BOE's TG Policy Passes, 5 - 1
Policy 443 to provide “Welcoming and affirming schools for transgender and gender nonconforming students” passed at Wednesday’s Board of Education meeting by a vote of five to one. The vote in favor includes a non-binding vote from Carter Gipson, student board member. Board member April Miller, PhD was the dissenting vote. Colleen Cusimano did not attend the meeting.
Twelve people spoke against the motion in the public comments section. BOE members each shared the thinking behind their votes. “This policy is … based on American principles of democracy,” Michael Bunitksy said. “How can we do less than to accept, encourage and accommodate our own students here in Frederick County?” For the full text of his statement, read here.
Members of the public opposing Policy 443 were parents, or spoke in their professional capacity or as an elected official. Of most concern to this group was the privacy requirement where transgender or gender nonconforming students may disclose their status to school staff but does not authorize school staff to disclose this information to parents. Commentary made clear that parents viewed the school’s role in maintaining confidentiality to be overreaching and a usurpation of parental authority. The group went so far as to suggest the policy would encourage students to lie to parents “creating a wedge between parents and gender-confused children.”
The issue of participation in sports was also important. Since Policy 443 states that “students are permitted participation in FCPS sports … in a manner consistent with their gender identity” this group questioned whether the policy narrowed the opportunities for women to achieve in athletics and “flies in the face of Title IX.” Further, the policy does not address children of different ages, or biological development who are competing against one another.
A third issue raised has been generally known as the bathroom issue. Policy 443 states that “all students must have access to facilities, including rest rooms, locker rooms, or changing facilities, that correspond to their gender identity.” The group questioned whether a “mischievous student” could test the limits of this policy by entering any bathroom under any circumstances, opening up all students to “sexual abuse and an invasion of privacy.” The same concerns were expressed for overnight trips.
Requests were made to delay the vote on Policy 443 for further discussion. Miller also urged delay since she had only very recently received a document on the Fairfax County, Virginia transgender policy now being written and wished the BOE to review it and possibly add regulatory detail to Policy 443.
In response to these criticisms, the BOE pointed out that public discussions on accommodating transgender students had begun in February with the first of five public policy discussions held on March 8th. The meetings, which were open to the public, continued through the spring. The BOE had held three readings of the policy at open board meetings and had received hundreds of emails, consulted with the school attorney, school principals, teachers, administrative staff and councilors, engaged in best practices research, and independently gathered public input over a three-month period.
Board members, who identified as parents or grandparents, pointed out that the role of schools is to support and facilitate the communication between students and their parents and every conversation with a student begins with the question: “Have you involved your family in this?” The school district acknowledges that the transgender issue is sometimes a difficult conversation for students to have with their parents, but the goal is for schools and parents to work together to ensure students feel comfortable and safe.
“This policy protects all students,” board member Joy Schaefer said. “We do not encourage children to lie. Our first goal is to work with parents. There is no one on this board that would make a policy for one set of students at the expense of another set of students. It’s clear to me from some of the discussion that we are not talking about boys on the girls’ teams …. or boys in the girls’ bathroom. Or straight versus transgender, violent or predatory, that’s not what we are talking about. We are a community together and we owe it to each other to become more educated about what each of us are [sic.]”
The need for more education was also stressed by board member Ken Kerr, PhD, who identified himself as the father of three daughters and a grandfather. “The concerns I had I find no longer to be valid,” he says. “This has been a learning and growth experience for me. I’m convinced that with this vote (in favor of the policy) I am doing the right thing.” Board President Brad Young talked to his experience as a parent, grandparent, educator and sports coach. He has been privy to some of the difficult issues his students have faced. He says: “I think this is a good first step. It (Policy 443) can be amended as we go through.”
