The U.S. Department of Education’s investigation into Ann Arbor Public Schools (AAPS) over allegations that the district failed to share information about students’ gender identity with parents has sparked a broader debate about student privacy, parental rights, school responsibilities, and the role of federal civil rights laws.
For Colleen A. McKenney (she/her/hers), a scholar, researcher and practitioner of sex- and gender-based violence prevention, the issue represents a complicated intersection of law, ethics, safety, and individual autonomy.
Based in Manchester, McKenney has worked since 2009 to prevent sex- and gender-based violence in and outside of the military. She has investigated civil rights complaints at both Central Michigan University and the University of Michigan and has trained schools and organizations on Title IX and civil rights compliance.
McKenney said the AAPS investigation raises questions that extend beyond a single district.
“I see this specific case as many issues intersecting and conflicting that hold broad implications for legal rights of all of us related to our freedom and autonomy,” McKenney said. “There are legal issues at play, as well as broader societal understanding of autonomy. It is a case of who has rights to autonomy, what are the limits, and when and/or how can they or should they be restricted?”
Balancing parental rights and student privacy
One of the central questions in the debate is how schools should balance parental access to information with a student’s right to privacy and safety.
McKenney said that, generally, parents have broad legal authority regarding their children’s education, particularly in K-12 settings. However, she said there are situations where student safety concerns may affect how information is handled.
“Our society tends to treat minors’ rights as subordinate to the rights of their parents, with little to no autonomy and rights of their own,” McKenney said. “Children are dependent on adults legally and out of necessity. So, generally parents have greater rights than the minor student with regard to academic records.”
However, McKenney said exceptions can arise when issues involve safety or medical privacy.
“There are exceptions in law however, when it relates to student safety and/or medical privacy,” she said. “In those cases, the rights of the students can outweigh those of the parent.”
FERPA, Title IX and areas of misunderstanding
Much of the discussion surrounding the AAPS investigation has focused on FERPA, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, which is a federal law protecting the privacy of student education records, and Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination in education.
McKenney said one source of confusion is that FERPA protections are often understood differently depending on the educational setting.
“FERPA is a law that protects privacy of academic records,” McKenney said. “FERPA is broadly interpreted nationally and varies between K-12 and higher education.”
She explained that parents generally have extensive access to their children’s educational records in K-12 schools, while colleges and universities often apply FERPA protections more strictly because students are adults.
“In my experience, FERPA in higher education is more strictly interpreted,” McKenney said. “An example is that some institutions will not even confirm nor deny that a student is enrolled if a parent were to call asking for information.”
McKenney said the current debate centers on whether information related to gender identity, gender expression, chosen names and pronouns should be treated differently because of potential safety concerns.
Student safety as a consideration
Because McKenney’s research and professional work focus on sex- and gender-based violence prevention, she said safety is a key factor schools should consider when creating policies.
“Largest at issue, is the safety of the student, which in this case, is at potential risk, based on information about their gender,” McKenney said.
She noted that not all students have supportive home environments and said schools must consider the potential consequences of disclosing sensitive information.
“If a student is protecting their gender information from their parents, it may be because they do not feel safe to disclose that information to their parents,” McKenney said. “Students who do feel safe at home are likely to have already disclosed their gender information to their parents.”
McKenney said transgender, nonbinary, and gender-nonconforming students can face heightened risks of discrimination, harassment and violence, making questions about privacy particularly complex.
“These severe conflicts are leading to real harm, up to and including loss of life, to people of all ages who do not conform or fit within legal and societal expectations of gender,” she said. “They face very real and documented discrimination and harassment, including in their homes and families.”
Changing interpretations of Title IX
McKenney said Title IX has become an area of significant debate because its interpretation and enforcement have shifted over time.
“Title IX policies, and how parental involvement is specifically handled in matters, can vary from district to district,” McKenney said. “Enforcement varies as well from district to district and state to state.”
She said changes between presidential administrations have affected how schools interpret their responsibilities.
“Title IX began to be changed and to vary from presidential administration change to presidential administration change,” McKenney said. “This led to both changes in schools’ requirements as well as in how they were told to interpret and enforce it.”
Creating policies that reduce harm
McKenney’s experience working across education, the military, higher education and equity-focused organizations has shaped her approach to policy development.
She said policies should be evaluated not only by their intent but also by their impact.
“I have come to recognize ways in which policies can both harm or help depending on how they are written, their intent, and how they are carried out (or not),” McKenney said.
She added that policies should evolve when they create unintended consequences.
“Policy is not a fix all or band-aid,” McKenney said. “It is a tool we can use to shape an equitable society. And if we’re not there yet, we try something else and keep working at it.”
Questions for the community moving forward
As the investigation continues, McKenney said parents, educators and community members should consider broader questions about rights, dignity and responsibility.
“I think we all collectively as a society, nation and global community of humanity, have to decide what our values actually are,” McKenney said.
She said the discussion should include questions about how society views children’s rights and the responsibilities adults have toward young people.
“Do we believe that children are full people with human rights that should be treated with the same dignity and respect as all people?” McKenney asked. “That it is our responsibility as adults to protect them and guide them but still honor their individual humanity?”
McKenney said the AAPS investigation reflects a larger national conversation about identity, rights, and equality.
“This case is a piece of a wider argument,” she said. “An argument about whether all humans deserve to be treated with equal level of humanity and applies to more identities of people than only gender.”
Note: The views expressed by Colleen A. McKenney are her own and do not represent the official positions of Ann Arbor Public Schools, the U.S. Department of Education, or Current Magazine. The federal investigation into AAPS is ongoing, and legal interpretations surrounding FERPA, Title IX, student privacy, and parental rights continue to evolve.
