“Having anything kept from parents and having active legislation that helps provide cover for schools to hide things from parents is unacceptable,” said Rep. Matt Marshall, R-Eatonville.
He was talking about lawmakers using Senate Bill 5181 to change provisions in current state law about what parents can receive notification about from public schools. The bill was voted to move on by the House Education Committee Monday along partisan lines. No further action has been scheduled as of the time of this writing on April 1, and in the interest of child health, I hope to see the bill stall and die or be voted down.
Research consistently shows higher parental guidance leads to better mental health, stronger social skills, reduced risk-taking and higher academic achievement. Keeping parents from being fully informed caregivers is dangerous for children and teens.
SB 5181 removes notification of medical services
As the latest bill summary for Senate Bill 5181 says, “Some notification requirements are expressly established in statute as parental and guardian rights,” including:
— “prior notification when medical services are being offered to their child, except where emergency medical treatment is required;”
— “notification when any medical service or medications have been provided to their child that could result in any financial impact to the parent's or legal guardian's health insurance payments or copays;”
— “notification when the school has arranged directly or indirectly for medical treatment that results in follow-up care beyond normal school hours. Follow-up care includes monitoring the child for aches and pains, medications, medical devices such as crutches, and emotional care needed for the healing process.”
SB 5181 removes those notification rights.
Another right parents have right now because of Initiative 2081 is “immediate notification if their child is taken or removed from the public school campus without parental permission, including to stay at a youth shelter or host home.” That right would be modified this way, giveing parents the right to “not have their child removed from school grounds or buildings during school hours without authorization of a parent or legal guardian according to statutory provisions governing permitted school campus removals (rather than receive immediate notification if their child is taken or removed from the public school campus without parental permission, including to stay at a youth shelter or host home).”
Some lawmakers who support SB 5181 and getting rid of parent notification of medical ongoings are offended that educators are being treated as if they are misusing their influence or offering medical advice and direction that parents might not choose. I agree that the majority of public educators want to partner with parents to help students succeed and don’t want to be guiding kids’ medical decisions. That gives even more reason to share any medical information that educators know about with parents.
In Washington state, children 13 and over are already allowed to make lifelong medical decisions without parent notification or consent. Initiative 2081 did not change that, and lawmakers should go after that practice, which is harmful to child health.
For now, however, lawmakers should not add to bad law and say that what educators know about a child’s health is not information that should be given to parents. That will only create mistrust between parents and educators. Again, parental guidance is associated with better health outcomes and academic achievement.
Robust abuse laws exist
Some argue this change to 2081 is needed for unhealthy parent-child relationships. But we already have robust laws protecting kids from abuse. In fact, educators are required to report suspected abuse — and should. CPS and law enforcement can step in immediately.
This proposed change isn’t about child safety. It’s about helping kids make life-changing health decisions without parents.
Video of Monday’s hearing can be accessed here. It's must-see TV for those wanting to better understand the arguments for and against this idea to limit parent notification. Lawmakers spoke more clearly about the proposed policy than I often see and read.
