Trans Gate Keeping!

Trans Gate Keeping!

One of the concerns that parents in SD76 have is that Policy 622 does not establish just what constitutes a “Frivolous and Vexatious” case. The guidelines to best practices as put forward and endorsed by education Minister David Eggen is that a child can self identify as whatever gender they feel at whatever time. Even changing from day to day.

One of the topics that was discussed at length during the informal meeting in March of 2016 was what was the process that would be implemented to identify a frivolous case, and how a true case would be managed. Parents were ASSURED that a process would be worked out and that the details on that process would come out when procedures were written.

To this day, no “gate keeping” procedure or process has been written. (Or at least been publicly made available.) In fact 3 procedures have been written that actively inhibit a gate keeping process.

622 P 001 Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

  • j. work collaboratively with school staff and build capacity to identify and implement evidence-based supports for students;
  • k. ensure staff will not refer students to programs or services that attempt to change or repair a student’s sexual orientation or gender identity; and
  • l. ensure all staff recognize the confidentiality of the sexual orientation and gender identity of all students and protect them from unwanted disclosure of such information.

(Policy 622 for reference)

Procedures (j) and (k) are contradictory and dangerously so. Evidenced based (j) support will show that there are those (such as Carey Callahan) who have regretted becoming trans and de-transed, but that would be a violation of (k).

Procedure (l) puts children at risk because it does not allow for professionals to evaluate if the child is suffering from some other condition, (gate keep.) If a teacher can not divulge the information concerning a student’s health and mental state, than it could progress further and lead to increased risk of self harm. Procedure (l) is also a violation of the Family Law Act as stated here.

The situation as it stands now leaves parents out of the loop, and allows individuals without professional medical or psychological training, to make life altering determinations for minors, that if misdiagnosed could lead to serious harm. The concerns parents have with 621 and 622 are not over with.

 

You must be logged in to post a comment