Granite School District is telling parents that the ONLY way they’re going to get a respirator or mask exemption for their kids is to come into the schools to fill out a form that asks for much, much more information than is required by Salt Lake County.
In fact, you couldn’t be blamed if you thought that the amount of info the district is extorting about a student’s medical “worthiness” for an exemption borders on, if not actually lives in, Medical Privacy Violation-ville.
How intrusive is the exemption “request?” Let us count the ways….
They require the “release of related medical documentation,” ask that your medical provider “discuss the condition” with Granite school officials, force you to make a legal “attestation” of said condition, and after all that, insist that “the school” shall develop a plan for appropriate accommodations — meaning what, exactly??
It’s almost surprising that they didn’t ask for your kid’s underwear size at this point.
This letter has all the appearance of an intimidation tactic to gather private medical data on your child in gross excess of what the County said was needed to obtain an exemption.
Utah Smoke Signal makes the excellent point that this type of form is collecting “compliance data.” Don’t think for a minute that this form is just going to sit in a dark cabinet somewhere, gathering dust. Data is like a chocolate fountain. It’s not there to just get looked at — it gets used.
Compare and contrast with this exemption form from Jordan School District:
Non-exploitative, simple, not onerous on parents, not creepy…well done, Jordan School District. Notice the wonderful heading of the table: PARENTCERTIFICATION. Enough said.
Sorry to have to return to the lipstick-less pig that is the Granite district form, sometimes we just have to do hard things. Is there a way to possibly redeem this poor excuse of an excuse?
Hey Granite — FTFY:
Parents, DO NOT SIGN the Granite form in its original, unedited state. Or anything like unto it for that matter. Use your own form or even this redacted one above. You do not have to sign away your rights to obtain a respirator or mask exemption. Need further proof? Read the press release issued by Salt Lake County Council Chairwoman Laurie Stringham.
The county-wide “mask” mandate issued by the Salt Lake County Health Department Friday, January 7, is much worse than you realize.
Come Monday, thousands of parents will be sending their kids to schools in masks, thinking that that will be enough to comply with the order.
Late Sunday night, the Salt Lake County Council Chair issued a press release that confirms that there are legitimate medical reasons for needing a respirator or mask exemption, and that obtaining an exemption can be done by directly informing your child’s school of the medical need for one.
The Public Health Order of Constraint is mandating RESPIRATORS, not just masks. Multiple school districts have already announced they’ll be meeting your kids at the doors to give them “masks” to comply with the Order. What they’ll be getting is a KN95 respirator like this one:
Look at the warning on it…its misuse may result in sickness or death.
This type of mask is highly restrictive on a person’s breathing. So much so that prolonged use is NOT recommended.
Schools are expecting your child to stay in a mask like this for the entire duration of the day. Some schools, like Indian Hills Elementary, have been telling students that they have to wear their masks at recess. No exceptions, no mercy.
This is patently abusive. It’s an unprecedented violation of a person’s right to bodily autonomy and safety.
The big thing parents need to be aware of is that State code governing county Health Department powers allows them to ONLY:
Do masks or face coverings cause your child to experience any of these adverse physiological and psychological effects?
👉 hypoxia 👉 hypercapnia 👉 shortness of breath 👉 increased acidity and toxicity 👉 activation of fear and stress response 👉 rise in stress hormones 👉 immunosuppression 👉 fatigue 👉 headaches 👉 decline in cognitive performance 👉 predisposition for viral and infectious illnesses 👉 chronic stress 👉 anxiety and depression
If so, you have a reason to request AND obtain a medical exemption for your child on your OWN RECOGNIZANCE as a parent. No doctor note needed. The medical order itself states:
[T]he following individuals are exempt from the respirator, mask, or face covering requirements:
2. An individual with a medical condition, mental health condition, or intellectual or developmental disability, that prevents the individual from wearing a respirator, mask, or face covering; or
3. An individual who has an Individualized Education Program (IEP) under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1414, or an accommodation under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. §794, that would necessitate exempting the individual from wearing a respirator mask or face covering.
Your letter can be short and sweet:
"This letter is to inform [SCHOOL NAME] that my child, [CHILD NAME] qualifies for a respirator or mask exemption due to a medical or mental health condition, or intellectual or developmental disability.
My child will not be wearing a respirator or mask and school administration and staff are prohibited under law to isolate, disaccommodate, or deny my child the right to equal access to education under the law.
STATE CODE REGULATING THE PHYSICAL TREATMENT OF A CHILD:
(1) A school employee may not inflict or cause the infliction of corporal punishment upon a student.
