Saline school board discusses non-discrimination policy ahead of Oct. 12 vote
A new draft of Saline Area Schools' non-discrimination policy includes sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression as characteristics that may not be used to discriminate against students.
Many comments at a Saline school board meeting Tuesday centered on the effectiveness of the anti-harassment policy, student safety and free speech.
Rachel Hackenbruch, a member of the gay/straight alliance Spectrum, said changing the policy wouldn’t only affect LGBTQ students. “Everybody has a sexuality and a gender,” she said. “Even straight people are harassed for their perceived sexual orientation. I see it every day in my high school. Think about a male who signs up for a culinary class, what he faces.”
Mayor Gretchen Driskell voiced her support for the change in policy. “We’re hearing there is a problem and it’s not being addressed by the school system,” she said. “These are my kids. And these are our kids. We’re hearing they’re not feeling safe. I want them to feel safe in our school system.”
Other community members opposed to the changes voiced concerns that what the policy covers could get out of hand.
Gary Perrydore, Saline resident, said sexuality, gender identity and gender expression “aren’t issues of race, they’re issues of features,” noting that if specific groups are singled out, then other groups with specific features, like redheads or people with freckles, would need to be listed as well.
Kathy Dobrowolski’s son attended Saline schools and was routinely bullied. She said she felt that the district shouldn't focus on changing the wording of the policy, but enforcing the existing one. “If all forms of harassment are wrong, then all forms of harassment without distinction should be banned,” she said. “We should be focusing our time and energy on protecting all our children through better implementation of the current school policy.”
Dobrowolski’s husband Paul said their son “never sought special protection” and worried that “the addition to the policy will stifle free speech.”
Board trustee Chuck Lesch, who has voiced his opposition to the proposed changes, said he wanted to get a legal opinion from the school’s lawyer and to learn how often harassment is reported.
“Not every complaint is handled through the traditional measures,” Superintendent Scot Graden said.
“A lot of kids just don’t report it,” board trustee Lisa Slawson said. “They don’t know who is a safe person to contact or a safe place to go.”
"For me this isn’t an LGBTQ issue," she said. "It’s about equality. It’s about fairness. It’s about people who need their civil rights protected.”
Emma Upham, president of Spectrum, said a new policy could “[level] the playing field. This is a group that has been disproportionately harassed. Changing the policy is the first step in creating a climate that’s safe for all students.”
David Friese, school board president, noted that he had lived through civil rights legislation and asked, “Is our nondiscrimination policy where it should be at this time? Is it all inclusive or is it in some ways exclusive? I think that’s the question to consider.”
The policy also includes race, color, sex, religion, age, height, weight, marital status and disability. The board will vote on the proposed changes Oct. 12.
Comments
Gary Perrydore
Sat, Oct 2, 2010 : 12:15 p.m.
Unfortunately, the comment attributed to me in this article was a "throw in" at the end of my comments to the board that does not reflect at all the point I was making. All children should be able to attend school and feel safe and be treated with dignity and respect - ALL STUDENTS - no matter what. Policies that seek to identify specific "groups" are always going to be self-limiting by their nature because once you start singling out certain populations, you eliminate others. I specifically cited a recent survey published in the Annals of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology pointing out that 30% of children with food allergies report bullying and discrimination. 20% said they were bullied or discriminated against by teachers. Some reported being purposely exposed to the foods they are allergic to by fellow students, potentially resutling in serious effects or death. This is a very real issue for them, but these children would be excluded from the proposed policy. No child should be excluded from the protection they need while in school. There are countless examples of students being bullied that are already protected under current policy. The students safety does not rely on policy but strict enforcement of exisitng policy. Board member Lisa Slawson argues that the students don't know who to go to when they are discriminated against, but how will that change with additional words added to the current policy? What is the goal of the student group and others who advocate for a revised policy statement? To have a new policy written that specifically identifies them, or to feel safe and protected at school? The former will not produce the latter.