# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Your students can learn about different cultures in this collection of musicals.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Even before the ball drops in Times Square Tuesday night, Broadway already has grossed more than $1 billion - and it's only half-way through the season.

Much of that ca-ching came from shows that rely on customers who can remember sticking quarters in jukeboxes -listening to the likes of Tina Turner, The Temptations, Alanis Morrisette and most of the seemingly hundreds of numbers sampled to widespread delight in "Moulin Rouge!" And if 2019 brought us an anti-romantic "Oklahoma!" that ended not with Curly and Laurie headed off to wedding bliss but covered in their own blood, it also revealed that audiences loved "Beetlejuice," a.k.a. The Show That Would Not Die, a whole lot more than snooty critics. (Guilty).

But there were plenty of high-quality success stories, including the sexiest production of a Harold Pinter play ever to be seen on Broadway (thanks mostly to Tom Hiddleston), a celebration of the authority-goosing fun of tabloid newspapers in "Ink," and a trip to hell and back in "Hadestown," as hosted by the incomparable Andre De Shields.

The best shows of the year are a diverse collection - revivals, new plays, hot musicals, family attractions, political statements - all together reminding us that great artists are to be found in all corners of the business and on many different Midtown streets.

Broadway is not just one of New York's biggest economic assets. In 2019, it also was a place to argue about politics, ponder the inevitability of death, better understand racial division and the Constitution of the United States, and have an old-school laugh at a man in a dress. With a really good voice and a big heart, toots.

Which were your 2019 favorites? These are mine:

Stylish, audacious and thoroughly original, "Hadestown"was the perfect dystopian musical for a year in which America seemed to be going to hell. An eye-popping fusion of Andre De Shields, "Westworld" and Bourbon Street anarchy, "Hadestown" avoided the trap of literality in its interpretation of the music of Anais Mitchell, allowing the politics to seep out like steam from a punk.

Director Rachel Chavkin's production was ferocious all right, but never shrill nor in lockstep with the musical down the street. Here was a show that asked where trust ends and caretaking begins, and that did not claim to know the answer. And unlike so many musicals these days, this show did not run scared from the transformative power of romantic love, a human entanglement so deep in the Broadway DNA that it hurts.

Was Jamie Lloyd's eye-popping revival the best Harold Pinter production ever to be seen on Broadway? The decades-long competition is formidable but I vote yes. Why? The production of this three-handed romantic thriller was lean enough to key into the play's theme of how the over-educated literary classes are doomed to fail at love and succeed only in having an existential crisis.

And it was human enough to make you care for its hapless spouses and adulterers. Tom Hiddleston even managed to cry through the invasion of a cellphone, indicative of the hell of having your heart on display.

Dense, sophisticated and complex, this enveloping story of a Yale creative writing professor with cancer and a keen sense of the complications of her own narrative was Adam Rapp at his best.

Rapp, the closest the theater can get to David Foster Wallace, is often misunderstood by directors and actors, but the combination of the cold, existential, Dostoyevskian eye of director David Cromer and the intellectual vulnerability of the luminous Mary-Louise Parker meant that audiences were able to explore both the clinical and the heart-pulling dimension of the demise that surely awaits us all.

Edward Albee once called the experience of seeing death in both the future and the present the "360-degree view." That is what the smartest play of the season on Broadway offered.

Forget that folksy old Joe Keller, or the idea that Arthur Miller had sympathy for small-town industrialists who became pawns of ruthless wartime capitalism. In Jack O'Brien's revelatory revival, the actor Tracy Letts turned the purveyor of lethally cracked cylinder heads into an all-American monster, far closer to Jeffrey Epstein or Bernie Madoff than any other interpretation I've seen.

Such men as these always cause a lot of collateral damage, of course, and here we had Annette Bening on hand to show us what happens to enablers who retreat from what their eyes see and the mind tells them. A cautionary tale, rivetingly told.

Heidi Schreck's solo tour de force decided that a Broadway show could be part a progressive political lecture, part a personal confessional autobiography of the writer and performer, and part a manifesto for feminist reform of the Supreme Court and its way of thinking.

Yet she never abandoned what matters most in the theater: Clarity, truth, vulnerability, and care and understanding for an audience that wants to hear someone else's story, but also use it in their own lives. Sure, there was catnip for feminists sick of orginalist fallacies. But Schreck revealed enough of her own personal and intellectual struggles to make us realize that the Constitution, and by extension America, are messy entities with unsolvable problems that always depend on the kindness of strangers.

Those compelled by Rupert Murdoch and his clan now have the HBO show "Succession" for their schadenfreude, but James Graham's savvy play about the Sun newspaper, ground zero for today's tabloid culture, revealed more about how the Australian mogul harnessed human need and failing for journalistic profit. Director Rupert Goold's s production was cold and cynical, but then how else should you treat this particular subject?

"Ink" was stained with casualties, but it also pointed out that Murdoch has thrived because his publications are fun: entertaining to read and thrilling to create.

The Clintons remain the most fascinating enigma in American public affairs, their marriage an endless source of curiosity. Not everyone on Broadway understood, though, that such a living couple are best explored artistically with the kind of elliptical remove that Lucas Hnath's very clever play afforded us. Laurie Metcalf brought her no-nonsense stoicism to a character trapped in a Sisyphean life of ups and down; John Lithgow embodied how geniality can cover a multitude of sins.

