GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY INSTITUTE

Teachers Unions: From Academics to Activists

How Teachers Unions Reward Insiders, Promote Political Activism, and Push a Divisive Agenda

January 10, 2022

Key Findings

No U.S institution has been affected more by current events than the K-12 education system. The COVID pandemic wreaked havoc on the mechanics of delivering education, while the social justice movement sparked a debate over what should be taught in the classroom. The convergence of these two issues turned traditionally mundane school board meetings into a platform for frustrated parents and often pitted these parents against administrators and teachers. While parents voiced their concerns about COVID policies, critical race theory, and gender issues to their local schools, the powerful teachers unions pressed a national campaign to stake out positions on these same controversial issues. The actions taken by the unions go far beyond their traditional mission of bargaining for better pay, benefits, and improved working conditions for teachers. For example, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) passed resolutions that supported Democratic presidential candidates and advocated for liberal positions on politically divisive issues. The leader of the National Education Association (NEA) admitted that the union’s mission had been expanded to include social activism. Expenditures by both unions reflected these priorities, going exclusively to support progressive causes and candidates. To understand the effects of this expanded role of teachers unions, GAI analyzed almost two years of resolutions by the AFT. We also researched the backgrounds and the public statements made by the influential leaders of both the AFT and the NEA. 

This is what we found:

• Randi Weingarten, the leader of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) since 2008, dramatically increased the union’s political spending since taking office.1 According to the Government Accountability Institute’s analysis of campaign finance records, AFT campaign contributions spiked from $3.7 million in 2008 to $20 million during the 2020 election cycle.

• Lily Eskelsen Garcia, the leader of the National Education Association (NEA), confirmed to Education Week that the “core business” of the NEA is no longer pensions and health insurance, but social activism and political lobbying.

• Eskelsen Garcia stated that leadership changes at her union have allowed it to focus on broader social issues like immigration policy and racial justice. She justifies this expansion of union activism because it reflects the leadership’s deeply held personal and political beliefs.2 

The Union Dues of Teachers Now Fund Radical Social Justice Groups that Don’t Reflect Mainstream American Values

• Data from the US Department of Labor reveal that between 2006 and 2020, AFT and NEA donated approximately $726,200 to GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network). GSLEN bills itself as a “leading national organization working to guarantee LGBTQ+ students safe and affirming education.”3
 

• Research indicates that over the last three years, the AFT and NEA have donated approximately $3 million to pass through groups that then fund Black Lives Matters.  

GAI Analysis Reveals Union Leadership Focuses on Electing Democrats and Advocating for Left-Wing Issues

• GAI’s analysis of AFT resolutions shows the most frequent topics discussed in AFT resolutions in 2020 and 2021 were COVID-19, elections, race, violence, and criminal justice, followed by education.

• In 2020 alone, there were 227 separate mentions of “elections” contained in fourteen different resolutions that were published on the AFT website. Likewise, there were 165 separate mentions of “COVID-19” in twenty-one different resolutions; 111 mentions of “violence” in fourteen different resolutions; 93 mentions of “race” (excluding discussions of racial discrimination, which add a further 32 separate mentions) in 16 different resolutions; and 49 separate mentions of “police” and “criminal justice” across eight different resolutions. In 2020, a total of thirty-four resolutions were published by the AFT.

• When COVID-19 is mentioned in AFT resolutions, it is often mentioned in advocacy for policies that expand the role of the federal government in public education and implement broad reforms in US education. During the Covid Pandemic, Teachers Unions Seized an Opportunity to Change Education
 

• America’s two largest teachers unions used the Covid-19 pandemic as the pretext to push for radical changes to public education and exploited the crisis to financially benefit powerful elites with close ties to their leadership.

• AFT and NEA both adopted the leftist trope of “Reimagining Education” to frame their wide-ranging demands for school transformation. According to internal union leadership communication, unions began advocating for global pandemic solutions that require harvesting and sharing vast amounts of personal data on students and increasing the number of “wrap-around services” provided through schools.
 

