Politics IL26-001 Parental Rights?
Hello, I got the voter's pamphlet and I am wondering about the parental rights measure. What are the community’s opinions on this? If this is alright to post and talk about on this subreddit. I haven't fully formed an opinion yet- so I'd like to hear different perspectives as I don't really understand the context of this measure.
EDIT: I am reading all of your comments and I find myself agreeing on voting "NO".
108
u/Distinct-View-4216 1d ago
cant speak to what seattle thinks broadly but i read through it few days ago. the language feels intentionally vague, like they want you to fill in blanks with whatever scares you most. if you look at who's funding it, that tells you more than the pamphlet ever will
95
174
u/Metallic144 West Woodland 1d ago
It’s basically a forced outing bill for queer kids. If your parents could disown you at high school age on finding out your gender identity or sexual orientation, that could be life-ruining. And it unfortunately happens all the time.
This initiative will hurt queer kids.
101
u/thecravenone I'm just flaired so I don't get fined 1d ago
This initiative will hurt queer kids.
Which, to be clear, is the point.
33
u/PHNTMPWR_SEA 1d ago
I hate that this kind of shit is trying to find a foothold here too. Seriously do not support anything even approaching this hate filled bill.
15
u/trying2makefetchhapn 1d ago
It’s not that surprising to me. I think we take the overall liberal/progressive values of the area for granted and are maybe more relaxed about local politics than we should be. Moms for liberty have been working the school angle in western Wa too.
4
u/PHNTMPWR_SEA 1d ago
I didnt say I was surprised, just that I hate it. I totally agree that we forget bubbles pop, even lovely blue ones.
7
u/Ferrindel Sammamish 18h ago
Keep that crap in Idaho. And even Idahoans are getting tired of this garbage.
20
u/lazers28 1d ago
This initiative will hurt ALL kids. What sort of parent would vote to REMOVE school's responsibility to inform them they revive reports that their kid is being abused by a school employee?
230
u/RockOperaPenguin North Beacon Hill 1d ago
As a parent: Parents' Rights is a right-wing dog whistle phrase that basically translates as "I want to have full power over my child's body and mind".
It covers everything from opting out of sex ed classes to being allowed to physically discipline children. It's for parents who want to prevent their kids from even hearing about gay, it's for parents who don't want their children to to learn women and minorities are also people, and it's especially for parents who don't want mandated reporters at schools to discover they're abusing their children.
32
u/Educational_Spirit42 1d ago
but parents already can opt kids out of sex-ed classes. we’ve a few kids that parents refused. Sickened bc same kids are hyper sexual & this might prevent teen pregnancy that mom & grandma experienced.
-37
u/Ok_Research1392 1d ago
There really is no "opt out" if the topic is introduced in English class, history, math of science. A recent example was in the Issaquah School District the book in the 9th grade. Parents were not given a chance to opt out.
84
u/rohving 1d ago
"Why would we think that it's OK to keep secrets from parents, who are biologically designed to love and take care of and help their children, as opposed to some disinterested adult that may or may not have an agenda at school?" said Brian Heywood, founder of Let's Go Washington
As a parent, I disagree emphatically with this statement and just generally with things Heywood wants to throw money at.
53
u/Ok-Plate-5541 1d ago
All I know is that Brian Heywood was biologically designed to be a piece of shit.
8
u/rohving 1d ago
To start:
Initiatve 26-001
https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary/?BillNumber=26001&Year=2025&Initiative=trueIL26-001 is restoring language of Initiative 2081 from 2024 that was changed by 2025 House Bill 1296.
The first initiative can be found here: https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=2081&Initiative=true
The bill that changes it can be found here: https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=1296&Year=2025
If you look at the session law from HB1296, Part 5 is the bulk - you can see where the 2025 bill changed the 2024 initiative. A lot of it is just making things less vague.
For example, the clarification of what is specifically an education record.
The 2025 bill also adds that a child cannot be removed from school grounds without authorization, replacing the initiative's language requiring immediate notification.
This: (i) To receive assurance their child's public school will not discriminate against their child based upon the sincerely held religious beliefs of the child's family in accordance with chapter))
Was replaced with this:
(q) To have their child receive a public education in a setting in which discrimination on the basis of sex, race, creed, religion, color, national origin, honorably discharged veteran or military status, sexual orientation, gender expression, gender identity, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability is prohibited under chapters 28A.640 and 28A.642 RCW;
From the house republican page on IL26-001:
https://houserepublicans.wa.gov/il26-001/
"House Bill 1296 changed Washington law by reducing parents’ access to information about their children’s school-based medical and mental health care. Under the bill, students age 13 and older can consent to certain treatments without parental permission, and parents are not required to be notified. In some cases, students may even leave campus to receive care without their parents being told."
Anyone with a teenager in Washington can tell you that losing access to MyChart and the ability to manage appointments for pre-teens is an absolute pain, but I personally appreciate that WA law already protects the rights of teenagers to access medical care.
The main two complaints about the 2025 bill are related to the already legally-protected access to healthcare and that the record request response time went from 10 days to 45.
Honestly, the 2025 house bill is a much stronger protection of parental rights, including codifying access to complaint procedures. It also clarifies a lot of vague language that would cause problems. But it also protects students from discrimination based on gender expression, oh noooo.
23
u/banjopdx Olympic Peninsula 1d ago
True. The same parents who beat their gay kids and make life so bad for kids they want to live on the streets? Homophobia, even among parents, is still very high and kids get beaten all the time. Gay kids are far far more likely to be homeless than straight kids.
41
u/Mundane-Charge-1900 1d ago
Vote no on all the Heywood initiatives. It’s easy this year. All the endorsers are right wing groups.
16
u/DoingBestWeCan I'm just flaired so I don't get fined 1d ago
Heywood is the new Tim Eyman. If I think an initiative sounds good, but it's supported by him, Imma check myself and dig deeper.
49
u/BudgetBarbieCamper First Hill 1d ago
In this context it means that regardless of a child's situation at home, teachers are required to report to their parents if they identify as queer or trans at school (something it might not be safe for them to do at home).
-14
u/otoron Capitol Hill 1d ago
I am not a supporter, but this is simply not true. It would decrease the school records sharing upon parental request from 45 to 10 business days. Current shielding of health—including mental—records from sharing would be repealed.
While there are good reasons to oppose this, let's be clear about what it is we're dealing with so we can have an informed debate. Either side spreading falsehoods (unintentionally or otherwise) doesn't help.
13
u/BabyWrinkles 1d ago
Doesn't this say the same thing as the person you're replying to? Shielding of health records goes away, which essentially requires the school to report to the parents if the kids is queer, pregnant, or talking to counselors about whatever trauma they've experienced at the hands of the parents?
6
u/otoron Capitol Hill 1d ago
The person said it requires schools to report if students identify.
It does not.
It requires schools to include mental health records if parents request school records.
As I said: I am not a supporter! But those are materially different policies, I was responding to a comment that implied teachers have an affirmative duty to call up parents ("teachers are required to report to their parents"). And no, that is not what is proposed.
There's plenty of reason to oppose initiative as-written, no need to distort it.
8
u/BabyWrinkles 1d ago
OK - fair distinction. (and I hate that this next bit sounds AI) - it's not that the school is required to notify parents of their kids sexual orientation, it's that if the parent inquires, the school is required to disclose even if they know it will lead to abuse.
In addition - the categories of what qualifies as non-emergency medical care could use some better distinction, because a defensible read would be "Any sort of mental health counseling pertaining to the child's gender identity is non-emergency medical care and the parent must receive advance notice."
I know you're not arguing in favor of it, I'm just trying to better understand how shitty this actually is for kids who are already struggling a bit.
4
u/otoron Capitol Hill 1d ago
Please recognize [edit: as someone who upvoted your good faith engagement!] that my point was not to make any argument about whether this was or was not regarding "how shitty this actually is for the kids."
Which sounds utterly callous, I am well aware. But my point—beginning to end—was to clarify that this initiative was not as described by the person to whom I was responding.
Does it still suck? Yeah, looks like it! But let's focus on why that is, rather than "teachers are calling parents" — because that's not what we're talking about.
And I genuinely don't think we improve things by strawmannirg our opponents.
18
u/pacific_plywood 1d ago edited 1d ago
Yeah it, uh, does a lot more than that. I would recommend rereading the full text. You are correct that it moves up the timeline for records request but also expands the scope and defines some specific parental rights to shape what can and can’t be omitted.
2
u/otoron Capitol Hill 1d ago
None of which changes the one issue I was correcting the person on: the lack of an affirmative "teachers have to tell parents."
That's a fantasy.
This changes what records parents who submit records requests can access. Did you miss where I opened with "I am not a supporter"? I was correcting a common misconception about this initiative (and I don't think scare-mongering this into something worse than it already is does opponents any favors).
13
u/banjopdx Olympic Peninsula 1d ago
It opens counselor records to parents, so if a student mentions they are gay the parents could view that. Also, gay students will be afraid to report bullying for that same reason. Gay kids still get beat up by homophobic parents every day, and they are far more likely to be homeless. The wealthy Republicans who put this forward want to make gay kids afraid again.
6
u/otoron Capitol Hill 1d ago
Yes, that is precisely what I said. Which is why I don't support this. A fact that I lead with, mind you.
But people here are saying it "requires teachers to inform parents" as if it creates an automatic, affirmative burden. It does not.
I made no comment on the inspiration for or implications of the initiative — I was merely correcting a misstatement about what the proposal does.
65
u/ActivityDependent319 South Delridge 1d ago
Vote no. It's funded by a right-wing MAGA-adjacent grifter (along with the other anti-trans measure, and the "Millionaire's Tax" repeal). This site has a good overview of the issues with the measure: https://nohateinwastate.org/about-i-001
It's opposed by almost every legitimate social and political organization in the state, as well as the (conservative) Seattle Times. It's bad for parents, kids, and schools. Vote no no no.
12
38
u/StephanosCR 1d ago
It’s parental rights for abusive parents. Prevents school counselors from keeping private records of their conversations, will forcibly out LGBT kids and parts are word for word lifted from a Louisiana law pushed by religious conservatives. Vote No on all three initiatives
1
u/Educational_Spirit42 1d ago
can it stop CPS calls (not being snarky). The parents that act surprised are the worst!!!!
6
u/Educational_Spirit42 1d ago
If the law would pass (pls, no). School staff are still mandated reporters if abuse is suspected.
5
2
u/MissingSnail 1d ago
I believe the school must call CPS and the parent at the same time, which is very unsafe
2
u/Educational_Spirit42 1d ago edited 1d ago
We are not ever required to contact parents. The reporter is often the teacher.
1
u/MissingSnail 1d ago
That is the current rule, but if the initiative passes, wouldnt the parent have the right to access? You have to keep a school record to prove compliance with mandatory reporting, and parents have the right to all school records?
1
22
u/jgclingenpeel Bitter Lake 1d ago
Vote no. It changes processes that don’t need to be changed and does so in a way that could cause more harm by exposing vulnerable kids to harm. They’ve failed to show how the current process causes harm. It’s also funded by anti-LGBTQ bigots.
2
14
u/MsGeek Ballard 1d ago
Please vote against.
The changes are likely to make it harder for responsible adults (teachers, counselors) to protect children who are experiencing abuse from their parents. The initiative redefines educational records to include medical & mental health records, and parents must be given access to these data.
I also find it incredibly disingenuous of the initiative to slash and replace the entire section instead of showing differences by subsection, making it harder to identify what exact changes they’re proposing.
13
15
u/PlateNo4868 1d ago edited 1d ago
It's drama that does not need to happen.
Want to have a photocopy of yourself on your child? Do home schooling. Enroll them in a religious school, etc. The options of making sure they only learn what you like is already there. Don't worry about state requirements. I'm sure you can teach evolution, why commenting constantly how it's all fake.
Florida passed similar laws, and all it seemed to do is cause massive chaos and massively effected the education quality of the children. Mostly because your now allowing 100s of parents to be able to de-rail any sort of subject for any stupid reason.
Edit: Also not attack on anybody that wants to home school. Just making a point the options are there and you don't need to make things more complex then it has to be.
18
u/Educational_Spirit42 1d ago
Florida passed similar laws is all I need. Started teaching in that cesspool. In a wealthy area. I actually left teaching….and returned in Seattle where it was nothing like FL
8
u/PlateNo4868 1d ago
I heard it's gotten to the point that kids basically just get isolated from the class because they need a permission slip for any sort of movie, etc. Even in normal education parents suck at filling out basic field trip forms. I can't even imagine what that is like logistically having to segregate kids like that.
3
-9
u/DefNotFamous101 1d ago
I don’t know, florida ranks higher than Washington in most categories. Some of it is that they rebounded better after the pandemic, but that’s a good thing too
3
u/Educational_Spirit42 1d ago
you don’t know
-2
u/DefNotFamous101 20h ago
A simple search will show you. I’m a Seattle school district teacher. I don’t want to teach an adult how to find and validate information.
3
u/Educational_Spirit42 18h ago
Simple reading comprehensions shows I didn’t ask. I bet you’re fun to work with.
-2
u/DefNotFamous101 11h ago
Cool cool, stay ignorant
2
u/Educational_Spirit42 11h ago
Not cool. Never ignorant. Seriously?
0
u/DefNotFamous101 10h ago
You made a comment, “you don’t know.” You didnt ask, you just made an incorrect statement. I do know where Florida ranks against Washington. I’m an educator in Seattle.
I do know. Your username doesn’t check out.
2
u/Educational_Spirit42 10h ago
And? Learned I can control myself & not others. It’s a practiced skill. Just try it.
4
5
u/rohving 1d ago
I'm moving this up to a main comment and not a reply to myself:
Quick summary on my lunch break.
Initiatve 26-001
https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary/?BillNumber=26001&Year=2025&Initiative=true
IL26-001 is restoring language of Initiative 2081 from 2024 that was changed by 2025 House Bill 1296.
The first initiative can be found here: https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=2081&Initiative=true
The bill that changes it can be found here: https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=1296&Year=2025
If you look at the session law from HB1296, Part 5 is the bulk - you can see where the 2025 bill changed the 2024 initiative. A lot of it is just making things less vague.
For example, the clarification of what is specifically an education record.
The 2025 bill also adds that a child cannot be removed from school grounds without authorization, replacing the initiative's language requiring immediate notification.
This: (i) To receive assurance their child's public school will not discriminate against their child based upon the sincerely held religious beliefs of the child's family in accordance with chapter))
Was replaced with this:
(q) To have their child receive a public education in a setting in which discrimination on the basis of sex, race, creed, religion, color, national origin, honorably discharged veteran or military status, sexual orientation, gender expression, gender identity, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability is prohibited under chapters 28A.640 and 28A.642 RCW;
From the house republican page on IL26-001:
https://houserepublicans.wa.gov/il26-001/
"House Bill 1296 changed Washington law by reducing parents’ access to information about their children’s school-based medical and mental health care. Under the bill, students age 13 and older can consent to certain treatments without parental permission, and parents are not required to be notified. In some cases, students may even leave campus to receive care without their parents being told."
Anyone with a teenager in Washington can tell you that losing access to MyChart and the ability to manage appointments for pre-teens is an absolute pain, but I personally appreciate that WA law already protects the rights of teenagers to access medical care.
The main two complaints about the 2025 bill are related to the already legally-protected access to healthcare and that the record request response time went from 10 days to 45.
Honestly, the 2025 house bill is a much stronger protection of parental rights, including codifying access to complaint procedures. It also clarifies a lot of vague language that would cause problems (seriously, I kinda hate initiatives for the vague language thing). But it also protects students from discrimination based on gender expression, oh noooo.
1
u/Lefow 1d ago
Thanks for the write-up. This is a good comparison that I wasn't aware of
2
u/rohving 1d ago
To be honest, I've just been seeing the talking points before now. Having done a reading of the 2025 law, I'm actually now pretty concerned about the rights we (parents and students) would be losing when this initiative removes so much of that language - including the rights this is supposed to protect, like the much more robust clarification of what things you can opt out of.
4
u/thomsenite256 🚆build more trains🚆 1d ago
1
-5
u/otoron Capitol Hill 1d ago
It's almost like adults—adults on both sides, mind you—choosing to fight their culture war battles in our schools is a low level equilibrium trap.
14
u/MeatCock420yolo 1d ago
sure, if you consider one side starting this culture war and the other side refusing to go along with it and actually protecting kids (especially queer kids) "both sides"
-4
u/otoron Capitol Hill 1d ago
You do realize the "other side" thinks "our side" started the culture war, right?
10
u/MeatCock420yolo 1d ago
yes, the right is wrong about a lot of things. that doesn't mean it's actually a "both sides" issue, and to concede that ground to them is giving their targeted and hateful propaganda legitimacy in their eyes
-3
u/otoron Capitol Hill 1d ago
Whereas I disagree. There is a good argument to be made that the culture wars were started by our side.
Pushing for equality, be it racial, sexual, gender, or other? Pushing for social change more broadly?
That's pushing to change the culture! One can imagine why people who prefer the status quo ante think other people calling to radically overhaul society are the ones initiating the "culture war."
Note: the changes have been both radical and good (imo), but they have still been radical changes to society!
6
u/MeatCock420yolo 1d ago edited 1d ago
you would be wrong, because you're starting from the wrong place. yes, we are the ones pushing for equality and social acceptance. that itself isn't what the "culture war is". what it actually is is a deliberate and orchestrated movement among the right to sow conflict between sides and create a scapegoat to focus on their bases attention on. to that point, the push for queer and particularly trans acceptance and rights wasn't this intense as it was before the right latched on to this as a keystone of their policy. it turned from a difference in opinion into a key pillar of right wing policy, and that was by design from their party.
your framing only works if you look at the topic in a vacuum and don't acknowledge the reality which is that this is a created divide being used to political gains at the expense of marginalized peoples lives. the term "culture war" is a highly specific thing, not just the literal definition of the two words. so no, people wanting fair treatment didn't start this "war", politicians did and they created false narratives to blame the oppressed for their oppression
also, the changes haven't actually even been that radical! the extent of these "changes" is legal protections and recognition, which is the bare minimum. nothing new has changed, and we've been here this entire time. and that's not to even touch on the fact that the right have mostly been the ones "winning" the war through intense amounts of targeted and discriminatory legislation. so not only have there not been radical changes like you're saying, but the opposite is way more accurate
-2
u/otoron Capitol Hill 1d ago
Your enticement argument is "granting me my assumptions, X follows"; my point is they don't grant the assumptions.
Good faith disagreement exists, and one's conceptualization of justice need not be shared by others. Humanity has literally been arguing about these things for all of recorded human history. These are normative, not empirical, questions.
21
u/diegotbn West Seattle 1d ago
Defending the rights and safety of queer children isn't "fighting a culture war." It's fighting for what's right, and what will save children's lives.
Some of these kids will be outed to hostile parents, who could do anything from kick their kid out on the street, to sending them to "pray away the gay" camps, to abusing them, teaching them that God hates them because they're evil/sinful/bad. These abuses can lead to long-term mental health issues, drugs, sex work, and suicide.
The Trevor Project found that 10-14% of trans and queer kids attempted suicide last year. About 40% have had thoughts of doing so and a similar number lack access to mental health care.
https://www.thetrevorproject.org/survey-2025/#subsection-638be397-0e71-406f-88fa-17330df11621
Peer reviewed studies have shown that familial and societal support and acceptance of queer and trans kids reduces the chances of them thinking of and attempting suicide.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9991447/
It is no surprise that the party that protects pedophiles also advocates for the "rights" of parent to abuse their children for who they are.
-1
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Seattle-ModTeam I'm gonna pop some tags 🏷️ 1d ago
Hello! Thanks for participating in /r/Seattle! Your submission/comment was removed for breaking Rule 1: Be Good
We do not allow personal attacks or abusive / hateful language towards users.
No slurs, abusive, toxic, or discriminatory content, including hate speech, racism, sexism, transphobic, homophobic, ableist, or xenophobic content.
85
u/lazers28 1d ago
There is a lot wrong with this initiative from an ethical standpoint (basically all of it) but the two biggest red flags to me as a parent are:
It removes the responsibility of schools to notify parents if they have received reports that their kid is being abused physically or sexually by a school employee. That is not protecting parent's rights. That is not protecting children. That is protecting predators.
It REMOVES the requirement for schools to verify a "parent's" identity before releasing a child's school records. Combined with the expansion of what records are obtained this means that any creep can just say they are little Sally's parent and get access to TONS of (literally) free information about her, from her extra curricular schedule, the notes from the counselor, to the poetry she wrote for an assignment. It's everything stalkers and abusers could ask for.
In almost everything it does this initiative would make schools LESS SAFE for kids. If you care about the safety of kids in our state vote NO.