In 2021, Quebec Minister of Education created the “Improved Understanding and Practices for Sexual and Gender Diversity in Schools” (Guide) for Quebec educational institutions. Following directives in the Guide, a Montreal high school created a set of procedures making it illegal to inform parents or guardians when their children over the age of 13 undergo a formal gender transition at school.
In 2023, a 14-year-old student at this Montreal high school decided to undergo a female-to-male gender transition at school. Administrators ordered teachers to address the student with the neuter pronouns “they/them.” At the same time, administrators ordered teachers to refer to the student with the feminine pronouns “she/her” when dealing with the student’s parents. There was no evidence or suspicion of parental abuse at home.
One teacher (who prefers to remain anonymous) informed school administrators that while she agreed to use the student’s preferred pronouns at school, she would not lie to parents about their child’s preferred gender identity at school, especially during an upcoming parent/teacher interview. That interview did not occur. Instead, the school allowed the teacher to submit to the student and parents a written report that avoided the use of personal pronouns. While granting this exception, the school made it clear that the teacher would be obligated to meet with the parents during an upcoming spring parent/teacher interview. If the teacher disclosed any part of the student’s gender transition at school to parents during that interview, the school would fire the teacher immediately.
Being ordered to lie to parents was the last straw for the teacher, who 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.”
With help from the Justice Centre, the teacher filed a constitutional challenge against the Guide and Procedures of the Quebec Minister of Education. She believes that they “contravene parental rights protected by section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms…in defiance of the principles of fundamental justice and without sufficient justification in a free and democratic society.” The teacher also believes that the Guide and Procedures violate their section 2(b) Charter right to freedom of expression and their section 2(a) right to freedom of conscience.
According to lawyer Olivier Séguin, this is the first time a court action raised the issue of freedom of conscience without also raising the issue of freedom of religion. Section 2(a) of the Charter guarantees both freedom of conscience and 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.
While it is true that Quebec law does not expressly mention how schools should handle cases like this, Mr. Séguin suggests that the authors of the Guide appear to have issued a ministerial directive “on the sly,” making the law say things it simply does not say. For example, in the section entitled “Legal framework” (at page 8), the Guide cites Article 60 of the Civil Code of Quebec, which states that a request for a name change may be made on the initiative of a minor aged 14 or over. The Guide ignores, however, section 62, which states that parents must be notified of any requests for changes to personal pronouns and that parents are permitted to object to such changes. Again, the authors of the Guide cite site Article 71 of the Civil Code, which states that a request for a change of gender may be made on the initiative of a minor aged 14 or over. The authors fail to note, however, that Article 73 states that parents must be able to object to any such changes.
In other words, the Guide fails to capture the law in Quebec. Mr. Séguin does not consider this accidental incompetence. He notes 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, the teacher, 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.”
In June 2024, Mr. Séguin cross-examined various representatives of the Quebec Ministry of Education. On July 5, 2023, Mr. Séguin presented his arguments before the Superior Court of Quebec.