• AFT President Randi Weingarten wasted a million dollars of union funds on counterfeit Covid supplies from China, and funneled loads of cash to her cronies in New York.

Unions Now Direct Schools to Promote and Advocate Controversial Issues

• Teachers unions disseminate radical curricula to teachers and schools, creating new professional standards that encourage controversy among teachers and families. Union initiatives encouraging activism in the classroom tie the hands of those teachers who wish to remain neutral and objective among their colleagues, their students, and their community.

• Despite the persistent argument that Critical Race Theory (CRT) is not taught in schools below the college level, many of the educational programs addressing racial equity and racial justice in public schools push such narratives. Primarily, students are being taught that the United States is inherently racist and that skin color determines the institutional hierarchy of oppressed and oppressor in which people are placed.

• Teachers unions encouraged teachers to intervene in the sexual and gender identities of students, especially during the isolation of the COVID-19 pandemic. These interventions include establishing private online communications with students, then concealing these communications from parents and other family members in the home. For many teachers, this could expose them to conflict with parents, a betrayal of the family’s trust, and even legal liability.

• Advancing radical gender politics in the classroom has harmed teachers, raising tension between teachers and their communities that spills over into lawsuits and public shouting matches. Teachers unions continue to push for the expansion of teacher responsibility in the life of the child, alienating parents and making the real work of education more difficult.

Unions Want to Expand the Influence of Liberal Policies Through “Community School” Programs

• The idea of Community Schools has been around for over three decades in the US, but under the Biden Administration financial support for this alternative schooling model has increased nearly fourteen-fold, from $30 million to more than $400 million per year. A bill called the Full-Service Community School Expansion Act of 2021 in Congress seeks to spend $3.65 billion over the next five
years on community schools.

• The major reason for this expansion is the teachers unions, which advocate for community schools using three primary tactics: 1) lobbying federal and local governments, 2) partnering with union insiders to provide wraparound services, and 3) “bargaining for the common good.”

• The most dangerous component of the community school model is the unprecedented amount and array of personal data collected from our nation’s most vulnerable and needy students through wraparound services. For example, Kneomedia Limited is a digital edutainment company that partners with New York City schools. One of Kneomedia’s crucial features is data capture and analysis, which provides immediate measurable results for schools, teachers, and parents to track students’ progress. This data harvesting also produces highly detailed biometric data on students that was not previously available.

Teachers Union Leadership

An organization’s leadership sets the tone and agenda for its activities. Leadership provides personality and a face to the organizational mission. For teachers unions, recent leadership has consisted of big personalities like Randi Weingarten (President of the AFT), Lily Eskelsen Garcia (former President of the NEA [2014-2020]), and Rebecca Pringle (current President of the NEA). These women style themselves as trailblazers, activists, and guardians of education. They use their public face to speak to and for educators across the country. Their beliefs and words move and inspire the members of their unions. Are they doing their best to serve American educators? Do they prioritize the original mission of their organizations? Do they positively contribute to American education.

