Generally, anyone under eighteen is considered a minor and cannot legally exercise their rights under HIPAA. Instead, HIPAA considers the minor's parent or guardian to be their “personal representative.” The Privacy Rule authorizes a personal representative to exercise the minor's HIPAA rights on their behalf.

A law passed in 2019 around mental healthcare for teens may come into play; this from Crosscut in 2020:

Teens still have rights when it comes to their medical records. Those details aren’t freely given. In cases where health and safety are at risk, it is up to the discretion of the provider to share medication and treatment reviews. The teen will be notified of the disclosure ahead of time. Parents now have access to treatment plans, medication suggestions, psycho-education on the child's mental health and parenting strategies.

In short, if a minor can legally consent to treatment without the consent of a parent or guardian, then HIPAA recognizes their right to privacy.

As well, from the form for the student health centers in SPS schools, there is a notice for the parents that is only that they received a privacy practices notification.

HIPAA requires that we make the Notice of Privacy Practices available to you. We ask
that you sign and date this form. When you sign and date this form you are agreeing
that you were given a copy of the Notice of Privacy Practices. You are not
agreeing to what the notice says.

Usually parents sign for children who are minors (under the age of 18). There is an
exception when a minor seeks services for the following: family planning services,
sexually transmitted disease testing/treatment, outpatient mental health treatment or
outpatient alcohol and drug abuse. Under state law, minors may consent to their own
treatment for these services. When this happens, they will be asked to sign this form for
themselves.

As well, here is the King County Health Departments notice to parents.

So I'm not sure where the two laws will collide but it looks like the new law may trump the old one. I hope that Seattle Schools will look at this new law and explain to parents what it means vis a vis their child.

I do agree with these portions that I believe are new:

(f) To receive immediate notification if a criminal action is
deemed to have been committed against their child or by their child;
(g) To receive immediate notification if law enforcement personnel question their child, except in cases where the parent or legal guardian has been accused of abusing or neglecting the child;

Again, a bit tricky because I believe this passage means if law enforcement is involved.  But what about a school security officer? 

Then we run into a buzzsaw on two issues:

To receive immediate notification if their child is taken or removed from the public school campus without parental permission, including to stay at a youth shelter or "host home" as defined in RCW3
74.15.020;
(i) To receive assurance their child's public school will not discriminate against their child based upon the sincerely held religious beliefs of the child's family in accordance with chapter7
28A.642 RCW;

Except in cases where a student says they are being abused or neglected, that first paragraph could be difficult for a student who believes they are LGBTQ+. I would guess most of us had at least one friend who knew their parent would reject them if they express those views. 

As for the religious beliefs, I think that would be a fine line between what the student wants to do versus what the school believes they can do. For example, Muslim students are allowed to pray during the day in Seattle Schools. The district has a non-pork option on days when a pork item is being served in the cafeteria. 

Again from the Spokesman-Review:

Despite concerns voiced during public testimony last week about the potential targeting of homeless, LGBTQ+ or other marginalized youth groups, Sen. Claire Wilson, D-Auburn, emphasized the initiative does not alter existing protections for these groups.

“The Legislature and our allies will be keeping our eyes on implementation so that we can come back immediately should interpretation by districts cause any harm to young people,” she said.

I read where Seattle Senator Jamie Pedersen also warned that legislators would be keeping on eye on the implementation of this new law to protect LGBTQ+ students.  

We also have this:

j) To receive written notice and the option to opt their child out of any surveys, assignments, questionnaires, role-playing activities, recordings of their child, or other student engagements
that include questions about any of the following:
(i) The child's sexual experiences or attractions;
(ii) The child's family beliefs, morality, religion, or political affiliations;
(iii) Any mental health or psychological problems of the child or a family member; and
(iv) All surveys, analyses, and evaluations subject to areas covered by the protection of pupil rights amendment of the family educational rights and privacy act;

Many of you may remember that I am against the use of a middle school mental health screener called Check Yourself for some of the above reasons. I think asking students about their attractions, their gender, or about intimate details of their family lives is wrong. I firmly believe that parents whose students are taking this screener do NOT fully understand what is being asked.

This initiative will go into effect 90 days after the Legislature adjourns on Thursday.