A teacher refused to deceive parents about a student’s gender transition
In 2021, Quebec’s Minister of Education published the Improved Understanding and Practices for Sexual and Gender Diversity in Schools Guide for Quebec schools. Following the Guide, a Montreal high school adopted procedures requiring staff to withhold information from parents when students aged 14 or older socially transitioned at school.
In 2023, a 14-year-old student at the school began identifying as male. School administrators instructed teachers to refer to the student using masculine or gender-neutral language at school while continuing to use feminine language when communicating with the student’s parents. There was no evidence or suspicion that the student faced abuse or neglect at home.
One teacher objected. While she agreed to respect the student’s preferred identity at school, she refused to intentionally mislead the student’s parents about what was taking place. When administrators warned that disclosing the student’s social transition to the parents during a future parent-teacher interview would result in her dismissal, the teacher concluded she could no longer comply.
Because the case involves an ongoing employment relationship and the teacher feared professional repercussions, she chose to remain anonymous throughout the legal proceedings.
The teacher stated:
“I could not live with myself if I did that. I will not look them in the eye and intentionally lie about the fact that we are enabling their child to undergo a significant psychosocial intervention without their knowledge. Transparent collaboration with parents is essential to my role as a teacher and is critical for the long-term wellbeing of children. Lying to parents about how we are treating their children, or about what is going on with their children at school, violates the principles of my vocation.”
The case challenges the constitutionality of Quebec’s secrecy policy
With assistance from lawyers funded by the Justice Centre, the teacher launched a constitutional challenge against the Quebec Minister of Education’s Guide and the school’s implementing procedures.
The case argues that these policies violate parents’ rights protected by section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and infringe the teacher’s freedoms of expression and conscience protected by sections 2(b) and 2(a) of the Charter.
According to constitutional lawyer Olivier Séguin, this is the first known constitutional challenge to rely on freedom of conscience without also relying on freedom of religion.
“It is true that prohibitions against lying are common to all religions, but my client’s conscientious objection is not religious in nature,” Mr. Séguin explained.
The challenge argues the Minister’s Guide misstates Quebec law
The constitutional challenge also argues that the Minister’s Guide misrepresents Quebec law governing changes to names and gender markers by minors.
Mr. Séguin argues that while the Guide cites provisions allowing certain requests to be initiated by minors aged 14 or older, it omits other provisions requiring that parents be notified and allowing them to object.
He stated that the Guide appeared to introduce new obligations without legislative authority by presenting them as though they reflected existing law.
Mr. Séguin stated that “the irregularities with which the Guide is riddled are both too obvious and too numerous to see anything other than a desire to mislead readers by falsely claiming that the Guide translates the letter of the law. I see the Guide as a usurpation of power and a denial of democracy.”
Regarding his client, Mr. Séguin stated: “Secrecy toward parents, which in practice amounts to lying to them, is a serious violation of the legal contract that binds the state to its citizens.”
Constitutional challenge continues before the Court
During the proceedings, lawyers examined officials from Quebec’s Ministry of Education and presented arguments before the Superior Court of Quebec. The Court also considered applications relating to confidentiality for parents and detransitioners who sought to participate in the case without publicly revealing deeply personal information.
Constitutional lawyer Olivier Séguin said the Court must ensure that those directly affected can safely participate in what is expected to be a landmark case.
“This case will likely become a leading decision in Quebec, and potentially across Canada, on secrecy policies in schools and freedom of conscience,” said Mr. Séguin. “Parents and detransitioners should not be forced to expose highly personal information without appropriate confidentiality protections,” he added.
