Abrami: Parental rights were always understood- but not anymore

Society through its traditions and its laws, both state and federal, has always ascribed responsibility for children under the age of 18 to the parents or in some cases guardians. A matter of fact, if parents are seriously negligent in their duties, they are subject to legal repercussions.

It is up to parents to understand and monitor all their children’s activities and behaviors as best they can whether at home, out of the home, and yes even at school. The orthodoxy has always been if a child shows consistent changes in behavior of any kind, it was the parents who would be notified by a school official. This has always been so, since schools have always understood that it's the parents raising the child who are ultimately responsible for the child.

In recent years that dynamic has been changing with many schools being less transparent about student behaviors. The new norm is that school officials and employees at all levels can intervene without a parent’s knowledge or consent, even though by law the parents are the ones ultimately legally responsible for their children.

Previous story: NH 'parental bill of rights’ fails after objections from attorney general, advocates

As a former state representative from Stratham for twelve years, I have seen a steady shift away from this principle of inherent parental rights. In the last several years in office, I received a steady stream of calls and emails from parents expressing their concerns about what is going on in our public schools. Many simply wrote to make me aware that they are pulling their children from the public schools. The statistics suggest this trend is real.

I never thought we would need a parental rights bill to ensure parents' rights are not trampled on by our schools. But with the acceleration of less transparency in recent years, the state Legislature had no choice but to codify these rights into law. Thus SB 272, establishing a parents’ bill of rights in education, was filed. If you have not read the bill, go to www.gencourt.state.nh.us, where you can search for the bill text and current RSAs (laws).

The sponsors and drafters of this bill understood that a vast majority of N.H.'s parents are responsible and loving. Even with this, they added a section that points to RSA 169, the Child Protection Act, which gives schools a legal means of withholding information if there is a compelling state interest. If you go to the bill and click on the PDF version and go to page 2 starting on line 24, you will find this section: "'Compelling state interest' shall include a circumstance in which the school or school personnel have an actual and objectively reasonable belief, supported by clear and convincing evidence that any action or inaction that infringes upon any of the rights identified in RSA 189-B:3 (new statute being added by the bill) is likely to cause a child to be abused or neglected as defined in RSA 160-C:3…"

In short, this bill protects the rights of the many while protecting the vulnerable.

A recent UNH survey showed that Granite Staters overwhelmingly supported the rights of parents as follows:

• Telling parents if their children are using a different name from their given name at school (66% support, 23% oppose).

• Telling parents if their child identifies as a different gender at school (64% support, 27% oppose).

• Allowing parents to inspect all the instructional material used to educate their children (69% support, 20% oppose).

The Observer: Why are people obsessed with fame and celebrity culture?

Unfortunately, the N.H. Senate passed SB 272 was defeated in the N.H. House. What occurred was that six amendments were voted upon during the floor debate, all weakening the bill to a point where it did nothing for parental rights. Supporters of the bill attempted to table the bill so work on the bill could be continued this session. This was defeated by the efforts of those who wanted this bill killed, who in turn made a motion of indefinite postponement, which did pass. That means that this topic cannot be brought up until the 2025-26 session. The rejection of this bill goes against common sense and the will of the voters.

A shift to a progressive view of the role of the parent is not where N.H. has ever been and the polls show a good majority of voters reject this ethos. World history has shown us that this mindset has never ended well in societies that put the state's rights over children ahead of parental rights of their children.

To young parents, it is up to you to fight for your parental rights. Yes, most educators care about your children, but educators must always work in partnership with parents no matter what the situation may be. Withholding information about your children and what your children are being taught, is simply wrong. You must insist the building of a school environment based upon mutual respect requires parents, teachers, and all adults again working together and not just following woke ideology. A school not being transparent about the children in their care or what they are being taught is counterproductive since it promotes dishonesty between teacher and parent.

For the good of the children, all sides need to work together to rethink how full transparency in our schools can be re-established. Young parents, you need to lead that charge.

Patrick Abrami, R-Stratham, is a former six-term state representative representing the town of Stratham.

This article originally appeared on Portsmouth Herald: Abrami: Parental rights were always understood- but not anymore