Randi Weingarten

AFT President was born and raised in the New York area.4 Rhonda “Randi” Weingarten is an attorney who began her union career representing the President of the New York City’s United Federation of Teachers affiliate from 1986 to 1998. From there, she rose to become president of the American Federation of Teachers in 2008. According to her profile on the AFT website, education reform has been central to her work as the national union’s president. These reforms include drastic changes to teacher evaluations and a sharp increase in federal funds and involvement in public education.5 Reflecting Weingarten’s aggressive push for more federal involvement in public schools, AFT has transformed into a more aggressive political fundraiser. Influence Watch, a project of the conservative leaning Capital Research Center, has reported that under Randi Weingarten’s leadership, political spending by the American Federation of Teachers rose dramatically.6 AFT affiliates — such as the AFT Solidarity PAC — increased their political campaign contributions from a collective $3.7 million when Weingarten took office in 2008, to nearly $20 million in 2020. More than 99 percent of this money is diverted to Democratic campaigns and political organizations, according to OpenSecrets.7 Much of the politics and many of the policies pushed by Randi Weingarten detract from the original purpose of the union, which was to bargain collectively to increase the pay and protect the rights of workers in education and other public services. Rather than focus on pension issues and protection against mistreatment, Randi Weingarten’s agenda has emphasized radical changes in education that do not serve students or teachers. Her focus on promoting politically charged curricula often brings teachers and parents into conflict. It may even have cost Democratic candidates in critical elections. In Virginia’s gubernatorial election in 2021, many observers attributed the victory of Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin, a political newcomer, over previous incumbent Democrat Terry McAuliffe to the divisive and sometimes dishonest messaging Weingarten and other teachers union leaders pushed. After months of denying on Twitter her role in keeping the schools closed and denigrating the role of parents in the classroom, her public stumping for Terry McAuliffe may have been the last straw for frustrated Virginia parents.8 By focusing so heavily on political messaging, Weingarten has shifted the AFT from teachers’ working conditions and towards unpopular policies that voters do not support. Thus, even for the teachers who support the Democratic push to expand federal funding of schools, Weingarten’s broad involvement in social politics has begun to sabotage their efforts to vote friendly candidates into office, even after earlier success in the 2020 presidential campaign. Weingarten also brings controversy on herself. For example, according to a lawsuit filed by the Mississippi chapter of the AFT against Randi Weingarten and the national AFT, Weingarten covered for her close friend Akemi Stout, the corrupt head of its Jackson-based local. Stout mismanaged the local’s finances and paid union money to a business he owned, the lawsuit alleges. Weingarten assailed the lawsuit as a “personality conflict,” and accused the local affiliate of wasting dues money.9 Furthermore, Weingarten and her politically connected wife, Rabbi Sharon Kleinbaum, have been outspoken in support of New York City political candidates who are pro-union, but who have also faced multiple, credible accusations of sexual harassment, sexual assault, and misconduct. Most recently, Influence Watch reported that Weingarten was widely panned online for her support of Alphonso David, the former president of the Human Rights Campaign. David was fired from his job after a report by the New York State Attorney General, Letitia James, revealed he had helped Andrew Cuomo and his office attempt to discredit one of Cuomo’s accusers in the sexual harassment probe against the then-Governor of New York.10 That report led to Cuomo’s resignation from office. This was just months after Kleinbaum wrote an opinion piece in the New York Daily News that encouraged readers to believe women who make claims that they have been sexually mistreated – except for those made against Scott Stringer (AFT’s preferred and endorsed NYC mayoral candidate). Kleinbaum’s article spends more time explaining what an altruistic politician Scott Stringer is than discussing the accusations against him, or explaining why those accusations lack credibility.11 As leader of an organization whose primary mission is advocacy against injustice and inequality for workers, Randi Weingarten seems unafraid to compromise on moral propriety and to permit hypocrisy and injustice when it suits her political ends.

Weingarten also oversaw the development of Share My Lesson, a database where teachers can share their curriculum material and lesson plans.12 The database features a large collection of lessons that focus on the politically charged topics of race, gender, and equity.13 Some of the most recent featured collections include “Indigenous People Lesson Plans and Resources,” which discusses how to celebrate indigenous people’s day instead of Columbus Day; “Teaching about Race and Racism: Lesson Plans and Resources,” which includes teaching resources such as “What Does It Mean to ‘Defund the Police’?;” “Talking About Race and Privilege Lesson Plan for Middle and High School Students;” and “Anti-Racism Resources for Racial Literacy,” which includes lesson plans drawn directly from Ibram X. Kendi’s book, Stamped.14 While there is nothing wrong with helping teachers share and obtain lesson plans for their classrooms, hijacking such a service to instead promote left-wing politics does nothing but raise tensions between public schools and the families they are meant to serve.