It wasn't so much that they looked like Bill and Hillary, of course, but that they caught their essence, and their ability to reflect back to us so much of what has been going on in America.

Self-protected, youthfully certain of its truths and scathing of much white liberalism, "Slave Play" was unlike any other Broadway show, ever. But the politics were never allowed to subsume the inherent theatricality of the writing, and of the playwright, Jeremy O. Harris, who refused to sit quietly as playwrights are supposed to do.

"Slave Play" wasn't really about what most people thought it was about - sex, interracial marriage, therapy - but it was a sometimes affectionate takedown of the white critical establishment, luring the old-school tastemakers into loving a play that argued for their destruction. Brilliant. And never dull.

The Daily News Flash Newsletter

Catch up on the day's top five stories every weekday afternoon.

A show with a near-impossible task given the aged ideas of the its source movie, "Tootsie" nonetheless managed to be the funniest show in town, unspooling gag after gag in its need to win us over to a fundamentally unsympathetic protagonist, and adding a delightful jazzy score from David Yazbek.

Thanks to one of the best musical performances of the year, or any year, from Santino Fontana, it made for a good night out on the town. Nothing wrong with that. Life is hard.

For all the trends toward revisionism, the directing of Broadway musicals remains a craft that takes experience, talent and respect for the material. That is precisely what Scott Ellis - and his star, Kelli O'Hara - delivered with this charming revival of a Cole Porter musical with a score that just won't stop smooching.

With an eye toward the moment, Ellis and O'Hara subtly refocused the show as a tribute to the women and men of the theater, turning the work into a kind of precursor of "A Chorus Line" while still celebrating its place in the golden age of musicals, when the songs and the performances always revealed things more than people today think.

The old school knew way, way, more than today's trendsetters realize.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Broadway's best: 10 diverse shows that defined the new theater season

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The best shows of the year are a diverse collection - revivals, new plays, hot musicals, family attractions, political statements - all together reminding us that great artists are to be found in all corners of the business and on many different Midtown streets.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
In the Heights (Broadway, Richard Rodgers Theatre, 2008)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Listen to an Excerpt From In The Heights: Finding Home, Read by America Ferrera

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The arts are a powerful thing. Whether acting in a play, singing a song, performing a dance, drawing a picture or writing a poem, the arts allow people to express themselves and their ideas without having to put them in to words. This is just one of the many reasons expressive arts therapy has become popular, particularly for special needs children.

What Is Expressive Art Therapy?

The term expressive arts refers to any combination of dance, writing, visual arts, drama, music or other creative outlets. Expressive arts therapy is taking these modalities and using them to enhance individual development and growth. The right mix can improve overall well-being and contribute to lowering anxiety and stress, improving self-awareness and self-esteem, strengthening relationships, regulating behaviors and advancing social skills.

This type of therapy has also been shown to help children - and adults - deal with negative situations, disabilities and trauma. Through rehabilitation, education and communication, art therapy helps an individual release and express feelings they may not know how to let go of otherwise.

Additionally, expressive arts positively affect function, mood, cognition and behavior. This is particularly evident in children with special needs, such as those with autism, speech impairments, PTSD, developmental disabilities, ADD/ADHD or other mental and behavioral health conditions. Expression through art is a way to help these kids feel a sense of normalcy without judgment, while allowing them to show their individual personality and bring attention to their strengths.

Developmental Benefits of Expressive Art

Children of all ages, both special needs and not, may not have the language skills to express themselves, but they still have a voice. Expressive arts awaken a child's imagination and creativity to help him discover who he is and how to engage his senses. They also bring a sense of calm to the body and positively impact mindset, interpretation of surroundings and emotional state.

Putting their feelings into a poem, song and painting gives children a safe outlet for negative emotions through an enjoyable activity, which accelerates the healing and growth process. But expressive arts aren't just for coping, they also have great effects on a child's normal development.

Social Development

Establishing social skills at a young age is incredibly important for regular development. Children who are comfortable in social settings operate much better as adults, as they establish connection, communication and empathy. Expressive art therapy can enhance social development by providing support without judgement from peers, parents and the therapist. It gives children the opportunity to appreciate differences between people and accept each individual's perceptions.

Many of the arts can be practiced in groups, where children have to work together, learn to share and accept responsibility for how their actions affect others. Even in private settings, interactions with the therapist, or even the parents, contribute to the development of social skills, as it encourages relationships and trust.

Cognitive Development

Experiences in the arts go hand in hand with learning. Whether painting a picture, writing a play or choreographing a dance, children are forced to learn simple things like colors and shapes, as well as experiential lessons like cause and effect, choices and consequences, problem solving and experimenting, and how to make decisions. They can also learn how to draw meaning from visuals and communicate through them.

On a deeper level, art actually seems to have an impact on the brain's neural connections, which act as the wiring for learning. Whichever art form is being utilized, the senses have to operate and deep thinking is a requirement. This leads to the development of skills such as recognizing the difference between abstract and reality, understanding patterns, making observations about the world, and forming mental representations of what is real or imagined. Overall, the expressive arts help children develop comprehensive thinking capabilities through the interaction of complex thought processes.

