New Hampshire currently has a law that requires informed consent from parents when their children take a non-academic survey in school. Exploiting children while conducting research on them, is not only illegal, but it is unethical too.
Unfortunately, when this law was passed, the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) was exempted. But shouldn’t school administrators still seek parental consent from parents when administering this survey? Of course they should. The administrators in charge of your children should certainly uphold ethical standards. Unfortunately, many do not.
There is now legislation that has been introduced by Representative Ralph Boehm that would remove the YRBS exemption. That would be a good thing ,since parents should consent on all non-academic surveys, not just some. If there is research on their drug use, sexual identity, or any other sensitive topic, school administrators should uphold the highest standards for themselves and the vendors they use to collect this data.
But what happens when a member of our law enforcement opposes informed consent by parents? Shouldn’t he uphold these high ethical standards too? Of course. That is why it was so shocking and disappointing to hear a member of our law enforcement community oppose HB1639.
Please watch this video from the House Education Committee Hearing where David Goldstein (at 5:07:50) Chief of Police from the city of Franklin, New Hampshire testifies in opposition of HB1639. He testified on behalf of the Association of the Chiefs of Police. Why do the Chiefs of Police now stand against parental involvement and parental rights ?
He along with others opposed this important parental rights legislation. Keep in mind if a licensed Child Psychologist administered a survey like this, they could lose their license if they did not seek informed consent from the parents or guardians. (#9) Yes, even those who are educated and licensed must follow a code of ethics.
Now read the testimony below from Mark B. Constantian, MD. He describes why this kind of research is an experiment on children that it can cause them harm.
I don’t suspect the Chiefs of Police want to cause harm to children, but they are attempting to deny parental consent when gathering this data on children in our public schools. I urge the Chiefs to reconsider their position on this important bill and let’s bring our laws up to speed so ethical standards are followed when conducting any research on our children.
—————————————————————————————————————————————–
Dear New Hampshire Representatives:
I have been a New Hampshire resident since 1978 and practiced Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery in Nashua for 43 years. All of our four boys attended the Hollis Brookline school system through high school, and I have two granddaughters in the school system now. I write to encourage you to support HB 1639.
There is an easy example of why this legislation is needed.
I have done many years of clinical research. Any research involving students, according to the Declaration of Helsinki, requires Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval. The purpose of such approval, which is rigorous, is to assure that any human experimentation, which includes surveys, is not only safe but likely to produce important new information.
The current Youth Risk Behavior Survey would not pass IRB muster, for several reasons.
First, to my knowledge it is not a metric proven to give reliable information. It is not “controlled,” except by measuring the current data against the data from two years ago. To my knowledge, the YRBS has not been shown to be reliable; and moreover its questions are potentially harmful because they can create confusion in the children’s minds, plant ideas that may not have occurred to them, and invade their privacy in a way that parents may not approve. The YBRS is thus an experiment with no defined goal.
The latest administrative analysis of this data (attached) is naïve. The writer consistently talks about “significant” change with no evidence of any statistical proof, and is excited, for example, that the percent of students who ingest alcohol before sexual intercourse has dropped from 22% to 5% in two years. This is an unbelievable conclusion.
Because the approval of parents is not specifically requested before the survey and “opt in” consent is not required (as mandatory in any IRB experimentation), parents cannot protect their children. It is widely known that the students see the survey as a joke and therefore presumably invent whatever answers they want, so that the results are entirely useless. YBRS is thus potentially dangerous and yields nothing useful to the educators.
HB 1639 would require affirmative parental consent, which will ensure the safety and reliability of any data. The young students of New Hampshire cannot have less protection than is required of me when I survey consenting adults. This is only one example of educational overreach without parental approval.
More broadly than restraining overreach, HB 1639 provides common sense rights for parents to know and approve their children’s educational content, the right to know who is teaching their children, whether they are safe, and to ensure that the School Board is responsive to parental wishes, all rights that are regrettably and incomprehensibly not currently case.
I strongly encourage you to endorse this bill.
Respectfully submitted,
Mark B. Constantian, MD, FACS
Mark B. Constantian, MD, FACS
Clinical Adjunct Professor of Surgery, (Plastic Surgery) , University of Wisconsin
Visiting Professor, Department of Plastic Surgery, UVA www.drconstantian.com
Author of newly released research on childhood trauma and plastic surgery patients: https://journals.lww.com/plasreconsurg/Abstract/2021/12000/The_Prevalence_of_Adverse_Childhood_Experiences,.10.aspx
Author of: Childhood Abuse, Body Shame, and Addictive Plastic Surgery: The Face of Trauma https://www.amazon.com/Childhood-Abuse-Addictive-Plastic-Surgery/dp/1138100307/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=constantian&qid=1550260503&s=gateway&sr=8-1
——————————————————————————————————————————————
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON FEDERAL LAW PPRA (Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment)
Federal law requires informed consent from parents:
When must schools get parental consent?
Schools must get parental consent when 1) a required survey, analysis, or examination is 2) funded in whole or in part by the US Department of Education and 3) is being conducted to find out any of the following:
- Political affiliations of the student or the parent
- Mental or psychological problems of the student or the student’s family
- Sex behaviors or attitudes
- Illegal, anti-social, self-incriminating, or demeaning behavior
- Critical appraisals of other individuals with whom respondents have close family relationships
- Legally recognized privileged or analogous relationships, such as those of lawyers, physicians, and ministers
- Religious practices, affiliations, or beliefs of the student or the student’s parent
- Income (except as required to determine eligibility for participating in a program where they’d receive financial assistance)
If student participation isn’t required, then notice and opportunity to opt-out would be sufficient. Parental consent is not required for surveys that don’t cover the above categories, but parents generally may opt-out….
The YRBS can certainly be administered to students in any district in New Hampshire. Just like when a consent form is needed to attend a field trip, the YRBS would also need consent from parents. Recently in Hollis, students were given the YRBS survey but no notification was given to parents ahead of time. The current “opt out” law did not work in that district.
This boils down to money. How? Because if there is not enough participation, money could be lost. It’s all about the money!
They want to deny parents their fundamental rights to secure funding. That’s no reason to deny parents their fundamental rights. That’s why we have ethical guidelines and parental rights laws currently in place. Closing this loophole is needed.
LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: 3/7/22: House Education Committee votes to support HB1639. The vote was down party lines. Republicans on the committee voted to support parental rights, the Democrats voted to oppose. HB1639 now goes to the House floor for a vote. You can contact your State Representatives here, and ask them to support HB1639.