Lily Eskelsen Garcia

The politicization of teaching is not limited to Randi Weingarten and the AFT. Lily Eskelsen Garcia, then the president of the National Education Association, told Education Week in 2020 just before her term ended: “It’s the first time we’ve had three women [in the leadership team]. We’ve never had three women, we’ve never had three people of color. Now, we have two African Americans, and I’m Latina. I think it makes it so that even when we have members or affiliate leaders saying, ‘Our core business is really advocating for our members and negotiating contracts and your sick leave and your health care and protecting pensions,” you have Becky and Princess [Moss] and me saying, ‘Here’s why we care about DACA. Here’s why we care about the fact that we were able to talk about this,” in response to questions about incoming leadership at the NEA.15
Eskelsen Garcia’s observation shows there has been a push under recent leadership to move away from the traditional mission of a teachers union and to pick political fights that go beyond protecting and improving the working conditions and pay of teachers. Her comments also suggest that within the NEA, there is concern or outright opposition to this expansion of political activities from within the union. Union leadership disregards these voices, which come from dues-paying members. This politicization of their mission has led to conflict between NEA members and leadership. Prior to the 2016 presidential elections, Eskelsen Garcia was widely criticized for endorsing former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s candidacy before Senator Bernie Sanders (D-VT) was able to establish himself in the primary race. Eskelsen Garcia cited the necessity of choosing a candidate early, so “education’s voice” has the opportunity to influence the campaign.16 This was a problem for the NEA under the Obama administration, which looked more favorably on policies to improve teacher evaluation, offer merit pay and school choice than the NEA supported.17 Eskelsen Garcia’s prioritization of political influence over the standard operations of her union led the organization to disenfranchise thousands of its own members in the endorsement process, and to endorse a candidate who ultimately lost to the Republican nominee, Donald Trump.
Eskelsen Garcia is also on the record making derogatory statements about students who require extra support in the classroom. Referring to the duties of teachers to adapt to student needs, she described some students as “chronically tarded [sic] and medically annoying.” Although Eskelsen Garcia issued an apology for the statement and explained that she meant to say, “chronically tardy,” and that medically annoying was a failed attempt to humorously describe children who take their emotions out on teachers by behaving poorly, some were still upset with the sentiment expressed.18 As the Washington Post reported, some parents of children with special needs felt that the message of Eskelsen Garcia’s speech, even after she issued corrections, expressed a misplaced frustration with disabled and special needs children who are simply seeking an education and support from their community.19 Many educators go into the profession for the purpose of serving the young and the vulnerable, and would surely resent the implication that teachers resent working with special-needs children.
Lily Eskelsen Garcia expressed “grave concerns” with having armed police officers acting as “school resource officers” in schools, despite acknowledging that she knows many parents who believe their children are protected from in-school violence by these officers.20 While this may not be true for all parents, the influence of teachers unions creates means the messages they push carry more political weight than that of parents, since families have no union to represent them. Thus, when the social activism of the day demands removing resource officers from the classroom, closing down schools for COVID, or teaching controversial and subjective curriculum to young students, the needs of parents and students sink beneath the lobbying influence of an organization like the NEA. This expansion of political spending and influence cultivation also benefits those in the leadership positions of the movement. When her term as president of the NEA ended, Eskelsen-Garcia began a campaign to become Education Secretary under President Biden. Though this unofficial campaign failed, she was believed to be one of the top candidates for Secretary of Education and had extensive support in Congress and in the press.21 Likewise, Randi Weingarten’s family has benefitted from her role as a union leader. Weingarten’s wife, Sharon Kleinbaum, was repeatedly nominated to serve on the Commission of Religious Freedom, first by Senator Chuck Schumer in 2020, and then in 2021 by President Joe Biden.22 Rebecca Pringle, Lily Eskelsen Garcia’s successor as president of the NEA, has put her own stamp on the political activity of the nation’s largest teachers union. During the 2020 election, Pringle oversaw the union’s endorsement of Joe Biden and a massive mobilization campaign to put hundreds of thousands of union members to work canvassing and knocking doors for Biden’s campaign. Pringle’s endorsement of Biden came after teachers unions began to clash with the Trump administration over the reopening of schools during the COVID-19 pandemic. Throughout the pandemic, Pringle worked to prevent the reopening of public schools in the United States. When it came to light that she had played a role in setting the federal guidelines for school reopening so that they were especially restrictive, she downplayed concerns about the influence of teachers unions on policymakers and the negative effects school closures have had on students, especially vulnerable students that the unions claim to prioritize in their work. Pringle shrugged it off with a single-sentence tweet: “It’s no secret we want to keep our students and schools safe.”23