Emotional Development

In addition to being an emotional outlet for children, expressive arts therapy can actually help them develop and better understand their feelings. Being angry or hurt is not always easy to describe in words, but a child can put these emotions into a drawing, poem or dance and make it easy for themselves and others to comprehend. It also creates a starting point for conversation, which can lead to a more open expression of feelings and thoughts. At this point, the therapist, parent or child may even be able to tap into emotions none knew the child had.

Involvement in art activities also allows kids to grow confidence. It's a way to open up dialogue about situations that may be hard to deal with or share. Getting their emotions out in a creative way can be both therapeutic and insightful.

Physical Development

While the mental benefits of expressive art therapy are prominent and major, there are also physical changes that can come about through this practice. Improved motor skills and control, hand-eye coordination and muscle development can be achieved through the different modalities of art.

For instance, dance and theater not only spark creativity, but also get the body moving. This puts multiple senses into action and teaches children to become more conscious of their physical presence and use of space. Drawing or writing, although they don't require as much movement, also provide physical benefits by helping kids gain control over the small muscles in their hands. Whatever the action, these activities help children coordinate their thoughts and motions, which is a key step of development.

Expressive Art Takeaways for You and Your Child

Formal expressive art therapy should be facilitated by a professional, but the principles and activities can translate to home life. Encourage your children to explore their artistic and creative side by doing craft projects with their siblings or making up a song to perform to the rest of the family at the next gathering. When you take these actions, make sure older individuals understand there is to be no judgment - only encouragement. After achieving the expressive task, take a moment to talk about what was done and how the child feels about it. Asking questions shows the child you respect them and what they did matters.

Incorporating the arts into your young child's life is essential for his or her development, particularly if mental or behavioral problems are present. However, if your children develop behavioral issues or psychiatric ailments as adolescents, other types of therapy or treatment may be a better option. Don't hesitate to get the help of the professionals at this stage, through inpatient or outpatient therapy programs.

Resources

http://expressiveartssandiego.com/what-is-expressive-arts
http://unh.edu/health-services/ohep/complementaryalternative-health-practices/expressive-arts
http://autismdigest.com/expressive-arts-learning-growing-and-expressing/
http://extension.psu.edu/youth/betterkidcare/news/2014/art-an-opportunity-to-develop-childrens-skills
http://articles.extension.org/pages/25680/creative-art-helps-children-develop-across-many-domains
http://ncfy.acf.hhs.gov/features/thinking-creatively-family-and-youth-work/art-therapy
http://www.cognitivedynamics.org/therapy/
http://www.ieata.org/
http://www.socialworktoday.com/archive/exc_020712.shtml
http://www.goodtherapy.org/learn-about-therapy/types/expressive-arts-therapy
http://www.aasa.org/SchoolAdministratorArticle.aspx?id=7378
http://www.education.com/reference/article/art-center-enhances-children-development/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Benefits of Expressive Art Therapy for Children

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The arts are a powerful thing. Whether acting in a play, singing a song, performing a dance, drawing a picture or writing a poem, the arts allow people to express themselves and their ideas without having to put them in to words.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For example, students may create "mood mandalas" by drawing and coloring symbols to convey their inner worlds. They can also paint their worries on small "comfort" boxes and fill the container with personal items that bring solace. Others list their insecurities in "place book" journals, including healing words, like "Learn to accept your flaws and learn to accept beauty." All group members receive "place books" where they privately record their thoughts and feelings.

During each gathering, Wardrip shares phrases like, "Remember, you don't feel better by feeling less" and "Your thoughts are always valid." Using these prompts, she invites students to begin a discussion. Although they're not required to participate, most of them do. For many students, being surrounded by a community of nonjudgmental listeners helps them open up, and kids who once felt afraid begin to feel brave, according to Wardrip.
Mental Health is Personal
Mental illness is a topic Wardrip knows intimately. For nearly a decade, she silently battled depression, hiding her psychological pain from family and friends.

"My depression never made sense to me," she says. "I didn't understand why I felt hopeless when I had a good life. I stayed quiet because I didn't want people to think less of me."

It wasn't until Wardrip began a graduate school program, Creative Pulse at the University of Montana, that she began to heal from her depression. Creative Pulse is a master's program, teaching educators how to integrate art, creativity, movement and mindfulness into the classroom.

"In my program, I was challenged to do the most important thing I could do for myself, which helped me open up about my depression and suicidal tendencies. I firmly believe the program saved my life," says Wardrip.

During her graduate studies, she relied on art and mindfulness to help her access and express emotions she had kept bottled up for years. Eventually, Wardrip opened up to close family and friends. Her journey taught her that shame often prevents people from seeking psychological care.

Unfortunately, Wardrip's experience is not unusual. Although depression and anxiety are the most common mental health concerns, surveys have found that 80 percent of adolescents with a diagnosable anxiety disorder and 60 percent of depressed kids do not receive treatment. In fact, a recent survey conducted by Kaiser Permanente found 55 percent of people view depression as a personal weakness, and 24 percent of millennials believe most people can recover without professional services, like psychotherapy.*

"I realize how stigma is silencing, especially for adolescents. I want to be a role model for our students, which is why I began Creative Courage," says Wardrip.

Many of the kids in Wardrip's 10-week group struggle with depression, anxiety and gender dysphoria. Others feel lonely and out of place. All of these students are searching for someone who can understand their suffering.

