Latest news with #ParentsBillofRights
Yahoo
17-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Washington parents get turned away again
The partisan vote to rewrite Washington's initiative for parental rights is sadly been taken. Unfortunately, many will never see the damage done to a child that does not get the care and love at times when they need it most, not to mention the lifelong negative effects that families have to deal with. Kids with the most loving homes are often concerned with letting their parents or loved ones down. It's normal for a young person not to want to confide in parents on some issues, even though doing so often is the best way for the issue to receive the care and love it needs. The Parents Bill of Rights ensured safety if there was any kind of abuse. Once again, political dominance dictates not only how parenting is to be done, but when allowed. Special interests dictate parenting even in our homes. Using identity politics to affect how our family functions is a sad part of public education in this state. Mick Sheldon, Kingston This article originally appeared on Kitsap Sun: Initiative changes should disappoint Washington parents | Letters
Yahoo
25-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Proposed changes to Parents Bill of Rights sparks ire
There are dueling views on proposed changes to the Parents Bill of Rights. The Parents Bill of Rights is less than a year old. But Democrats say it needs to be updated to better comply with state and federal laws. Meanwhile, Republicans say it is an excuse to water down parents' rights. Opponents are particularly upset about one provision in this bill. That's the provision that makes the bill law as soon as the governor signs it. It's called the emergency clause. And a longtime Republican activist says it's underhanded. 'Removing the parents' rights is not an emergency,' said Tim Eyman. 'Mt. St. Helens blowing its top, that's an emergency.' Initiative Activist Eyman made no secret of that he vehemently opposes the provision that means changes to the Parents Bill of Rights would go into effect right away and could not be changed through a referendum. He evoked the ire of Rep. Sharon Tomiko Santos (D), Seattle, the House Education Committee chair, too. 'Please do not impugn motives,' she responded. 'Questioning our motives is also impugning.' 'I'm questioning the motives of the emergency clause itself,' Eyman shot back. 'The emergency clause is motivated behind it to prevent the citizens from exercising a constitutional right.' The Parents Bill of Rights would change in some key ways. The bill, which began as a voter initiative, would no longer require giving parents access to their child's school records in 10 days. It would give educators 45 days to respond. Out would be the provision regarding medical services provided for children. And parents would no longer be able to sue school districts that violate their rights. 'We said very clearly, and I said myself, that we were going to bring the bill back if there were problems,' said Sen. Claire Wilson (D), Auburn, Federal Way. The Democratic senator and chief sponsor says the bill needed to be changed because some provisions, like those involving medical care, are taken up in other laws. Moreover, the law needs to go into effect before the school year ends. 'So, an emergency clause allows it to go into effect right now, so school districts know what's the right law to follow,' she said. She insists she has been a longtime parent and child advocate, having served for eight years on the Federal Way School Board. The bill likely has a good chance of passing. Since Democrats hold a majority. It will be up to the Governor to decide whether to sign it.
Yahoo
24-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
How central Ohio schools are complying with state's ‘bathroom bill'
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — Central Ohio school districts are adjusting their restroom policies to comply with the state's 'bathroom bill,' set to take effect Tuesday. Districts have altered policies that previously allowed students to use restrooms that align with their gender identity to comply with Senate Bill 104. Dubbed the 'bathroom bill,' the law states people can only use restrooms inside schools that align with their sex at birth. Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost threatened legal action against districts that did not comply with the law, emphasizing that compliance was 'not optional' and needed to occur before the law went into effect. In response, districts around central Ohio have updated their policies. Here's what area district had to say: Bexley's Board of Education passed a resolution amending portions of its gender expression and identity policy, which has been in place since 2016, to comply with S.B. 104. Board President Victoria Powers said she anticipates further changes to the policy in the near future, referencing the Parents Bill of Rights, which will go into effect in April and require staff to inform parents about changes in a student's gender identity. 'I do not agree with the requirements of Senate Bill 104,' Powers said at the meeting approving the changes. 'But I do believe that we will best serve our district by approving the resolution before us this evening. I know we will continue to work to ensure the dignity of everyone in our buildings, and that every student feels welcomed, supported, values and safe.' Columbus City Schools voted unanimously to rescind its gender-affirming policy on Feb. 18 after Yost's letter directly threatened the district with a lawsuit if they did not comply. The district now has no policy in place. See previous coverage of the district's decision in the video player above. 'The Columbus City Schools Board of Education respects and values each of our students and staff members,' the board wrote in a statement. 