Parent sues school district for ‘unconstitutional’ policy concealing students’ gender dysphoria from parents 

A mother who wants to be informed of her child’s expressed gender dysphoria has filed a lawsuit against a Pennsylvania school district. 

According to the lawsuit, Pine-Richland School District’s policy prohibits faculty and staff “from disclosing a student’s transgender status to the student’s parents or guardians.” 

The mother, referred to only as Jane Doe, wrote the district asking her child not be referred to a mental health counselor or social worker for evaluation, and to be notified if her child expressed any forms of gender dysphoria.  

The mother fears if her daughter shows signs of gender confusion the district will affirm her beliefs and help her child obtain medical care without her knowledge.  

In a meeting to discuss the written notice, district representatives allegedly told Doe, “under no circumstances would the School District notify her if it becomes aware that her child has requested to be addressed by different pronouns, a different name, or other exhibited behavior consistent with gender dysphoria or a desire to transition to a gender other than her biological gender.”  

In response, Doe emailed the school district again asking for its position. The district allegedly responded with a similar response, stating it “would work with the student, not the parent, on such matters.”  

According to the lawsuit, Doe has legitimate concerns regarding her child’s gender dysphoria, as Doe found her daughter watching “online videos related to transitioning, videos of transgender individuals advocating transitioning, and videos on sexuality.” 

The lawsuit claims the district is violating Doe’s Fourteenth Amendment rights guarding the fundamental role of parents to direct the care, upbringing and education of their children.  

The lawsuit also asserts the district deprived “Doe of her rights under 20 U.S.C. § 1232h, which is a law of the United States.” 

Doe is seeking monetary damages, attorney fees and a court order declaring the district’s policy unconstitutional and void.