To help create a safe space, Wardrip begins each meeting with a wellness check-in, followed by a guided meditation and an art-related activity. Her group combines creative process with psychological theory.
Art Equity
According to the American Art Therapy Association, artistic expression may decrease anxiety, feelings of anger and depression. This creative process can also enhance cognitive abilities, foster greater self-awareness and help students regulate their emotions.

Despite these findings, there's an equity gap in arts education. A survey conducted in 2012 by the Department of Education discovered students in low-poverty schools were more likely to receive art instruction than kids attending high-poverty schools. While proposed federal cuts could eliminate art education in many schools, teachers like Wardrip advocate for art inclusion.

"Art teaches kids problem-solving and decision-making skills," says Wardrip. "Creativity also promotes identity development, helping students find their 'place' in the world."

Wardrip finds that by the end of the 10-week course, students begin to heal. Her data from last year's group suggest participants' symptoms of anxiety and depression lessened by 40 percent. To measure this change, each group member completed an anxiety and depression questionnaire: one before the group began, and another after completing the course.

For many of these kids, art becomes a tool, helping them to share their authentic selves in a community that understands.
Juli Fraga is a psychologist and writer in San Francisco. You can find her on Twitter @dr_fraga *This post has been updated to more accurately reflect the results of the survey.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Making Art Helps Teens Better Understand Their Mental Health | KQED

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For example, students may create "mood mandalas" by drawing and coloring symbols to convey their inner worlds. They can also paint their worries on small "comfort" boxes and fill the container with personal items that bring solace. Others list their insecurities in "place book" journals, including healing words, like "Learn to accept your flaws and learn to accept beauty."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
LGBT History Month celebrates the achievements of 31 lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender Icons. Each day in October, a new LGBT Icon is featured with a video, bio, bibliography, downloadable images and other resources.

LGBT History Is American History
"LGBT History Month sends an important message to our nation's teachers, school boards, community leaders, and youth about the vital importance of recognizing and exploring the role of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people in American history."
George Chauncey
Samuel Knight Professor of American History and Chair of the History Department, Yale University

Background

In 1994, Rodney Wilson, a Missouri high school teacher, believed a month should be dedicated to the celebration and teaching of gay and lesbian history, and gathered other teachers and community leaders. They selected October because public schools are in session and existing traditions, such as Coming Out Day (October 11), occur that month.

Gay and Lesbian History Month was endorsed by GLAAD, the Human Rights Campaign, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, the National Education Association and other national organizations. In 2006 Equality Forum assumed responsibility for providing content, promotion and resources for LGBT History Month.

Celebrate Our Heritage

The LGBT community is the only community worldwide that is not taught its history at home, in public schools or in religious institutions. LGBT History Month role models, builds community and makes the civil rights statement about our e xtraordinary national and international contributions.

About Equality Forum

Equality Forum is a national and international LGBT civil rights organization with an educational focus. Equality Forum coordinates LGBT History Month, produces documentary films, undertakes high-impact initiatives and presents the largest annual national and international LGBT civil rights summit. For more information, visit www.equalityforum.com.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
LGBT History Month celebrates the achievements of 31 lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender Icons. Each day in October, a new LGBT Icon is featured with a video, bio, bibliography, downloadable images and other resources.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Care and Feeding is Slate's parenting advice column. Have a question for Care and Feeding? Dear Care and Feeding, Submit it here or post it in the Slate Parenting Facebook group. Dear Tired,
I need some help gaining perspective on my 15-year-old child's whiplash approach to gender and sexuality. For the last three years, they have been on a journey with regard to their sexuality, declaring and changing identities one every few weeks or months, even when those identities have been both contradictory (how can one be both asexual and polyamorous?) and hypothetical (my kid isn't dating and hasn't dated). They are committed to being anything but cisgender and hetero, and that identity-whatever it turns out to be-appears from their actions and words to be the central part of their sense of self. They spent a lot of time on queer wikis, looking up new possible identities. They avidly "ship" fictional characters into same-sex couples, express anger/disappointment when shows/books have hetero couples, and talk constantly about LGBTQIA issues, representation, etc.

I have been, and want to be, supportive. My kid deserves to be loved and celebrated for who they are, and however their identity settles out is fine with me. But I am also struggling with these rapid changes. In the last two weeks, my kid has changed their name once and pronouns twice, colored their hair, worn exaggeratedly feminine eye makeup, pinned their hair up to look masculine, purchased a bikini and a dress and then asked me to buy them a binder (because they think it would be "fun" to look like a boy sometimes). At this point, it feels like they're trying on identities like costumes, and that makes me very uncomfortable. None of it feels authentic-it seems more like a bid to stand out in a crowd or perhaps to find the limits of my acceptance.