53G-9-601 Public Education System — Local Administration — Health and Welfare — Bullying and Hazing Definitions. As used in this part: (1) (a) “Abusive conduct” means verbal, nonverbal, or physical conduct of a parent or student directed toward a school employee that, based on its severity, nature, and frequency of occurrence, a reasonable person would determine is intended to cause intimidation, humiliation, or unwarranted distress. (b) A single act does not constitute abusive conduct. (2) “Bullying” means a school employee or student intentionally committing a written, verbal, or physical act against a school employee or student that a reasonable person under the circumstances should know or reasonably foresee will have the effect of: (a) causing physical or emotional harm to the school employee or student; (b) causing damage to the school employee’s or student’s property; (c) placing the school employee or student in reasonable fear of: (i) harm to the school employee’s or student’s physical or emotional well-being; or (ii) damage to the school employee’s or student’s property; (d) creating a hostile, threatening, humiliating, or abusive educational environment due to: (i) the pervasiveness, persistence, or severity of the actions; or (ii) a power differential between the bully and the target; or (e) substantially interfering with a student having a safe school environment that is necessary to facilitate educational performance, opportunities, or benefits.
(5) (a) “Hazing” means a school employee or student intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly committing an act or causing another individual to commit an act toward a school employee or student that: (i) (A) endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a school employee or student; (B) involves any brutality of a physical nature, including whipping, beating, branding, calisthenics, bruising, electric shocking, placing of a harmful substance on the body, or exposure to the elements; (C) involves consumption of any food, alcoholic product, drug, or other substance or other physical activity that endangers the mental or physical health and safety of a school employee or student; or (D) involves any activity that would subject a school employee or student to extreme mental stress, such as sleep deprivation, extended isolation from social contact, or conduct that subjects a school employee or student to extreme embarrassment, shame, or humiliation;
HB1007 – FACE COVERING REQUIREMENTS (5) An LEA, an LEA governing board, the state board, the state superintendent, or a school may not require an individual to wear a face covering to attend or participate in in-person instruction, LEA-sponsored athletics, or another LEA-sponsored extracurricular activity, or in any other place on the campus of a school or school facility after the end of the 2020-2021 school year.
Big win for parents! Granite School District’s Canvas settings no longer allow the selection of pronouns in a student’s personal profile.
The problem was first reported by AIM earlier this week. After calls to the district by parents and social media exposure of the issue, it looks as if a student’s pronoun information is no longer selectable through the CANVAS web-based instructional tool.
In communicating with the district and Granite School Board members, more than one parent was told that because CANVAS was a “state-contracted” software system that Granite had no say in the options offered. This information is not accurate — other districts, including Davis, Jordan, and Alpine do not offer students a way to select their pronouns through CANVAS.
Bottom line is that schools and educators can’t solicit this type of information from a child without a parent’s informed consent and knowledge.
Any data collected during the course of the year from Granite School District through CANVAS regarding a student’s pronouns should now be destroyed. The data was collected illegally and cannot remain in the system in any way, shape, or form.
The screenshot you’ll see below demonstrates why — when a teacher would send out an email to more than one student, a student’s pronouns would appear right next to his or her name.
Under Federal FERPA (the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act) law, a parent has the “right to seek amendment or correction of their child’s educational records that a parent believes to be…in violation of the child’s rights of privacy.”
Under Federal PPRA (the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment) law, parents rights regarding personal information of their students is also established.
PPRA governs the administration to students of a survey, analysis, or evaluation that concerns one or more of the following eight protected areas:
political affiliations or beliefs of the student or the student’s parent;
mental or psychological problems of the student or the student’s family;
sex behavior or attitudes;
illegal, anti-social, self-incriminating, or demeaning behavior;
critical appraisals of other individuals with whom respondents have close family relationships;
legally recognized privileged or analogous relationships, such as those of lawyers, physicians, and ministers;
religious practices, affiliations, or beliefs of the student or student’s parent;
income (other than that required by law to determine eligibility for participation in a program or for receiving financial assistance under such program).
PPRA also concerns marketing surveys and other areas of student privacy, parental access to information, and the administration of certain physical examinations to minors.
The rights under PPRA transfer from the parents to a student who is 18 years old or an emancipated minor under state law.
Granite School District did the wrong thing by allowing solitication of unauthorized student information through CANVAS in the first place. It’s good that the pronoun information is no longer directly selectable, but remember, this only happened because parents noticed and spoke out.
Why is Granite School District breaking the law? And how in the world are they getting away with it? The answer may surprise you….
These screenshots were taken in December of 2021.
What you are looking at is 3 different student profile pages on the CANVAS web-based learning management system used by almost every Utah school district. Kids access CANVAS on a daily basis multiple times in order to check their grades, complete school work, communicate with teachers and other students, etc.
In a nutshell, CANVAS gets used — a lot. Teachers and administrators and even outside third-parties have access to the data that is on CANVAS…keep this in mind.
What you are seeing on the screenshots is Granite School District surveying students for their PRONOUNS related to their personally held gender/sexual identity beliefs. And if you have a minor student enrolled in a concurrent enrollment course through Salt Lake Community College, that child gets an even wider choice of LGBTetc-inspired pronouns to choose from.
This is against the law.
