PUBLIC SCHOOLS HAVE LIMITED RESOURCES AND DO NOT HAVE A PUBLIC MISSION TO ENTERTAIN ALL PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS, WHICH MAKES PUBLIC SCHOOLS LESS EFFICIENT AND LESS SAFE FOR ALL INVOLVED. In Ohio, it is illegal to engage in acts of public indecency, which includes exposing one's genitalia in a public place. This is regulated under Ohio Revised Code 2907.09, which makes it a crime to recklessly engage in conduct that is likely to be offensive to others or to cause public inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm. Exposing one's genitalia in a public place would generally fall under this statute and could result in charges of public indecency. If convicted, a person could face fines, imprisonment, or both. Additionally, a person convicted of public indecency may be required to register as a sex offender, which can have significant long-term consequences.
Allowing transgendered children of the opposite biological sex of designated public school restrooms is a cause for concern for their probable violation of 2907.09. Children may not comprehend what a life-changing decision they may make by exposing themselves to a member of the opposite sex. This is generally why - in order to provide a safe environment for children, it is self-evident to create a policy that biological boys and girls use their respectively designated restrooms.
While most of the legal community now looks at gender as an arbitrary social identity that one can choose - Ohio laws have not caught up to that rationale. Section 3.07 of the Ohio Revised Code calls for the removal of office for any public official participating in “gross immorality.” While it can be argued that some children and adults are cursed with physiological abnormalities that could possibly make a natural sex or gender harder to determine, this occurs in less than .01% of the transgendered population, according to medical professionals.
Gross immorality is generally legally thought to include “gross indecency.” Gross immorality also definitely covers negatively exacerbating a mental condition or taking advantage of the mentally challenged. Ethically, school board members have a legal “duty of care” to provide a safe place for a child’s educational needs, and members must also respect the laws of the State of Ohio. It is generally accepted that anyone that voted to allow the unaccompanied use of a public restroom by a minor of biological sex that the restroom is not intended for (transgendered) - is unnecessarily putting the transgendered child at risk of breaking Ohio Law and impermissibly puts other students at risk of witnessing public indecency. Additionally, parents allowing a transgendered student to socially identify with a sex that their biology does not conflate with, in a public school setting can cause an unsafe educational environment for that child, and is reasonable to assume that this stress can be mentally abusive and harmful, with or without accommodation.
Reasonable accommodations by students concerning public school dress codes have been upheld by many Ohio courts. No different than a student becoming a distraction for wearing a politically insensitive t-shirt - a boy portraying themselves as a girl is equally distracting. The best policy for all involved is if boys are required to wear boy clothes, and girls are required to wear girl clothes and are required to use their respective restrooms. This will create the least social drama and pressure on all students and help to create a safe atmosphere. Ethically, school board members have a "duty of care" responsibility to protect children with sound policies that do not compromise the mental health of a student or exacerbate mental health abuse issues.
Ethically, school board members have a duty to follow Ohio State Law and not place children into an irresponsible and impermissible situation that endangers them or may cause them to break the law. Legally and ethically, school board members have a responsibility to act to prevent a policy from being implemented that impermissibly threatens the welfare of a transgendered student and places children in an unacceptable position of potentially being exposed to indecency.
Additionally, school board members have a moral imperative not to exacerbate any mental harm to the transgendered student. Parents would have to provide proof of physiological abnormalities of their child's choice of presenting themselves as a gender opposite of what they are born along with the recommendations of multiple mental health professionals. This required proof is to ensure the school system is not helping misguided parents to abuse their children. Transgenderism recognition must be reserved for those with legitimate medical conditions and not be abused by parents encouraging their children to choose any gender they want to identify as.
Becoming a distraction and a focal point within the school system is not providing an atmosphere of acceptance or inclusivity, nor can it prevent children from being insensitive. The pressure of having to treat a pupil so drastically differently creates inefficiency in education - which harms all students and certainly creates more social anxiety than necessary. School board members that vote to accommodate transgendered students’ social identities and not their biological sex and have not done their due diligence are guilty of “gross immorality” and exacerbating the mental abuse of a child. These school board members have also abandoned their duty of care and duty of loyalty to the board of education and can be removed by a process provided by Ohio Revised Code 3.08
Legal Rationale for Removing School Board Members Supporting Accommodation of Transgendered Students without Adequate proof of a qualifying Physiological Condition
McHugh talks about inter alia the tendency of psychiatry to be swept up in social crazes of the era, giving the examples of "multiple personality disorder" in the 1970s and the Satanic panic in the 1980s, where therapists purported to recover memories from children about ritual sexual abuse by teachers, priests, and parents that led to dozens of prosecutions — all of which eventually either collapsed or were overturned because it became clear the "memories" had been implanted by the therapists.
Paul McHugh, a university professor of psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine
Dr. McHugh encourages psychiatric therapy for transgender people, especially children, so that they accept the gender assigned to them at birth.
Why we should not let Psychiatry define our Morality
We support love and understanding for all children and students. We must not mistake treating a mental health issue and the non-acceptance of a social identity as hate. There is a point where inclusivity is harmful and detrimental and evident to those that have not bought into the "woke" craze. Children do not have the mental capacity to choose their gender, and such adult decisions should not be encouraged by public school systems or by parents.
Unethical physicians and mental health professionals and healthcare systems, including large and respected hospital networks, are not devoid of activism and a profit motive. Gender-affirming care and reassignment surgeries are big money makers and may bring the mentally compromised temporary relief. Long-term we see higher rates of suicide and other mental health struggles by those undergoing gender-affirming therapies and gender reassignment surgery.
Many physicians, mental health professionals, and hospital networks have a conflict of interest in diagnosing and treating those susceptible to the "woke" craze of transgenderism. It is dependent us as a people to define our morality and to determin whether or not we will allow the healthcare community to exploit the mentally compromised.