I have worked so hard to make sure my kids know they are loved unconditionally, but if this kid is looking for a boundary, maybe I should set one? I literally squirmed when I wrote that sentence; setting a random limit on acceptance goes against everything I believe. But at the same time, I am so, so tired of hearing about their identity day after day after day and of trying to keep up with the changes. They're a great, smart, interesting kid for a dozen different reasons; their gender/sexuality is just one aspect of their personality. Would it be wrong of me to say, in essence, "I love you, and will never not love you. When you figure out your identity let me know, and in the meantime can we maybe stop talking about it all the time?" Also, as the world opens up and my kid spends more time outside of our home, can I/should I ask them to be more thoughtful in how they present themselves? It seems to me that trans and nonbinary people cannot simply change their identities and expression for "fun," so my kid's behavior feels a little bit like cosplaying in a way that could be hurtful. Or do I just keep keeping my mouth shut, do my best to remember this week's identity, and pray that this phase ends soon?
Dear Care and Feeding,
-Tired and Confused

Back in my day, we hid our evolving sexualities and gender identities from our parents! While that wasn't better, it was definitely less annoying, probably for everyone involved.

OK, but seriously, this kid is trying on identities like costumes, which is a normal part of adolescence, as is, for some people, needing all of these changes to be seen and acknowledged. It's extremely challenging for you as a parent to remain supportive when your kid is constantly contradicting themselves, but it's their prerogative-up to a point. No matter what your pronouns are, it's not OK to be an asshole to your mom. Your kid is looking for a boundary, you're absolutely right-but it's not a boundary on your acceptance, which they seem to have correctly intuited is genuinely boundless. The boundary is on their behavior, and how they are allowed to treat the people who care about them.
Dear H.S.H.,
You can't ask your kid to stop talking about gender and sexuality or table the question of their identity until they have it "figured out," which presumes a kind of endpoint in their journey that might not exist for a while, or ever. But you can set limits on when or how you want to engage in these conversations. It's reasonable and healthy to say, "I don't have the bandwidth for another conversation about this right now. I'm busy with [thing that is important to you]. Can we set a time to pick this back up when I can focus better? You are important to me, and you deserve my full attention." You'll get a lot of pushback at first, probably, but stick to your guns, and follow through on your end of the bargain. It gets better, or at least different.

I was raised Jewish and my partner was raised atheist, but while we celebrate the main Jewish holidays with my family, we also have decided to let our 8-year-old daughter choose if she wants to actually attend Hebrew school and have a Bat Mitzvah, as most of the reform synagogues in our area charge a lot of money for the programs, plus it's a massive time commitment. We've explained what a Bat Mitzvah is and how long it takes to study for one, and until now, she hasn't been interested in it, but last weekend, she attended her cousin's Bat Mitzvah and her attitude has completely changed. She was bored during the ceremony, but she loved the small after-party, which my sister went all out for, and has now been begging us to send her to Hebrew school. She said she likes celebrating Passover and Hanukah with her grandparents, but she really wants to sing the special songs and wear a fancy dress and have a special party like her cousin did.

My partner thinks that since she's only excited about going because of the party and attention that comes with a Bat Mitzvah, in a few years she may decide she actually doesn't want that and we'll be out several thousand dollars. I will admit that I've always hoped that my daughter would have a Bat Mitzvah, but I also remember that at her age, I too was more interested in the big party and presents my siblings got than in sitting through prayers I didn't fully understand. But as I got older, I learned more about the meanings of different prayers and the parts of the ceremony, and was able to fully appreciate it. And at her age, Hebrew school at most reform synagogues is just learning the alphabet and playing games with other kids-it's not like we'd be having her read the Torah for six hours every Saturday. I think that since we promised our daughter that she could choose if and when to start Hebrew school, we should honor that promise, no matter why she wants to join, but I also understand my partner's hesitation, as our daughter has gone through phases of being really into one activity and then quitting after a few months when she finds something new. What do you think we should do here?
* If you missed Sunday's Care and Feeding column, * Discuss this column in the Dear Care and Feeding, Slate Parenting Facebook group! read it here Dear Unsure, .
-Hebrew School Hang-Ups

Look, I don't want to come off as some kind of religious extremist here, but have you considered ... practicing Judaism?
Dear Care and Feeding,
I understand the challenges of raising interfaith kids, and I hear you about the expense and time commitment involved in preparing for a Bat Mitzvah. But in the absence of any Jewish observance or education apart from a twice-annual holiday celebration with the grandparents, how can you expect your 8-year-old to want to have a Bat Mitzvah for any reason besides "it's a fun party with lots of presents?" Of course that's going to be her takeaway-she has no other basis for extrapolating the meaning of that milestone. Also, she's 8. It's not fair to her to expect her to make a decision this big without enough information, but also, it's not fair to her to expect her to make a big decision, period. Your husband is second-guessing her choice, which isn't great, but it also wasn't a good idea to make the choice hers to begin with.

Without being explicit about the fact that you're rolling back the promise you made to let her choose her own Hebrew school adventure, see if you can stall a bit by exploring what having a meaningful regular engagement with Jewish religious or cultural life would mean for you as a family. These traditions resonated with you at some point, and now it's up to you to explore what that might mean for you as an adult. While it might take some time to find the path that feels right to you, you can at least find company in your search. There is a whole generation of people who were raised Jewish and are now actively looking for ways to raise kids who have a connection to some aspect of that faith. It might be the rituals and traditions, the cultural and historic aspects, or the questioning, searching, argumentative way of engaging with philosophical questions. Or maybe you'll find that none of this is actually important to you and that you're content with things as they are-in which case, your daughter should just have a regular 13 th birthday. That's also fine. But expecting her to be the only religious person in your family from ages 8 to 13 is a recipe for lasting confusion and resentment, even if it culminates in a great party.

