Letters to the Editor: Transgender students should be given a voice when policies affect them

To the editor: Much of David G. Savage’s recent article about the Supreme Court’s decision to allow California teachers to tell parents about their children’s gender identity revolves around the argument that this is a win for parental rights (“Supreme Court: California parents may be told about their transgender child at school,” March 2). However, the article fails to include the perspective of the impact the ruling may have on school administration and transgender students.

Advocates for the ruling are quoted as calling the previous policy “anti-family” and “California’s parental deception scheme,” while “parents are left in the dark.” Although the article gives voices to parents on this topic, educators, transgender students and mental health professionals are left unheard. These three groups may find that the privacy protections established are very much needed for the students’ comfort and safety in a physical and mental sense.

The court’s ruling also claims, as this article quotes, “California’s policies conceal that information from parents and facilitate a degree of gender transitioning during school hours.” Contrary to what this language may lead you to believe, medical transitioning procedures are not taking place during school hours. In reality, schools are merely allowing for a simple change of name or pronoun that the student would rather be identified as. The preferred pronoun or name that the student asks for helps the student feel that they are in a safe, comfortable and inclusive environment at school.

Students’ overall safety and parental rights are both serious matters. The article should have presented an equally balanced discussion, giving light and a voice to all sides in the topic.

Andrea Guerrero, La Puente

..

To the editor: I fear the separation of church and state is disappearing. If parents believe their religious beliefs are being disrespected at a public school, then perhaps their children would be better served at a parochial school. Likewise, if the two “devout Catholic” teachers object to these policies, they might be happier teaching at a parochial school.

There are children for whom school is the only safe place to be their own true selves. Getting support from a trusted teacher or counselor can ease their transitions outside of school. Denying children this opportunity will do irreparable harm.

Bottom line, if parents and teachers want religious education, there are options for that. For now, church has no place in public schools.

Nancy Lazerson, Encinitas