Julien Brisson argues that New Brunswick’s policy mandating parental consent for students under 16 to use their preferred names and pronouns creates unjust inequalities between students based on parental support.

__________________________________________

New Brunswick’s Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development, Bill Hogan, has recently introduced revisions to Policy 713 – Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity, which will come into effect on July 1, 2023. Section 6.3.2 of the policy outlines the following key points:

Transgender or non-binary students under the age of 16 will require parental consent in order for their preferred first name [and pronouns] to be officially used for recordkeeping purposes and daily management (EECD, school district, and school software applications, report cards, class lists, etc.). If it is not possible to obtain consent to talk to the parent, the student will be directed to the appropriate professional (i.e. school social worker, school psychologist) to work with them in the development of a plan to speak with their parents if and when they are ready to do so. If it is not in the best interest of the child or could cause harm to the student (physical or mental threat), the student will be directed to the appropriate school professional for support.

Hogan has offered his support for these changes, citing his intention to uphold professionalism among teachers and accommodate parental preferences. One specific concern involves the prioritization of parental preferences over the preferences of young individuals, raising ethical questions that call for further contemplation. Within this context, it is crucial to address an ethical concern that emphasizes the potential lack of justice for young people resulting from this policy, as it perpetuates inequalities among them. This discussion will focus on two aspects of the policy that contribute to these injustices: 1) the arbitrary age threshold of 16, and 2) the requirement of parental preferences as a prerequisite for having one’s gender respected at school.

Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons. Image Description: New Brunswick Legislative Assembly.

Firstly, the decision to set the age threshold at 16 for having one’s gender (e.g., pronouns) respected at school without parental consent lacks a clear and objective reason, giving rise to concerns about its arbitrary nature. Why is it that only individuals who are 16 years old and above can have their gender respected in this manner? What ethical justification exists for limiting the autonomy of younger students in having their gender respected at school?

In this context, it becomes evident that it is unjust for a 15-year-old trans or non-binary student, for example, to be denied the respect of their pronouns solely based on their chronological age. There is no objective rationale to consider them as less competent or incapable of exercising their autonomy in such a fundamental aspect of their identity. What concretely changes at the age of 16 that suddenly renders a student capable of having their gender respected at school without requiring parental consent? Age should not be the determinant of whether an individual’s autonomy is respected at school, especially when it comes to deeply personal matters like gender identity.

Secondly, another ethical concern arises from the potential lack of justice resulting from this policy, perpetuating inequalities among young people. By making parental consent mandatory for young individuals to use their preferred names and pronouns at school, two distinct outcomes are foreseeable. Those with supportive parents are likely to obtain consent easily, enabling them to express their preferred identities, while those with less supportive parents may be denied this opportunity solely due to the requirement of parental consent. It is fundamentally unfair that some young people can have their preferred names and pronouns respected, while others face an arbitrary barrier based on their parents’ preferences.

One’s gender represents the embodiment of the principle of autonomy. Only the individual can determine their own gender, including students. It is, therefore, unfair that some students’ autonomy can be respected in schools solely because they have parental support, while others are denied the recognition they deserve and may be forced to be misgendered.

Considering the implementation of this policy, it is reasonable to expect that trans and non-binary students will compare their situation with their peers. For example, a trans student without supportive parents may observe that other trans students, with supportive parents, have their pronouns respected at school. This policy has the potential to create comparisons between parents and may lead some students to harbor resentment towards their unsupportive parents.

The new policy has sparked considerable reactions and critiques throughout the maritime province. As these conversations continue, it is crucial to address the element of injustice highlighted above. Every student, regardless of parental consent, deserves to have their gender respected within the school environment.

__________________________________________

Julien Brisson is a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Toronto’s Dalla Lana School of Public Health. @brisson_julien