My partner was raised by a father who yelled, withheld affection, and used shame as a tool of control. His family would describe it as "being hard on the boys," but we both recognize it was toxic, damaging, and not OK. His mom was largely silent about the treatment. He and we have done a lot of work over the past few years to undo the damage, and he's a loving, sensitive father to our 2-year-old.

The issue is that his parents want all of the traditional grandparent relationship with our child (and another on the way), but my partner has never resolved with them, much less discussed, the pain that their parenting caused. So, he feels exhausted and hurt at the end of visits, and talks about how much he doesn't want to spend time with them. Conversation is stilted and his Dad shares abusive parenting anecdotes as if everything was OK. And then he'll say yes to another multiday overnight visit. I know this is my partner's relationship to manage, but I really don't know how to support him as we navigate this new phase of his relationship with his parents. If they were treating my daughter similarly, I'd have no problem putting my foot down, but so far they have been loving and attentive grandparents (phew!). The awkwardness and passive aggressive behavior are exhausting for me too. Is this a wait and see situation? Do I just keep having an open ear and hope it resolves?
Dear Frustrated,
-Unsure of Grandparents

Your husband and his parents are trying to leapfrog over their painful past and fast-forward straight to a happy, easy grandparent-dom, and for obvious reasons, that's not going well. The problems are theirs to solve, but they affect you. Unfortunately, there's nothing you can do except make it clear to your husband that these multiday visits that leave him emotionally spent are hard on both of you, and that he needs to find a way to begin to change that. Maybe he's ready to talk to his parents openly about how their parenting affected him, inaugurating a new chapter in their relationship, or maybe what he needs is space to heal without being reminded of the past. Either way, the current situation is not working.

Especially as you head into the challenge of parenting two young kids, you need to create a solid framework for your own emotional well-being as parents and adults. It sounds like you have supported your husband's growth and had an open ear as he has struggled to process the way he was parented. Going forward, maybe he will also be willing to do more of that work with a support group or a therapist (assuming he doesn't already have one), so that you are not solely responsible for supporting his mental health, in addition to your other caretaking responsibilities. This stuff is hard to navigate as a family, but he's a grown-up and is ultimately the one who needs to make choices about his adult relationship with his parents.

For more of Slate's parenting coverage, listen to Mom and Dad Are Fighting

I am an avid reader of all the Slate advice columns, and generally find myself in agreement with most of the responses. However, I have noticed a recent trend in the answers given to questions regarding COVID vaccination refusal and family/friend relationships. Overwhelmingly, the responses are to end, temporarily or permanently, relationships with people who refuse to be vaccinated. This is, I think, an extreme overreaction, and is most likely not in the best interest of anyone involved.

For some context, I have a doctorate in a medical field and have family members who have and have not been vaccinated, all of whom I see regularly. Myself and my spouse got our vaccines as soon as we were eligible, and we have a young daughter who is still ineligible. Thankfully, children and infants, the only demographic not currently able to be vaccinated, are at very low risk for serious illness. Everyone else can and should get the vaccine, and is therefore safe from serious illness or death. Are there exceptions? Sure. Everything in life has exceptions. We cannot live in a zero-risk society.

Unfortunately, though, your focus on the risks of COVID overlooks an additional serious risk: The pandemic has destroyed or weakened many people's social support systems and led to a massive mental health crisis. I myself have lost many friends due to the prolonged separation and trauma of this ongoing event. Advising people to end or jeopardize their remaining relationships to potentially stave off a small risk of minor illness is frankly bad advice. Now more than ever we need to reaffirm our social support systems and be thankful for those relationships which remain. Although I am left-leaning politically, I find it appalling that vaccines have become politicized by the right and the left, and your columns' ill-given advice to blow up people's support networks over vaccine refusal is exactly that-an unnecessary politicization which is designed to punish those who refuse the vaccine or keep company with refusers. Please recognize that mental health is just as important as physical health and stop sowing divisiveness around this issue.

-Frustrated and Flummoxed

This is tricky territory to navigate, and while I can't speak on behalf of every single one of my advice-columnist colleagues, I'm willing to own up to having navigated this issue imperfectly in the past. I certainly agree with you that mental health and physical health are equally important; in fact, I believe they are one and the same. But where we might diverge, Frustrated, is that I don't think I'm sowing divisiveness when I give people permission to avoid their unvaccinated friends and family members. It's not in the best interest of anyone's mental health to wish this issue away or pretend that it doesn't exist.

You and I both understand that support networks are important, especially when it comes to friends and relatives who help provide child care. Parents aren't meant to go it alone, and the cost of quality care is prohibitive for many U.S. families. In general, and especially when this issue informs a parent's decision about socializing with unvaccinated people, my advice is informed by the principle of harm management. It's incredibly difficult to forgo family help, but it might also be psychologically taxing for the new mother of an infant to leave that child in the care of someone who has made the decision to remain unvaccinated against COVID-19. We now know that COVID-19 poses a very small risk to children, it's true. But would a person who is willing to ignore the risks their choices, writ large, impose on society-whose values are informed by far-right conspiracy theories-be a good caretaker in other ways? Is that person likely to get a flu shot, or a DTaP booster? That all enters the calculus, and while I'm not able to tell anyone what the exact right answer is in a given situation, I want parents to make choices that keep them safer, both physically and psychologically.

