成人X站

Democratic State Representative Lillian Ortiz-Self appeared Wednesday on “Seattle鈥檚 Morning News” on 成人X站 Newsradio, addressing controversy surrounding House Bill 1296, a revision of last year’s Parents’ Bill of Rights (Initiative 2081). The bill has sparked intense debate over student privacy, parental notification and family rights.

Ortiz-Self, whose full-time career has been as a school counselor and mental health professional, emphasized that her experience guides her approach to student privacy and parental involvement.

“Parent access has been a critical part of my job,” Ortiz-Self explained. “Young people need trusted adults to talk things through, with the hope that we can then link them back with their parents.”

Ortiz-Self explains reasoning behind HB 1296

Ortiz-Self explained that HB 1296 was introduced to clarify language from the original initiative, addressing confusion among schools, teachers and parents.

“Teachers were worried, asking, ‘If a student tells me they’re mad at their parents, do I have to call home immediately or risk losing my job?’ We needed clarity,” she said.

One major point of contention has been the parental notification requirement when a student is involved in a crime or questioned by law enforcement. The original initiative mandated immediate notification, but early drafts of HB 1296 allowed a 48-hour window.

After extensive debate and multiple amendments, the final House version of HB 1296 restored immediate notification, though with some conditions: crimes must have occurred on school property during school hours.

“If the assault involves someone outside the home, parents are notified immediately,” Ortiz-Self emphasized, countering claims that schools would intentionally delay notifying parents. “I say this with 99.9% confidence because there is no situation where law enforcement would tell us not to notify parents unless the parents themselves were being investigated.”

Ortiz-Self pushed back on what she described as misinformation that pits parents against teachers, calling such claims “exaggerations and lies.”

“There’s no child that walks into my office that I’ve ever suggested, ‘Maybe you’re gay, maybe you’re trans.’ That’s not within the scope of how we practice,” she said. “We always try to look at how we can bridge communication between students and parents.”

Washington voters have right to challenge law passed by legislature

In Washington, voters usually have the right to challenge new laws passed by the legislature. It鈥檚 called a referendum, and : If enough registered voters sign a petition within a certain timeframe, the law doesn’t take effect immediately. Instead, it gets placed on a ballot, giving everyone a chance to approve or reject it.

But there’s an exception. When lawmakers add what’s called an “emergency clause” to a bill, they’re saying the law is “necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety.” That means as soon as the governor signs it, it takes effect immediately, and citizens can’t challenge it through a referendum.

Critics of emergency clauses say they’re sometimes used as a political tool to bypass voters. The conservative-leaning , for example, argues lawmakers often attach emergency clauses to laws that aren’t genuine emergencies, effectively taking away the public’s right to push back on unpopular legislation.

During today’s interview, “Seattle’s Morning News”聽pressed Ortiz-Self on the decision to include an emergency clause in HB 1296, pointing out voters who supported the original Parents’ Bill of Rights might be concerned they’re now unable to weigh in through a referendum. Ortiz-Self did not directly acknowledge these concerns, instead emphasizing that immediate action was necessary.

“We needed to act urgently to provide clear guidance and protect students,” she repeated, declining to address whether voters might feel bypassed by the legislative process.

Brian Heywood speaks against legislative changes to parental rights bill

Brian Heywood, who led the original Parents’ Bill of Rights initiative, , expressing strong opposition to legislative changes proposed in HB 1296 and its Senate counterpart, SB 5181.

Heywood argued the legislature acted in bad faith by initially passing the initiative and then attempting to roll back its protections.

“They overwhelmingly voted for it with bipartisan support, then gave a wink and a nod to special interests saying, ‘Don’t worry, we’ll gut it next session,'” Heywood said. “It pissed me off. They’re playing legal games with voters.”

Heywood also expressed concern about how the changes in the law could affect parental involvement in decisions related to medical or mental health care for their children.

“The legislature has slowly added these restrictions over time, making it harder and harder for parents to know what’s happening with their kids,” he said. “It鈥檚 unconscionable.”

“They promised parents transparency, and now they’re slowly chipping away at those rights, bit by bit,” Heywood continued. “Parents deserve better.”

“If the state can come between a child and their parents regarding critical decisions like gender-affirming care, what other parental rights are at risk?” he asked. “This isn’t just about notification; it’s about fundamentally who gets to raise and care for our kids.”

Since a referendum may be off the table, Heywood vowed to file a new initiative to overturn HB 1296 if it becomes law.

“If lawmakers refuse to respect the rights voters supported, we’ll go back to the people and ask them again,” he promised.

Republican lawmakers express serious concerns

The Center Square that during the recent House debate, Republican lawmakers voiced strong concerns. Rep. Chris Corry, R-Yakima, said, 鈥淚t鈥檚 obviously disappointing because parents in our state are continuing to feel pushed away from their children and that the state feels like it can do a better job of caring for children.鈥�

Republicans are particularly worried that schools might bypass parents regarding sensitive issues like gender-affirming care.

Ortiz-Self responded by affirming that HB 1296 respects parental rights while protecting vulnerable students.

“Public schools serve a diverse population,” she said. “Every child deserves to feel safe. My role is to ensure all kids feel valued and protected.”

HB 1296 is now moving forward in the legislative process and faces further discussion in the Senate. Advocates from both sides continue to debate the balance between safeguarding student privacy and ensuring robust parental involvement.

Listen to聽鈥淪eattle鈥檚 Morning News鈥�聽with Charlie Harger weekday mornings from 5-9 a.m. on 成人X站 Newsradio. Subscribe to the podcast聽here.