Teachers union leadership has benefitted from the expansion of political spending and influence. It keeps their jobs and their names relevant and leads to personal enrichment and the advancement of their own agendas. Many of the current criticisms levied at teachers unions are embodied in the controversies which surround leaders like Weingarten and Eskelsen Garcia, both of whom are pushing for an evolution of the role their organizations play in classroom politics, despite objections from parents and teachers who face mounting pressure to pick a side.

https://thedrilldown.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/2022_Teachers_Union_Report.pdf

Teacher Unions Used Pandemic to Funnel Millions to Divisive Political Groups: Government Accountability Institute

 

 

theepochtimes.com

 

 “...they now admitted their core function is social and political activism and campaigning,” Eggers said."

 

Katabella Roberts

---

America’s largest teacher unions have funneled millions of dollars to divisive political movements as well as mostly Democratic political candidates, using the pandemic and their political influence to advance policies outside of education—including election reform and COVID-19 policy.

This was among several findings in a new investigation into America’s two largest teacher unions focusing on how the unions “reward insiders, promote political activism, and push a divisive agenda.”

The report reveals that two of the largest and most powerful U.S. teacher unions; the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and the National Education Association (NEA), have been using the COVID-19 pandemic to expand both their influence and planned agenda for radical changes to public schools, including pushing critical race theory and transactivism policies while simultaneously dismantling education standards by abandoning basic skills like math and reading.

In an interview with EpochTV’s “Crossroads” program, Eric Eggers, vice president of the Government Accountability Institute, which investigated this issue, said the unions have been funneling millions of dollars into political campaigns over the years while simultaneously increasing their political influence.

“I think the pandemic has exposed how powerful the unions have become,” Eggers said. “And with that power, you know, there’s the old phrase: ‘Never let a good crisis go to waste.’ I think, unfortunately, unions are now actively exploring ways to leverage pandemic era education and the incredible influx of capital that’s going to schools, going to teachers, going to unions, in fact.

“So there’s a reimagining of what it may look like to have a post-COVID—and to be quite honest, I think a post-2020—social justice racial-awakening education environment,” Eggers said, noting that a number of phrases in resolutions that have been passed by both the AFT and NEA, and internal communications viewed by Eggers show that “one of the things that they say they want to do is move away from ‘a culture of whiteness’ and into stuff that emphasizes more equity.”

“One of the things that they propose doing is having a Black Lives Matter at School week,” Eggers, who previously served as Director of Internal Communications for the Florida Department of Education, said.

The investigation into America’s two largest teacher unions revealed that they have funneled millions into political campaigns over the years, which has, in turn, granted them more political weight to push through their own agendas.

“Thus, when the social activism of the day demands removing resource officers from the classroom, closing down schools for COVID, or teaching controversial and subjective curriculum to young students, the needs of parents and students sink beneath the lobbying influence of an organization like the NEA,” the investigation authors write.

Specifically, it found that Randi Weingarten, the leader of the AFT, has drastically increased the union’s political campaign contributions since 2008, of which over 99 percent of that spending was diverted to Democratic campaigns and political organizations, according to OpenSecrets.

Meanwhile, NEA leader Lily Eskelsen Garcia confirmed to Education Week that the “core business” of the NEA was now social activism and political lobbying, including issues such as policy and racial justice.

“So the simple question is, how did they become so politically powerful? Well, in 2008, four presidential cycles ago, they spent $3.7 million, or they contributed $3.7 million in campaign spending,” Eggers said. “Fast forward 12 years, that number has increased 400 percent. So in the last presidential cycle, they donated $20 million dollars to political campaigns, and more than 99 percent of it went to Democratic candidates.

“I think that helps us understand how they become so politically powerful, and then to the place where they could basically dictate their own terms,” he said.

The Epoch Times has contacted the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association for comment.