Utah State Board of Education Rule R277-217(2)(23j and 24) states that an educator may not: “Encourage a student to develop a prejudice on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identification [or]… knowingly or intentionally permit unauthorized collection sharing or use of student data.”R277-217(3)(b) states that:”[A]n educator shall maintain appropriate verbal emotional and social boundaries. “In Utah state code 53e-9-203(1)(c), it lists ‘”Activities prohibited without prior written consent–:
Policies adopted by a school district or charter school… shall include prohibitions on the administration to a student of any psychological or psychiatric examination, test, or treatment, or any survey, analysis, or evaluation without the prior written consent of the student’s parent, in which the purpose or evident intended effect is to cause the student to reveal information, whether the information is personally identifiable or not, concerning the student’s or any family member’s … sexual behavior, orientation, or attitudes.”
Do you remember at the beginning of this 2021-22 school year how your kids were asked by their teachers about their preferred personal pronouns? And how upset parents were by this unauthorized, illegal survey of their children’s sexual politics? Parents complained in droves, to the point where, as reported by KCPW, even Utah State Board of Education State Superintendent Sydnee Dickson “alerted district administrators that asking gender identity questions does not comply with federal and state statutes.”
And yet despite this warning of illegality, someone at Granite School District authorized the asking of a gender identity question (pronouns) through its district-wide grading and curriculum CANVAS software. Who at GSD is breaking the law? We don’t have the answer to that question yet, but we do have a theory as to why parents have no clue that it’s happening.
As our children’s educations have been moved without our consent to mainly digital platforms, parents are realizing that the content of their children’s learning is less transparent and highly susceptible to dynamic change.
Did Granite School District notify any parents that they were adding pronouns to their children’s online profiles?
How long have children had the ability to provide this information to their teachers, administrators, and other third parties without parental awareness?
Parents should be up in arms about a district circumventing their right to know the personal information that schools are soliciting from their children…and in this case they are doing it illegally.
Whether you have kids in or outside Granite School District (the state’s largest school district, by the way), check your child’s CANVAS account. If pronouns are being solicited, CONTACT the district immediately and demand that they comply with the law.
We’ll leave you with this final cautionary note: this isn’t the first time your child’s right to a politically neutral education has been violated and it won’t be the last. When those who run the education system can make bad decisions with no accountability, who do they really serve?
Member Cline won’t find any big money payoff behind fighting the toxic adult agendas of the American Library Association, Utah Education Association, Equality Utah, and other libertine-minded groups — groups that seem to think that the First Amendment rights of publishers, authors, and librarians trump the psychological and social health of children, and who seem hell-bent on savaging those who defend impressionable young minds as “reactionary,” “fearmongers,” and “censors.”
The issue of obscene books and access to porn through online databases is raising its vile head in Utah. It’s vile because porn exposes children to images, ideas, and behaviors that destroy their innocence and rewire their young minds irreparably.
It’s especially vile because there are adults who will argue this type of emotional and psychological overload is no big deal, because hey, librarians have rights too.
Children are at the mercy of the adults around them. Are we as adults going to sacrifice our youth on the altar of “adult rights” to appease the god of groomers? Or are we going to be like Cline, deriving a desperately needed good for others at the expense of ourselves?
“It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.”
Recently the Davis School District has come under fire for what is being portrayed as rampant, systemic racism in its schools.
No one is defending Davis School District leadership. The district has historically been poorly run, and notoriously unresponsive to parental concerns and rights. But the nature of the DOJ’s investigation and the unclear origin of the complaints should give Utah citizens serious pause.
The report gives the number of incidents at upwards of 200 but it doesn’t tell you the number of complainants involved. All we know for a fact is that there have been people on the record at the Utah State board of Education meetings claiming that they have orchestrated efforts to get complaints to the DOJ.
The DOJ’s selective narrative shows the deliberate blurring the lines between systemic racism and incidental bigotry or insensitivity. Systemic doesn’t mean it occurs within a system. Systemic means it occurs BECAUSE of the system–the system itself directs, endorses, sustains it. The DOJ stretches to prove the case for this – in fact, its own report admits it doesn’t find evidence of systemic racism, but instead finds that Davis School District experienced “systemic failures” to address what they classified as racist incidents. This is a distinction with a huge difference.
And now thanks to what is possibly a coordinated complaint effort by some in the district, no school in Utah is safe from the Department of Justice’s overreach and interference in their right to local governance.
Davis School District needs to clean house, but it should start at the top. And the Federal government shouldn’t be the one holding the mop.
Here’s another interesting problem: Dr. Thompson was the Director of Educational Equity at DSD at the time more than a few of these incidents allegedly occurred. And judging by what the DOJ is saying, very little, if anything, was done by DSD leadership to address the problem adequately back then.
So Dr. Thompson drops the ball the first time around, and then gets hired back to…what? Drop the ball again?
Now the Federal government has literally installed within the DSD a new bureaucracy whose main goal is making racist witch hunts of teachers and students the top priority of the district going forward.
We’re calling it now: watch the number of alleged incidents motivated by racism to magically skyrocket.