to the First Circuit, arguing yesterday that the district court applied the wrong standard when it rejected their claims. It should not have dismissed their complaint, because the school’s significant interference with their parent-child relationship “shocked the conscience,” which they argued is the correct legal test.
She can only trust the people at the school. … How can she ever trust her parents if the counselor is telling her these things? The court then wanted to know how the school justified its “no-disclosure” policy, especially given that it was not required by Massachusetts law, a point the school’s lawyer conceded.If one accepts that gender identity must always be disclosed to parents, then there are any number of other important aspects of the child’s life and personhood that must also be disclosed to parents. … There’s no … limiting principle.
And it’s particularly the case here where the children requested that the information not be shared and where [the parents] are insisting on notice for the purpose ofBut as between the school and the parent, who should “control” children’s choices about their gender? That is really the whole point, though I doubt the school’s lawyer meant to get to it.
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: CTVNews - 🏆 1. / 99 Read more »
Source: SaltWire Network - 🏆 45. / 63 Read more »
Source: YahooFinanceCA - 🏆 47. / 63 Read more »