Last year, it emerged that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued tighter mask guidance after pressure from the NEA.

“They’re helping write CDC guidelines, in terms of what it looks like to have schools reopen when parents are showing up at school board meetings and pushing back against school and union leadership; as you know, that’s when they start to enlist U.S. department of justice officials to start potentially labeling some of these people as domestic terrorists,” Eggers said.

But the unions haven’t stopped at pandemic-related guidance. They have also used their power to help “enact democratic cultural and social objectives,” Eggers said.

“And using the political operation of their union leadership and the union membership to help see it happen, both in terms of the communications they have internally, they’re advocating for things like expanded mail and balloting in their resolutions. Automatic voter registration, I mean, these are straight out of HR one, liberal voting wish lists,” Eggers said.

“It’s almost like the teacher unions went out of their way, and they’ve, in fact, admitted that their core function now is not to focus on things like pensions for teachers, health care for teachers, smaller class sizes, the things that used to be 20 years ago educational prioritiesl; they now admitted their core function is social and political activism and campaigning,” Eggers said.

Katabella Roberts is a reporter currently based in Turkey. She covers news and business for The Epoch Times, focusing primarily on the United States.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/teacher-unions-used-pandemic-to-funnel-millions-to-divisive-political-groups-government-accountability-institute_4219852.html

Education Timeline

Department of Education Timeline

by Chris Edwards

• 1787: The Northwest Ordinance provides grants of federal land for the establishment of educational institutions.¹
• 1862: The Morrill Act provides grants of land to the states, which may be sold and the proceeds used to fund colleges that focus on agricultural and mechanical studies. However, "many states squandered the revenue from this endowment," according to a National Archives report.²
• 1867: Congress appropriates $15,000 for the creation of a Department of Education largely in response to lobbying by the National Teachers Association, which later became the National Education Association.³ The department, which has four employees, acts as a clearing house of data for educators and policymakers.
• 1868: After a bitter fight over federal encroachment in education, Congress downgrades the new department to an Office of Education within the Department of Interior. Education did not regain its separate departmental status until 1979.

2019 Seattle School Board Position 1 / Primary

Editors note:

My hope is that my platform is not a claim or an ideology but an insight into what is true.

This is my second campaign the first I was a manager and the second a candidate. I could never tire of speaking to constituents. In both campaigns I received emails and phone calls from citizens with deeply meaningful concerns and every one of them held a hope and faith despite hardship. This experience, although brief, is something I will always treasure.

I continue to advocate for youth and please check back for new posts.

Please feel free to contact me and keep the conversation ongoing.

I contacted both opponents and will share your concerns.

Again, thank you.

Sincerely,

Darcie Kline

 

******

Candidate Darcie Kline

I am a parent of three students in Seattle Public Schools and I attended grade school and middle school in Seattle Public Schools.

I have worked as an advocate for students with Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD) for nearly 15 years at the school, district, state and Federal level. I worked with parents and guardians consulting on issues around special education.

The Seattle School District has over a 1 billion dollar budget with over 100 schools. It has been consistently difficult if not impossible to track the Special Education funding let alone the rest of the funds. As taxpayers we need the school district finances to be transparent.

Further, it is concerning how far the district has gotten from teaching the fundamentals of reading, writing and arithmetic and developing critical thinking skills. The current focus of education is placed on socializing the student resulting in subverting the parental role.

If elected I would first ask to review the finances and focus on reducing the administrative cost. I would seek to direct funding to the schools giving them more autonomy and the ability to more specifically represent local families.

I would be honored and accountable if given the opportunity to serve the citizens of Seattle. Please consider voting for me.

The following posts are on subjects I think worthy of consideration. I would hope this information is relevant for your consideration. That being said, nothing posted should be construed as to what I believe. It is my hope to open up the dialogue about education.

