The world has certainly changed in recent years. While some people consider it progress, others feel that it is a giant step backward.
This includes Pamela Richard, a teacher who stood up for what she believed in, despite the possibility she could be suspended for it.
Pamela Ricard, a Kansas teacher, recently made headlines when she sued her school district, Geary County Schools, after they gave her a three-day suspension for refusing to use a student’s preferred pronouns.
Ricard explained the situation, saying she had been disciplined “for addressing a biologically female student by the student’s legal and enrolled last name,” via the New York Post.
Previously, a school counselor had told her one of the students preferred to use a different first name than their legal name. They also wanted to be referred to as a different gender. This student was born as a female.
In order to avoid using the student’s preferred name, she would refer to her as “Miss [legal/enrolled last name].” Richard felt this was a good compromise but it didn’t work out.
Eventually, the teacher was suspended, with the explanation that “employees should be aware and make an effort to utilize the pronouns an individual requests to be identified by.”
The lawsuit that then took place occurred because the policy violated her conscience.
“Ms. Ricard is a Christian and holds sincere religious beliefs consistent with the traditional Christian and biblical understanding of the human person and biological s3x,” the lawsuit stated. “Ms. Ricard believes that God created human beings as either male or female, that this s3x is fixed in each person from the moment of conception, and that it cannot be changed, regardless of an individual person’s feelings, desires, or preferences.”
In May, the teacher went to federal court and won a $95,000 award. The attorney said that she was “free to speak without violating her conscience by communicating with parents in a manner consistent with how she is required to address the students at school.”
Additionally, she was allowed to avoid pronouns for students that were not consistent with their biological s3x. In the policy, staff members were not able to disclose the preferred names of the students or the pronouns to their parents. The court ruled against that policy.
