view the rest of the comments
News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
A slippery slope is saying "if we allow thing 1, then later we will allow thing 2." That's not what I'm saying at all.
I'm saying the current thing makes me uneasy, and trying to clarify the left and right bounds of when that one thing is okay to do, if it ever is.
I think we can all come up with instances where it's wrong for the school to lie to parents. If you catch a kid smoking for instance, it shouldn't be acceptable for the school to not tell the parents. And it should be doubly unacceptable if the parents ask for the school to lie to them about it.
Schools aren't perfect. What I'm about to say might actually be a slippery slope, but if schools are allowed to lie to parents about their children, I don't think it's a far leap to say they will lie to cover up bullying and abuse to prevent themselves from being sued or held accountable. Bad schools can be just as bad at being a safe place for kids as bad parents.
But aside from that, I think there's an important meta conversation to be had about what a parent's responsibility to their child is. I think in addition to the obvious of providing a safe and loving home, a parent is responsible for raising their child to be a good member of society. It concerns me when the state begins to take that responsibility away from parents and put it on itself.
Now, sometimes that is something the state needs to do. If a child is being actively abused, the parents should be sent to prison, and the state should (in absence of another parental figure that can take in the child and is willing to do so) assume custody of that child. In which case it is the states responsibility to raise that child into a good and responsible member of society.
But these weird half measures where the state says, "you're not an abusive enough parent for us to take your children away from you, but we don't like the way you're raising them enough that we're gonna actively lie to you about what your child is doing at school," feel bad to me.
You are making a slippery slope argument because you're taking a situation involving schools respecting a preferred name and pronouns and turning it into an argument about a child killing themselves and the school hiding the warning signs from parents.
If you were really concerned about children self harming, you shouldn't be arguing that the state act as a snitch in a situation like this. Calling someone "he" instead of "her" or calling them by a name other than what's on their birth certificate by request isn't going to lead to physical or mental harm. Ratting a kid out to their bigoted parents when they've specifically asked you not to very likely will lead to physical and mental harm. These children aren't property of the parents and they should be given some agency over their own lives as human beings.
I think it's probably more analogous than you are painting it as. The trans community suffers elevated levels of suicide risk, and parents who are in the dark about what their child is going through are less equipped to get them the help they need if they need it. Parents of trans kids often have to get them emergency mental health services due to them being bullied or ostracized. If the parents are kept in the dark about it, they may not see the problem until it is too late.
And I agree that children aren't property, but they also aren't fully independent agents. Children need guidance. Children need to be raised by parents who love them and are involved in steering them to be a successful and active participant in society. Children should not be allowed to make every decision for themselves without question. They need to be required by an authority figure to eat their vegetables and brush their teeth.
They have agency certainly, but not unlimited agency, and we need to figure out what the left and right bounds of that agency are. And that will change as they age and get older, and will be different from child to child even. But who decides that? My gut is that it's the parents. I feel like every other option is unpalatable.
Your argument seems entirely disingenuous to me. Describe the situation where a student feels comfortable and confident enough to share this aspect of their life with their peers and teachers at school, but not at home with their parents. These parents are "loving and involved in their child's life" but somehow also in the dark about their child's identity and mental health. I don't see how you can meet all this criteria without a ton of mental gymnastics.
Should this be extended further into other hot button political issues? Should a school inform parents if their white child is hanging out with black or brown students? Should schools inform parents if their straight child is hanging out with LGBT students? Should they inform parents if children are expressing leftist or right wing viewpoints? Why or why not? What's the difference?
It's almost as if there was a reason that this student didn't want their parents to know.
Let's take the pronouns out of it. Suppose you have a child named Elizabeth who wants to be called "Beth". This child tells the teacher "please don't tell my parents that I'm going by Beth; they'll beat me if you do". In a rational world, the teacher would be able to report this as the child abuse it is. But imagine this teacher lives in a city/state/country where the judicial system refuses to prosecute nickname-related beatings as child abuse.
What is the morally correct action for this teacher to take?
When has this child been beaten by the parents? That would indeed be abuse! Being disrespected by own child…
It's not an easy decision. You are taking it on face value that the child is right. I have seen many children afraid to tell their parents something that they think will upset them, only for the parents to be totally cool with it. It's very common.
Now, if you truly believe that the child is right, I do think there's still a moral difference between not telling the parents and actively lying to them if they ask.
If asked, I think that probably the correctest decision is probably to refuse to answer and tell the parents that's a conversation they need to have with their child? Idk.
I've seen a scenario where the parents were actively beating their kid if he got good grades because they wanted their kid to fail out. Should the school have lied to the parents about what grades he was getting? CPS refused to remove the kid from the home. What should the school have done in that scenario?
Ultimately, I think navigating when and how the state intervenes in parenting is tricky. It's very case by case, and in most scenarios there aren't really good answers. What's the line where kids are taken away? What's the line where the courts mandate training or intervention in the home? What's the line where the state starts just actively lying to the parents about their child to protect them? If you've crossed the lying line, why haven't you crossed the removal line?
I don't know that there's a good answer to a lot of these questions. But in general, I think that the state hiding things is usually the wrong answer.
The parents are suing the school over pronouns and preferred names. Parents who are "totally cool" with their transgender child don't tend to do things like that.