1. Dear Care and Feeding: Can I Boycott My Friend's Sexist "Women-Only" Baby Shower?

2. Dear Care and Feeding: I've Tried Not to Comment on How My Grandson Is Being Raised, but I've Had Enough.

3. Ask a Teacher: Does My Son Really Need to Attend a Full-Day Preschool Program?

4. Dear Care and Feeding: A Gang of Neighborhood Kids Is Holding Me Hostage in My Own Home

The exception to this is when friends and family members are not willing to get the vaccine because they come from a community that experiences medical racism. It's on all of us to meet people where they are and open dialogues about the vaccine that are grounded in mutual respect and openness, and I continue to recommend this how-to guide for people who think they have a shot at changing someone's mind.

But when vaccine-avoidant people's minds seem to be firmly made up, I am going to continue to give the advice that it's OK to back away from those relationships. Refusing a proven-safe vaccine isn't a choice that only affects the person who makes it; it has repercussions for medically vulnerable people and for the medical personnel who must care for those who become very sick. When a friend or family member has made a morally indefensible choice, it's not always clear whether our obligation is to support them, cut ties, or to find some middle path. I trust my readers to determine which of those courses is right for them, and I think all of them are valid responses.

-Emily

More Advice From Slate

My 5-year-old son recently had a play date at the house of a kindergarten friend of his. When my wife picked him up, the friend's mother explained that the two boys had gotten dirty playing in the sprinkler, and so she had given him a bath. My jaw dropped when I found out. I quizzed my son and apparently no other adults were present, no cameras were seen, and she did not touch his privates. He had fun and did not seem bothered by the bath. Nevertheless, I am upset that a stranger would strip my child and bathe him without first checking with us. My wife thinks that this can be explained as a cultural difference as the friend's parents are immigrants, and that the mother was trying to be respectful. I want to put the kibosh on the relationship. What would you suggest?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dear Care and Feeding: My Teen Changes Their Queer Identity Every Week and I Can't Take It Anymore

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Care and Feeding is Slate's parenting advice column. Have a question for Care and Feeding? Dear Care and Feeding, Submit it here or post it in the Slate Parenting Facebook group . Dear Tired, I need some help gaining perspective on my 15-year-old child's whiplash approach to gender and sexuality.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It's 7:30 a.m. on a school day. Two parents are racing to get their three young children dressed, fed, packed for the day, into coats and out the door when 6-year-old Hallel runs downstairs, crying.

Ari, Hallel's father, is the first to intercept the distraught child and ask "what's wrong?"

The answer launches a journey these parents never envisioned, described by words they'd not heard and questions they never thought they'd ask. We're only using first names for the family members in this story due to Hallel's age.

The journey starts with a "let's pretend" game. As Hallel explains it, little sister Ya'ara wanted to play "parents." Ya'ara decides that she'll be the mommy, and Hallel will be the daddy. Hallel protests. Ya'ara insists: Hallel is a boy, and therefore must play daddy.

"But that doesn't feel right," Hallel says to Ari, between tears, "cause I'm a boy-girl."

Shira, Hallel's mother, says she copes well in a crisis. In that moment, she packaged the news away for later.

"I was like, 'well, we love you whoever you are, give me a hug,' " Shira remembers telling Hallel.

Resources, Important Facts For Kids And Parents: Understanding Nonbinary Identities

For Ari, "it felt a little bit like getting up to the top of a rollercoaster, like, OK, now it's going to begin. I don't know exactly what's going to happen next, but what I do know for sure is that this is happening."

To clarify, Ari and Shira had known for some time that Hallel was not a traditional boy. If they bought action figures, Hallel preferred female characters. Hallel would watch fairy movies one day and draw dresses, then dress and act more like what they expected from a boy.

"For us that wasn't a problem," Ari says. "There's lots of ways to be a boy and lots of ways to be a girl. But at the back of our mind it was confusing."

At one point, the parents kept a tally. Shira says she was relieved when Hallel seemed more "boy-like" for a while.

" 'Hallel is acting very girl-like today, but Hallel has acted very boy-like in the past week,' " Shira recalls saying, " 'so maybe that's going to stick.' "

When Hallel made the boy-girl announcement, Shira says the family finally had an explanation that made sense. But she wondered, "Is that an option?"

Both parents had read about people who are transgender but didn't know anyone who'd made the transition from male to female or female to male. Shira and Ari were not familiar with the term nonbinary, which refers to people who don't see themselves as strictly male or female or people who move between genders. Hallel's self-described status as a boy-girl seemed like it might resolve years of confusion.

"It felt really right," says Ari. And now, three years later, "it still feels really right."

But Hallel's identity triggers new worries. They surface one night while Shira and Hallel cuddle at bedtime.

"How did you feel when you first realized that I was a boy-girl?" asks Hallel, now age 9.

Shira pauses, then answers slowly.

"I was kind of scared because I just wanted you to have a normal life. I didn't want things to be super hard for you," she tells Hallel. "Abba [a Hebrew name for daddy] and I knew for a very long time before you said anything that something was a little bit different about your gender. So we were not going to force you to fit in a certain box. But I think when we first found out, we were nervous because we want things to be easy for you."

"... We were not going to force you to fit in a certain box. But I think when we first found out, we were nervous because we want things to be easy for you."
Shira

Shira has a version of that question for Hallel.