'The District remains committed to ensuring each student is empowered for success as a citizen in a global community, while also following the law.' Gahanna-Jefferson's Board of Education discussed the motion to comply with S.B. 104 separately from other agenda items, and the policy was rescinded after a 3-2 vote. Under the new guidance, the board said it would comply with the revised code and would not create any new multi-occupancy facility open to all genders, noting it was still able to establish 'family facilities.' Board members voiced frustration that they had to comply with a law some members felt targeted vulnerable students. All members said they care about creating an accepting environment that empowers students above all, and they will continue to do so while complying with the law. Grandview Heights Superintendent Andy Culp said the district made signage changes to avoid confusion but said their restrooms are compliant. The bathroom signs now read 'single occupancy restrooms.' 'Our students may continue to use the restrooms as they have been,' Culp said. Olentangy Superintendent Todd Meyer addressed S.B. 104 at a Feb. 20 school board meeting, reporting he had in-depth conversations with administrators at all district schools. The district has single-use restrooms in every building, he said, and the district also updated its online FAQs to address questions about the bill. Online, Olentangy said any student, regardless of reason, can request to use single-use facilities if they desire or need to have increased privacy. The district said it is prepared to address the law's requirement to comply on school trips as well, including in other states. The district does not allow students of different biological sexes to share accommodations on overnight trips. Upper Arlington confirmed they adjusted their policy in compliance with S.B. 104, passing a resolution affirming student well-being as a priority and stating they had a legal responsibility to change their policy. The district changed all signs reading 'all gender' to signs that read 'single occupancy.' A district representative said they will post 27 updated signs that identify 51 single occupancy restrooms across the district. On Feb. 10, Westerville had its first reading of a new policy, which will be voted on Monday evening. The proposed policy affirms compliance with S.B. 104, and the district does not appear to have any contradicting policies in action, according to school policy documents. Westerville did not provide comment, nor have they publicly sent out notices about S.B. 104, but the district did speak out against House Bill 68, which bans gender affirming care for minors. 'Legislating such discriminatory measures against Ohio's LGBTQ+ community now makes it impossible for educational leaders across the state to create educational environments and provide opportunities for all children,' said Westerville City Schools, regarding H.B. 68. 'No child should feel discriminated against or marginalized.' Worthington introduced a new policy reflecting compliance with S.B. 104 that prohibits use of facilities that do not align with one's sex at birth. The policy is effective Feb. 25 and said it is required per Ohio law. Worthington does not appear to have a public statement about S.B. 14, but joined Westerville in condemning H.B. 68 last year. 'We are deeply disappointed that the General Assembly has chosen to defy the governor, medical community, the Ohio High School Athletic Association, LGBTQ+ community, and parents of trans kids to target an already vulnerable group of Ohio's children,' Worthington Schools Superintendent Trent Bowers said at the time. New Albany-Plain and South Western school districts told NBC4 their policies are already in compliance with S.B. 104 and will not have to make changes. 'While some districts have moved in recent years to create policies that now potentially risk being out of compliance with the new bathroom and locker room requirements, South-Western City Schools has not moved to do so and, therefore, is appropriately aligned to meet the new expectations of the legislative measure,' South-Western Schools spokesperson Evan Debo said. Dublin City Schools said they don't have any information to share about S.B. 104, but the district will share updates through its usual channels if anything changes. Canal Winchester, Groveport Madison, Hilliard, Pickerington, Reynoldsburg and Whitehall school districts did not immediately reply to a request for comment, but a review of their policies showed none appeared to be out of compliance, and therefore may not need to make any adjustments. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
07-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
WA Democrats reportedly block move to nix 48-hour scholastic assault reporting requirement
A new Washington state bill characterized as a repeal of the state's Parents Bill of Rights now includes a provision allowing information to be essentially withheld from parents regarding assaults of their children for up to 48 hours. State Sen. Claire Wilson, D-Federal Way, attested to the Washington State Standard the bill overall "doesn't change any rights" and is a "cleanup bill" that updates health privacy provisions to align with current law. In a House Education Committee hearing this week, one lawmaker unsuccessfully attempted to undo the 48-hour rule and require immediate parental notification. "The underlying bill essentially states that schools can wait 48 hours before they tell parents if their children were involved in any kind of criminal action or if there was any sexual misconduct of staff," said state Rep. Travis Couture, R-Shelton. Washington State Proposes Protections For Unemployed Illegal Immigrants "And we have seen a stunning amount of sexual misconduct and sexual assaults by educators in our schools just in the last year itself." Read On The Fox News App He cited reports that two principals in the Vancouver, Wash., area "hid information" from parents on sexual misconduct against a teen. "As a parent myself, I would be disgusted and sickened to know if my kids