Relative to the use of children's names and pronouns by public school employees.
Impact
The introduction of HB 1356 is poised to significantly affect existing state laws related to education, student rights, and the rights of parents within the educational system. The bill emphasizes biological definitions of sex and restricts school personnel's ability to address students in a manner that reflects their preferred names or pronouns without parental consent. This could lead to a more rigid enforcement of traditional norms regarding gender identity in public schools, potentially impacting the inclusivity and emotional well-being of students who identify differently than their assigned biological sex.
Summary
House Bill 1356 establishes a legal framework for how public school employees and contractors may address students by their names and pronouns. Specifically, the bill mandates that school staff must use names and pronouns corresponding to a student's biological sex as recorded on their birth certificate, unless they receive explicit written permission from the student's parent or guardian. This legislation aims to mitigate confusion regarding gender identity and ensure that parents remain central to decisions impacting their children’s education and identity in a school setting.
Sentiment
Sentiment surrounding HB 1356 is sharply divided. Proponents argue that the bill is a necessary measure to uphold parental rights in the education system and protect children's best interests. They believe that it provides clarity and safeguards against potential confusion arising from the use of various gender identities in educational environments. Conversely, opponents highlight that the bill could harm students, specifically those identifying as transgender or non-binary, as it may invalidate their expressed identities in a formal educational context. Critics contend that the bill represents a broader trend of discrimination against LGBTQ+ individuals and a disregard for their rights.
Contention
Contention arises primarily around the interpretation of student identity and parental authority. Supporters argue that parents should have ultimate control over their children's education and identity, while opponents claim that the bill infringes on students' rights to express their identities as they see fit. Furthermore, there are concerns regarding the potential legal implications for school staff who might be caught between adhering to the bill while trying to support their students. This creates a complex environment where educators may feel compelled to choose between the law and the emotional needs of their students, particularly in cases where students may face distress without affirmation of their chosen identity.
Prohibiting gender transition procedures for minors, relative to sex and gender in public schools, and relative to the definition of conversion therapy.
Relative to screening and intervention in public schools and public charter schools for dyslexia and related disorders, and establishing an addition to adequate education grants for certain pupils screened for dyslexia and related disorders.