Sadly I’m not surprised that the NHSBA came out against the parental rights legislation that will be voted on in The New Hampshire House soon. It’s hard for me to remember when this lobbying organization supported any parental rights laws. It seems odd since parents pay their salaries.
Check your school budget to see the amount of dues paid to this lobbying organization. This is money that could be better spent on educating your children.
Here is the actual testimony that was presented by the NHSBA that opposes passage of the parental rights legislation.
NHSBA-SB-272
Why is there even a need for parental rights legislation? Maybe we should start there. It begins with the NHSBA’s recommendation that all schools adopt a transgender policy (JBAB) that’s hostile to parental rights. Within this policy there is instruction directed towards school staff to LIE to parents if they inquire about their child’s gender:
III. GUIDANCE A. Privacy
The Board recognizes a student’s right to keep private one’s transgender status or gender nonconforming presentation at school. Information about a student’s transgender status, legal name, or gender assigned at birth also may constitute confidential information. School personnel should not disclose information that may reveal a student’s transgender status or gender nonconforming presentation to others, including parents and other school personnel, unless legally required to do so or unless the student has authorized such disclosure.
This anti-parent model policy starts off with an attack on parental rights. The policy does not give parents due process, but instead assumes all parents are abusive monsters. There is no “innocent until proven guilty,” parents cannot be trusted so school personnel must hide this information from parents.
Is it any wonder that legislators have been contacted by their constituents to pass a law that requires school personnel to tell the truth?
FERPA, the federal student privacy law specifically states that parents have the right to examine their child’s school records. So how are schools legally hiding this information from parents? That’s a good question. Why such hostility towards the parents who are the ones funding the NHSBA?
NHSBA did eventually remove this model policy from their recommended list of policies they present to schools. That coincided with a lawsuit in Manchester by a parent who is currently suing the district because school personnel were required to lie to her about her child. This plaintiff is also a public school teacher who is outraged that this policy is in place. Many teachers do not want to be put in a position of having to lie to good parents.
The NHSBA lays out a list of grievances with SB272:
1) NHSBA has a problem with a law spelling out what is already in state statute supporting parental rights. NHSBA doesn’t mention how many of those laws they OPPOSED. Having this list of current laws that support parental rights, directs a parent who may be reading the law in the future, to laws that support their rights. God forbid parent have an easy way to access that information. NHSBA says it’s “unnecessary” to have this information included in the law. WRONG: If SB272 becomes law, any parent reading the law will not see all of the other laws listed. It provides transparency. (Page 2 Line 22)
2) Page 3 Lines 8-10: the right of a parent to exempt their child from immunizations. NHSBA goes on to complain that this isn’t necessary because immunizations have nothing to do with schools. Tell that to the two families whose children were vaccinated THIS year AGAINST their parents’ consent. One child in Nashua and one child in Rochester were immunized during a school based vaccination clinic. The parents specifically directed the school NOT to vaccinate their children, but they were vaccinated anyway. Where was the NHSBA? If schools are going to become vaccine clinics, then it is wise to address a parent’s most fundamental rights in SB272.
3) Page 4 Lines 4-5: The right to consent before a biometric scan of a child is made and shared or stored. NHSBA complains that this is not happening in NH Schools so we do not need to list this as a right of parents to consent. Well there is a BIG PUSH for biometric scanning in our public schools. Maybe NHSBA isn’t aware of that? If they are not, should they be weighing in on this important provision? Why would we wait for biometric scanning in schools to begin, and then address it in state statute? Biometric systems have the ability to collect a vast amount of information on children. Privacy is a big concern for students and parents. Finger and palm print biometric can track a child’s dietary habits, which can be intrusive.
4) Page 4 Line 6-8: the right of a parent to consent in writing before any record of a child’s DNA is created, stored or shared. Once again, NHSBA has a problem including this right for parents because they say it’s not being done in NH Schools. They think we should wait until schools begin this intrusive process before protecting the privacy of the students. Doesn’t it make sense to put into statute now before anyone begins collecting DNA from children? Texas has already begun asking parents to collect DNA samples on their children after a school shooting. Parents would store the DNA in their home, but what if school administrators decided to keep those records? Why wouldn’t we want to make sure that parents were consenting on something this important?
5) , Lines 9-10 – the right of a parent to consent to any medical procedure or treatment to be performed on a child. Public schools don’t conduct “medical procedures” on students. NHSBA argues that schools do not conduct medical procedures on children. Isn’t a vaccine a medical procedure? Didn’t two children get vaccinated against their parents’ consent this year? YES. School based medical clinics are part of the CDC’s agenda for community schools. Not only are schools supposed to be providing mental health services to students, but medical services too. Amoskeag Health is already in the Manchester public schools providing services. It makes sense to include this important language in law. But, NHSBA opposes that too. This is a list of NHSBA fighting against parental rights.
6)Page 4, Lines 12-19 – the right of a parent to ask the school if their child is transgender, and the obligation of the school to be truthful. God forbid a parent has the right to ask about their child’s gender identity at school and God forbid we expect those working in the school to be honest and not lie.
7) Page 4, Lines 24-25 – the right of a parent to know what extracurricular clubs the child is participating in. NHSBA surmises that this is about LGBTQ+ clubs. Once again, NHSBA wants to keep parents in the dark and allow school personnel to lie to parents. Federal FERPA law already states that parents have a right to examine their child’s school records. Why would any information be exempt from disclosure? Some kids do not want their parents to know that they failed a class, but parents have a right to know that information too.
The parent/ (public school teacher) suing the district for withholding information from her has since removed her child from the Manchester public schools. All of these anti-parental rights policies do is, drive families out of the public school system. If parents cannot trust the people working with their children to tell them the truth, why would then send them to that school?
What is next? What will they lie to parents about in the future? Where does it end?
CALL THE NH SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION AND TELL THEM TO STOP OPPOSING PARENTAL RIGHTS!
YOU PAY THEIR SALARIES, THEY SHOULD NOT SUPPORT ANY SCHOOL DISTRICT COMING BETWEEN A PARENT AND THEIR CHILD: Phone: 603-228-2061
Then tell your school board members to STOP paying dues to the NH School Boards Association!! There is an alternative to the NHSBA: The NH School District Governance Association.