had some kind of sexual abuse put upon them by staff, and I wasn't notified immediately of those things. . . . For God's sake, vote yes [on the amendment]." But Democrat Lillian Ortiz-Self argued that as a school guidance counselor, she was trained in how to best deal with such situations. "It's very clear that we take direction from law enforcement and from the Department of Children and Family Services whenever there's a crime that has taken place and that we must sit here and give them the time to do the investigation so that justice can be served. Our role in the schools is to support the child and support the parents," said Ortiz-Self, of Mukilteo. Washington State Democrats Accidentally Email Their 'Radical' Tax Plan To Entire Senate Ortiz-Self said authorities must not have their investigations "impeded," to which KTTH commentator Jason Rantz reacted incredulously in a column. "She didn't say, most likely because it's a completely contrived concern," he wrote. Couture's amendment to ensure immediate parental notification failed in an ensuing voice vote, with House Education Committee chairwoman Sharon Tomiko-Santos, D-Seattle, voting "nay" and deeming the vote unsuccessful. Following Couture's attempt to undo the change, another committee member raised a new amendment regarding parental notification if they are accused of a crime and have "more than just a meet and greet with a police officer." "We just heard if law enforcement are involved, parents should be involved as well. They should have the bare minimum of a notification when it comes to law enforcement questioning a child," said state Rep. Matt Marshall, R-Roy. "There are just certain protections that are afforded to all of us as members of society given by our Constitution. And one of them is the right to legal protection. And we're innocent until proven guilty. If parents aren't even involved, then children are potentially not aware of their rights. If they're being questioned, who's to say what they're going to admit to when they're being accused of a crime?" Marshall later said committee Democrats rejected two dozen Republican amendments in what he called a "blatant disregard for parents' rights" and children's safety. "[This is] further proof that Dems care more about their woke agenda than protecting our kids," he article source: WA Democrats reportedly block move to nix 48-hour scholastic assault reporting requirement
Fox News
07-02-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
WA Democrats reportedly block move to nix 48-hour scholastic assault reporting requirement
A new Washington state bill characterized as a repeal of the state's Parents Bill of Rights now includes a provision allowing information to be essentially withheld from parents regarding assaults of their children for up to 48 hours. State Sen. Claire Wilson, D-Federal Way, attested to the Washington State Standard the bill overall "doesn't change any rights" and is a "cleanup bill" that updates health privacy provisions to align with current law. In a House Education Committee hearing this week, one lawmaker unsuccessfully attempted to undo the 48-hour rule and require immediate parental notification. "The underlying bill essentially states that schools can wait 48 hours before they tell parents if their children were involved in any kind of criminal action or if there was any sexual misconduct of staff," said state Rep. Travis Couture, R-Shelton. "And we have seen a stunning amount of sexual misconduct and sexual assaults by educators in our schools just in the last year itself." He cited reports that two principals in the Vancouver, Wash., area "hid information" from parents on sexual misconduct against a teen. "As a parent myself, I would be disgusted and sickened to know if my kids had some kind of sexual abuse put upon them by staff, and I wasn't notified immediately of those things. . . . For God's sake, vote yes [on the amendment]." But Democrat Lillian Ortiz-Self argued that as a school guidance counselor, she was trained in how to best deal with such situations. "It's very clear that we take direction from law enforcement and from the Department of Children and Family Services whenever there's a crime that has taken place and that we must sit here and give them the time to do the investigation so that justice can be served. Our role in the schools is to support the child and support the parents," said Ortiz-Self, of Mukilteo. Ortiz-Self said authorities must not have their investigations "impeded," to which KTTH commentator Jason Rantz reacted incredulously in a column. "She didn't say, most likely because it's a completely contrived concern," he wrote. Couture's amendment to ensure immediate parental notification failed in an ensuing voice vote, with House Education Committee chairwoman Sharon Tomiko-Santos, D-Seattle, voting "nay" and deeming the vote unsuccessful. Following Couture's attempt to undo the change, another committee member raised a new amendment regarding parental notification if they are accused of a crime and have "more than just a meet and greet with a police officer." "We just heard if law enforcement are involved, parents should be involved as well. They should have the bare minimum of a notification when it comes to law enforcement questioning a child," said state Rep. Matt Marshall, R-Roy. "There are just certain protections that are afforded to all of us as members of society given by our Constitution. And one of them is the right to legal protection. And we're innocent until proven guilty. If parents aren't even involved, then children are potentially not aware of their rights. If they're being questioned, who's to say what they're going to admit to when they're being accused of a crime?" Marshall later said committee Democrats rejected two dozen Republican amendments in what he called a "blatant disregard for parents' rights" and children's safety. "[This is] further proof that Dems care more about their woke agenda than protecting our kids," he said.
