In an Op-ed published in the Union Leader on February 19, 2021, I predicted that the policy adopted by the Manchester Board of School Committee allegedly to “protect” the rights of transgendered and gender non-conforming students, would end up getting the city sued.  Sure enough, an aggrieved parent has filed suit against the district.  It wasn’t that hard to predict given that the board adopted a policy that forbade school personnel from informing parents of their student’s transgendered or gender non-conforming behavior in school.  


On the board’s agenda for tomorrow night’s meeting (Monday, March 14, 2022) is a proposed revision to the policy that appears to remove language prohibiting parents from knowing how their children are “identifying” while in school.  In an email to the board, the district’s attorney Katie Cox-Pelletier claims that the policy revision had nothing to do with the lawsuit; that it was brought about “in response to administrator and community feedback.”  The changes, supposedly, “were part of a regular review of this policy to address needed language.”  While Cox-Pelletier asserts that this was entirely independent of the filed law suit, it’s not much of a stretch to believe that the parent’s interaction with school officials, which ultimately led to the lawsuit, spurred them to action.  Cox-Pelletier backed the policy when presented to the board.

The changes strike the specific language including parents on the list of those not to be told of a child’s identifying behaviors or preferences.  However, the general prohibition remains and could still include parents as the language enabling the student to keep such information confidential remains.  In place of the stricken language, the proposed revision adds wording that protects the district’s “obligation” to “take action when student safety is concerned.”  While that may sound reasonable, it enables a child to say they will be abused, ostracized or otherwise maltreated by their parent(s) if their non-conforming behavior is made known to them, thus requiring the schools to keep the secrets of little Johnny or Susie from their parent(s).

In addition to the problems that come with preventing parents from knowing what their children are up to in the schools, the policy makes possible the horrific sexual assaults against young girls by a “skirt wearing boy” using girls bathrooms in two different high schools in Loudoun County, VA.  A policy that mandates a student be allowed to use whatever facilities they identify with enables this kind of tragedy.  (Click here for related op-ed.)

Also unchanged are policy proscriptions requiring schools to allow students to play on the sports teams they identify with, rather than their biological sex.  The unfair competition this has provided against girls has led legislatures across the country to enact laws that protect girls sports by requiring that athletes play on the teams that match their biological sex.

This policy needs to be scrapped, not tinkered with.  Policies need to explicitly inform parents, not keep them in the dark.  They need to ensure girls are safe in locker and bathrooms and that their athletic pursuits aren’t corrupted by biological boy athletes.  This policy promotes the exact opposite of all of this under the woke guise of “fairness” and protecting “rights.”  Several years ago, Candia reversed course and dumped this very same policy after voters cleaned house in the election that followed the policy’s adoption.  Unlike Manchester, there have been no discrimination lawsuits in Candia.

Related articles:

More about transgenderism: