Students and teachers urge board not to force disclosure of transgender students' identities

At the Chico Unified School District board meeting, a string of students, teachers and parents urged trustees not to approve changes that would allow school staff to disclose a student’s transgender or gender non-conforming status to parents without the student’s consent.

The testimony opened with Pleasant Valley High School student Valeria Torres, who said, “It hurts that I have to be back here again,” and warned that removing the policy would leave trans students at risk of suicide, abuse or being disowned. Torres told the board the policy currently means staff cannot tell parents a student’s gender identity without the student’s permission, and argued that many students use school as their only safe space.

Several speakers followed with similar accounts. Wasinger, who identified themself by surname, cited national studies and said legislative targeting coincides with rising suicidal behavior among transgender youth. “This proposal would do the opposite” of the mandate to protect students, Wasinger said, arguing that forced disclosure would break trust and push students away from support networks.

Pleasant Valley teacher and Pride Club adviser Casey Hansen described students who ask not to be in yearbook photos and who request that staff use different names at school. Teacher and parent Josie Kaine recounted supporting a trans child and said as a mandated reporter she fears being asked to break confidentiality and “endangering their safety physically and emotionally.”

Other speakers emphasized the practical risks schools already manage. A parent in healthcare, Michaela, urged the board to consider how school is often the only supportive environment for vulnerable students and said data show supported youth have lower suicide rates. Student speakers—including Caitlyn Sheran—repeated warnings that forced outings could precipitate conversion therapy, abuse or homelessness for some students.

Board members did not take immediate action on the specific policy at the meeting; much of the testimony came during the public-comment portion on items not on the agenda. Trustees listened, asked clarifying questions when speakers referenced studies or district practices, and allowed applause at the conclusion of many remarks.

The board’s next procedural steps on the parent-secrecy policy were not announced at the meeting. The speaker testimony requested that the board preserve student privacy protections, convene stakeholder discussions to explore alternatives, and consider the public-health and child-safety implications before making any policy changes.