Democracy hangs in the balance in the battle over parental rights 

Credit: Allison Shelley for American Education

The battle over parents’ rights in California is moving from packed school board meetings to contentious lawsuits. How these controversies are resolved will profoundly affect the rights of children, the rights of parents, and our obligation to educate our children to be responsible citizens in a democracy.

• A lawsuit in Riverside County challenges a Temecula Valley Unified School District resolution to ban critical race theory.

• Chino Valley Unified’s new policy requiring parents to be notified about a student’s gender identity requests has triggered a civil rights investigation.
• California Attorney General Rob Bonta is also looking at the adoption of a similar policy by Murrieta Valley Unified School District.

Which view of “rights” will prevail? There are three main tensions in this struggle:

The fundamental rights of parents to direct the care and upbringing of their children, including the right to be informed of and involved in all aspects of their child’s education to promote the best outcomes.

Student rights to privacy. Gender identity is a protected privacy right under the California and U.S. constitutions.

The right to an education is fundamental under the California Constitution. There is also the right to be free from discrimination based on race, sex and sexual orientation.

The political divide on these issues is reflected in the battle over parent rights in Congress. Two bills aim to redefine parental rights for the whole country, not just for individual states, districts or schools. (In a divided Congress, neither bill will be adopted.)

The Republican bill, called the Parents Bill of Rights. “Parents have a  God-given right to make decisions for their children,” according to a committee “fact sheet” on the bill. This includes the right to know if a school acts to change a minor child’s gender markers, pronouns, or preferred name or allows a child to change the child’s sex-based accommodations, including locker rooms or bathrooms.

The Democratic Bill of Rights for Students and Parents calls for a public education that is “inclusive, aspirational, and affirmative.” Educational materials should be historically accurate, reflect the powerful diversity of the nation, and prepare students to think critically and participate actively in a multiracial and multiethnic democracy, according to the resolution.

This latest struggle has its roots in the pandemic, which triggered a strong parent rights movement, voicing opposition to school closings, vaccinations and masking.

Parent opposition to “critical race theory” led to packed school board meetings and created divisive political advocacy. New, complicated issues keep popping up. Critical race theory and its progeny are the new whack-a-mole of public education politics.

Critical race theory is a graduate-level analysis that explores how racism is part of American laws and policies. Parents are using the term to object to how history and race are taught in our K-12 schools. Parent rights have morphed into a smorgasbord of issues.

•     How should schools teach about LQBTQ+? Whack.
•     Should schools teach ethnic studies? Whack.
•     How should schools provide education on sex, gender identity, sexual orientation? Whack.
•     What are the privacy rights of students? Whack.
•     How should schools address diversity, equity and inclusion? Whack.
•     How should schools incorporate social-emotional learning? Whack.

Many proposed new parental rights are aligned with Republican Party opposition to teaching about how historic government policies that discriminated against racial, ethnic and religious minorities are taught in school. Some proposals align with religious views on sex.

In California, decisions on what is taught in school are made through the legislative process, the State Board of Education and local school boards.

It’s the messy, complicated process of how decisions are made in a democracy — not by one person but through input from many.

Today’s political controversies are a wake-up call. They highlight the need for greater family engagement to help parents understand their legal rights, how decisions are made, what their children will learn, and how parent voices can be heard.

Here’s the process:

Legislation: Parents and their advocacy groups can provide input on bills throughout the legislative process. There has been vigorous debate in California about schools’ vaccination and school choice policies.

State Board of Education: Parents can also bring their concerns to the State Board of Education, which makes decisions on issues that generate controversy. How should math be taught? What should be included in the ethnic studies curriculum, the history/social studies frameworks, and health education? The state board adopts academic standards and guidance on how curriculum should be implemented at schools. It also adopts a list of instructional materials.

The state board and local school boards are not allowed to adopt any textbooks or other instructional materials that contain any matter reflecting adversely on a person based on race or ethnicity, gender, religion, disability, nationality, or sexual orientation.

Local school boards. School boards must include only materials which accurately portray the cultural and racial diversity of our society.  School boards do not have to select state-adopted materials, but any materials used must align with state academic content standards.

Parent input on instructional materials. Each district board must promote the involvement of parents in selecting instructional materials. Parents have the right to examine curriculum materials used in their children’s classes.

One of the most important goals of public education is to prepare students to be responsible citizens in a democracy. This idea is embraced in California’s education curriculum and its constitution.

In authoritarian countries, a core function of the education system is to suppress students’ access to competing ideas, including political views.

Should teachers be free to teach history, warts and all, or should the government “protect” children from the discomfort of learning about the history of racism?

Schools and libraries provide students and communities with access to materials that can challenge norms or beliefs. Should parents and school districts have the power to prevent students from seeing materials or hearing views that the parents object to?

This is not only about differences of opinion on parents’ rights. It is also about how we sustain our democracy. Children need the freedom to think critically and to learn about their society and the world beyond it.

•••

Carol Kocivar is a child advocate, writer for Ed100.org, retired attorney and past president California State PTA. A version of this article was previously published on Ed100. 

The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.