A human rights lawyer said this case highlights the importance of weighing parents’ concerns against protecting and supporting children in the classroom, particularly those who may have identities that differ from their peers. The ruling, issued in late August, cleared the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board (OCDSB) of any violations of the Human Rights Code. This is the latest in a range of issues surrounding gender identity in the classroom which are now traversing various courts and tribunals. Judge Eva Nichols, who presided over the case, took the extraordinary step of stating in her ruling that while the impromptu gender identity lessons, which emerged after classroom bullying, did not violate any students’ human rights, the systemic changes they called for parents — including that “the school board should be directed to avoid the issue of gender fluidity” — amounted to asking the school board to ignore Ontario’s human rights laws regarding gender identity and gender expression. The sign of the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board (OCDSB) at its main building on Greenbank Street in Ottawa. (Danny Globerman/CBC) “We are extremely disappointed with the outcome,” Pamela Buffone, the girl’s mother, said in a statement. “Our daughter continues to remember the lessons as very upsetting.” The court ruling noted several times that neither Buffone nor her husband, who also testified, were able to explain how they came to the conclusion that their daughter was upset by the lessons. In response to follow-up questions from the CBC, Buffone said that when her daughter recounted the events, she was “obviously upset.” “He wasn’t crying,” Buffone said, “but he was clearly struggling with what he had been taught in class.” This decision explains why simply having this as part of a curriculum is not a violation of one’s human rights.- Shakir Rahim, human rights lawyer During the hearing, Buffone described the gender identity discussions held at her daughter’s school as “cultural colonization” and a method of “reprogramming a child’s identity”. In their petition, the Buffones asked for financial damages and an order from the court that teachers must inform parents when a lesson on gender identity will be held. They also wanted the OCDSB to ensure that “classroom instruction does not in any way denigrate, deny, or undermine female gender and/or gender identity” and for the school board to change its approach to teaching anything related to gender, including avoiding gender fluidity. . Buffone moved both of her children to a different school board the following year because she had “lost confidence in the OCDSB.” The OCDSB said in a statement that it will review the court’s decision closely and that it remains committed to supporting its students, families and staff. (Submitted by Ottawa-Carleton District School Board) In a statement, the OCDSB said the decision “affirms the importance of cultivating learning environments for students of all ages that are inclusive and representative of all gender identities.” “The district remains committed to supporting students, families and staff to navigate with dignity the many challenging conversations that can arise to promote and protect student identity, human rights and learning,” added school commission. “Everyone is welcome at OCDSB.”
Ensuring child support
A human rights lawyer explained that a specific issue raised in the class is not enough for the court to intervene and that the facts of the case do not constitute discrimination. “I think this ruling explains why just having this as part of a curriculum is not a violation of someone’s human rights,” said Shakir Rahim, who specializes in LGBTQ issues. She emphasized the importance of supporting transgender children and those who have identities that may differ from the majority of their peers. “It’s certainly as much about the kids and making sure those kids are protected and safe in the classroom as it is about the parents and their concerns,” he said. Human rights lawyer Shakir Rahim said gender identity discussions in the classroom do not violate students’ human rights. (Submitted by Shakir Rahim) Lisa Bildy, the lawyer who represented the Buffones, said in a statement that the decision was the result of “an irreconcilable clash of worldviews in our society at this time.” “Respecting the inherent human dignity of gender diverse individuals, through inclusion and acceptance, is a very different goal than instilling in all children the belief that their gender is a fantasy or that they must have a gender identity,” she added. .
The “teachable moment” was intended to address bullying in the classroom
The Buffones’ petition was filed in March 2019, but the events at issue occurred in January 2018. According to the testimony of the 1st grade teacher, the students had been instructed by a previous teacher to leave a bottle of hand sanitizer on their desks when they went to the bathroom. There were two such bottles, each with a sticker: one with the outline of a boy and the other of a girl, as is often depicted on public toilet doors. The teacher noted that one student was teased by other students after using the “wrong” bottle. After removing the stickers, the teacher told the class that “a person may be one-way physically, but they may be different at heart,” according to the court order. The teacher, who has not been named to avoid the possibility of identifying the student and the school, used classroom resources designated for so-called “teachable moments.” These included the book My Princess Boy by Cheryl Kilodavis, which deals with gender expression, and a video called “He, She and They”, which addresses gender pronouns. During the class discussion, one student said that people could go to a doctor to change their bodies. The teacher confirmed that this was possible. At one point the teacher told the students that “there are no boys and girls”. Students from Nepean High School in Ottawa take part in a protest in support of transgender students in October 2021. (Jean Delisle/CBC) Buffone and her husband realized those lessons about two months later, when their daughter—then six—said at the breakfast table that there were no boys and girls and that she didn’t want to be a “mommy” when she grew up and would rather he has a dog Buffone requested a meeting with the teacher to voice her concerns. After this meeting, the teacher held a follow-up lesson to clarify her statements. Draw a gender spectrum on the board: a line with a boy at one end, a girl at the other, and several marks in between that denote other possible gender identities. Soon after, the parents said they noticed their daughter playing teacher, teaching a similar lesson about the gender spectrum to her teddy bears. The Buffones’ application to the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal alleged that the school board “discriminated in educational services based on gender and gender identity.”
Mother candid about gender issues
Buffone runs a website and Twitter account that criticize educational and legal issues related to children’s gender identity, particularly policies that recognize transgender and gender diverse rights. In her statement, she called the court’s decision “further proof that a new political dogma is being imposed on all of us, including six-year-olds in our education system.” “A girl can go to school knowing she’s a girl and come home unsure of who she is,” she said, “because schools mess with children’s identities by completely ignoring biological reality as a relevant and important personal characteristic—now with full support from [Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario].” The court, for its part, wrote in its ruling that “there were no allegations in the petition that the school board’s policy contravenes [Human Rights Code].”
