Court says schools don’t have to inform parents if child changes pronouns

• A federal appeals court upheld a Massachusetts school district’s policy to not inform parents if their child changes pronouns and wants to keep it confidential. The court ruled the parents failed to prove the policy violated their rights.
• The school district decided to call a student by their chosen name and pronouns but to use their given name and pronouns when interacting with the parents.
• The judges ruled that Supreme Court precedent does not give parents control over curricular or administrative decisions.

---

Full Story

A federal appeals court upheld a Massachusetts school district’s policy to not inform parents if their child changes pronouns and wants to keep it confidential. The court ruled the parents who sued failed to prove the policy violated their fundamental right to direct the upbringing of their child. 

How did this case make it to federal court?

The suit was filed by two parents and two guardians against Ludlow School District in Massachusetts. The defendants included teachers, counselors and the superintendent.

The case was argued in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, which covers New England. 

The student, whose name and information is redacted from the opinion, changed their name and pronouns in an email declaration to teachers and counselors.

A school counselor then instructed staff to address the student by their chosen name and pronouns when interacting with them at school. However, staff was to use the student’s given name and birth pronouns when interacting with their parents. 

That decision was based on non-binding guidance the state department of education wrote in 2012 on how to handle students experiencing gender dysphoria or a gender transition.

The guidance suggested schools accept a student’s stated gender. The school district used it to create an unwritten policy that allows students to determine whether their parents should be notified “about decisions related to affirming [their own] discordant gender identity.”

The parents eventually found out about the school’s policy.

According to court documents, they argued the school’s policy constituted “psychosocial” mental health treatment because name and pronoun changes are a recognized medical/mental health treatment for children with gender dysphoria. 

What does the lawsuit allege?

The parents sued, alleging school administrators’ conduct restricted their fundamental parental rights protected by the due process clause of the 14th Amendment. A district court ruled the parents failed to allege that Ludlow’s conduct involved medical treatment, which the appeals court upheld. 

What did the court rule?

In the appeals court opinion, the judges cited three Supreme Court cases. The cases make clear it’s a fundamental right of parents to direct the care, custody and upbringing of one’s child.

The judges ruled that the parents did establish a fundamental right. They also ruled that Supreme Court precedent does not give parents control over curricular or administrative decisions.

The judges noted that there were no allegations of coercive conduct towards the student, nor were there any efforts to misinform or deceive the parents. 

In summary, the judges wrote, “We acknowledge the fundamental importance of the rights asserted by the Parents to be informed of, and to direct, significant aspects of their child’s life — including their socialization, education, and health. Be that as it may — as this opinion has also made effort to explicate — parental rights are not unlimited.”

What’s next?

The plaintiffs could appeal to the Supreme Court. However, there’s no guarantee the justices would agree to hear the case.

A spokesperson for the Massachusetts Family Institute, which represented the parents, said they are disappointed by the decision. They said the family is considering all their options.