Regards, Darcie Kline

Endorsement

     After attending a candidate forum in the north-end I had an opportunity to meet with school-board candidate Liza Rankin. Although there are many issues I feel are not being address by the current candidates including Liza Rankin,  I feel she is less ideological and more academic in her approach. What stood out about Liza is her concern and willingness to address both of the other candidates in the primary who lost and ask about the concerns of the constituents who voted for them. No other candidate in District 1 or any other candidate afforded the same consideration at the forum. I think this is a significant indicator that a candidate is interested in representing the citizens rather than seeking power to push an agenda.

     She also held a informal forum at a home about Special Education. Without the formalities attendants were given an opportunity to engage in discussions in depth. This is something that is rarely afforded in any school meetings.

     Liza is well informed on the legalese of Special Education and on learning in Special Education. A great concern is the SLD (Specific Learning Disability) cohort. Dyslexia affects twenty percent of the U.S. population and eighty percent of the students in Special Education are SLD. There is evidence that poor curriculum, teaching by meaning rather than sound, is inducing dyslexia. Because of its high incidence and the affects of poor reading curriculum this issue needs to be addressed in the general classroom. Therefore, it is necessary for school-board members to have more than a cursory understanding in how students learn.

     I endorse Liza Rankin for school-board because I believe she is concerned about doing the right thing and in representing the best interests of the students and their families.

Regards,
Darcie Kline


elizasrankin.com

Letters

August 1, 2019, 5:04

Hello Ms. Fenton

Thank you for your question; it is a very important question to ask.

I am deeply concerned, as are many, about the developing role of public education in areas of health that I believe are not under the purview of education. I see this intrusion into the private lives of students in areas of health and psychology.

I do support education in basic biology in high school in health class but not earlier. Any younger I feel is inappropriate because puberty spans a number of years and for females later onset of menses is not a concern in pediatrics until the age of 16. This means that realistically there are students in middle school that are still children. This is one reason why it is important for sex education to be the responsibility of parents so timing is appropriate rather than a general and impersonal approach to all children through the schools.

I believe parents absolutely have a right to see the sex education curriculum, and have full right to pull their child out of any curriculum which puts the child in conflict with the parents’ concerns and beliefs. Public education was never intended to replace the parental responsibilities in the founding of this country. In fact, parents were intended to be responsible for education and in the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 the government allocated land specifically for building schools but the rest was left to the communities under the guidance of parental involvement - "Religion, morality and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged."  The states were to encourage education, but the Northwest Ordinance did not require states to provide public education.

In comparison to today, the government has morphed public education into parenting and assumed and enforced control without regard to the parent.

I attached a link to a form “Providing Health Care for Minors under Washington Law” written in 2006 and I was not able to find a current update but in the second column on the right and second cell it defines a “Mature Minor”. This is concerning because it is allowing doctors and the government to usurp the parental rights of a minor. In its worst manifestation occurring currently in Canada under MAID is the legal right if the child is determined to be a “Mature Minor” a child can choose euthanasia without parental consent.

Circling back, to your question I have anecdotal experiences with the school district and the Teen Health Center (separate from the school nurse). The Teen Health Center can provide means of birth control without parental consent; this includes IUD, progesterone rod implant and the morning after pill etc. Two young women I spoke with said they had gotten the implant not because they were sexually active but because there period was irregular. I explained it takes time for the body to regulate and it is important to eat well, exercise and sleep so it can adjust independently from the influence of drugs. My concern as a parent is if there are complications with birth control I would not know to consider symptoms as related to something as significant as the morning after pill. How is it justified that others can be in the “know” but not the parent? This leads into your last question about Initiative I-1004. If a minor has an abortion without parental consent, how would the parent know what to do in the best interest of the child if complications arise? Further, what about the psychological effects of an abortion or physiological effects of the hormone disruption?

It is all very concerning and this doesn’t get into the liberties, or corruption that takes place related to sex education. I had one constituent call me last week who was shocked at what he saw as a highly sexually charged school class at a Seattle Public Library which included high school students and many small children visiting the library. He is an older man and from the gay community. He asked what many ask, why would a school district, principal or teacher choose to suggest and influence sexual behavior in teens and moreover to children?

Regards,

Darcie Kline

Healthcare to Minors Under Washington Law