"Can you tell me what it feels like to be a boy-girl?" she asks.

"That's hard," Hallel says. "I just feel like myself, and that's it. I don't feel that different from anybody else."

"So, what about you is a boy?" Shira asks.

Hallel's voice rises slightly: "There's nothing specific for boys or girls. I just feel like a girl, as well as a boy."

Shira tries again, a few days later, with the same questions. This time Hallel ends the conversation quickly.

"Too complicated," Hallel says.

That might just summarize the family's life as they begin to tell friends and acquaintances that Hallel identifies as a boy-girl.

In May of 2018, a few months after Hallel's gender revelation, Shira shares the news on Facebook:

Here are some things I would like to throw into the Facebook stratosphere instead of telling anyone directly. ...My child who was born a boy tells me he is a boy/girl. This is okay most of the time because we are mostly happy and mostly secure and have wonderful supportive friends and family who don't see gender as a barrier. ... Sometimes I go places where people don't know our family and I get questions which come from a good place but they are hard to answer: '... What are you going to do when he hits puberty? Shouldn't you be telling him who he is instead of allowing him to figure it out?' ... The best advice we have gotten is to follow our child, and that is what we are doing. ... Not in my wildest dreams did I think I'd be struggling with these issues. ... Control over our children is an illusion and I'm glad I learned this lesson early. Still I am so happy with the family we are.

The illusion, Shira says, started when she and Ari saw an ultrasound image and began imagining life with a son and who the child might grow up to be.

"Clearly, it was nowhere near what I envisioned," says Shira, "not the least of which is also Hallel being on the autism spectrum, which has created another wave of difference in our family."

Hallel is doing well now but understanding their autism diagnosis and working to help Hallel cope with sensory overload was the parents' main focus during Hallel's early years. At some point, Ari and Shira learned about the higher incidence of autism among people who are transgender and nonbinary. They struggle to understand how the two overlap in their child.

"Control over our children is an illusion and I'm glad I learned this lesson early. Still I am so happy with the family we are."
Shira

"It's very confounding," Shira says. "And hard to find a community where Hallel feels at home."

The parents take Hallel to special needs camps and spend a lot of time explaining nonbinary. They go to nonbinary meet-ups and routinely have to leave because the noise and commotion is too much for Hallel.

Shira's request is for compassion.

"I literally grew somebody who I thought was a boy in my body. I gave birth after three days of labor ... so if you think you're having trouble with my child's gender, imagine what it's like to have concerns day in and out about whether this child is going to be OK when they grow up," Shira says. "When people raise objections it really, really hurts and it makes me mad."

But these parents know that people with the best of intentions will still make mistakes about Hallel's gender and even more often, Hallel's pronouns.

Hallel asked Shira and Ari to stop using "he" and start calling Hallel "they" about a month after the boy-girl declaration.

Little sister Ya'ara has had a hard time using they, as have Hallel's grandparents, some friends and teachers at Hallel's school.

Ari, who studies linguistics, says people frequently struggle to change the pronouns they use because those words are deeply embedded in our brains; we repeat them so much more often than nouns or verbs, for example.

"We say 'he' or 'she' or 'they' or "it" in almost every single sentence," Ari tells Hallel one morning, "so we have a lot of practice using a pronoun in one way, kind of like walking. Imagine if you had to walk in a new way, it would probably take some time, right?"

"Like walking backwards?" Hallel asks.

"That's right," says Ari.

Ari tries to be patient with himself and others who coded Hallel as a boy from birth and subconsciously default to that mental path now when speaking about Hallel.

"However much we might want to, even when we have the intention to do something, we have the underlying linguistic machinery that is actually making the language happen," Ari says.

Hallel has a suggestion for grandparents and others: "Refer to me as a group of people."

"Do you remember what grandma said to you, the way that she helps to remind herself?" Shira asks Hallel. "She thinks of God. She feels like God is very universal and not a he or she, but more a they. And so she thinks of God when she refers to you."

Hallel's parents have heard questions about using "they" to refer to a single person. But Ari says there are many instances of language changing to fit social customs, take the royal "we" or the current common use of "you" as a singular pronoun, even though we say "you are."

With excitement, Shira shows Hallel a news story about Merriam-Webster naming "they" the dictionary company's word of the year.

"Wow, wow," Hallel says in between mouthfuls of waffles.

"Why wow?" Shira wants to know.

"It's just really new that something like that's happening," Hallel says.

New still, yes, but familiar to many members of Generation Z and millennials, who say they know someone who uses gender-neutral pronouns.

"Wow," Hallel says again. "Maybe, like, next year, 'they' will be in the dictionary."

"I think it is in the dictionary already," Shira tells them.

"Already?" says a wide-eyed Hallel, their voice trailing off.

Hallel likes colorful clothes, especially those with pictures of animals.

Ari estimates Hallel wears dresses about a third of the time, clothes that might be seen as boyish about a third of the time and clothes that don't read as either gender for the remainder. Hallel's curly blonde hair flows to about mid-neck.

"When people first see me they think I'm a girl," Hallel says.

Sometimes Hallel or one of their parents will correct people who make the wrong assumption, but not all the time. Explaining boy-girl, nonbinary or "they" to everyone who calls Hallel "she" in the grocery store check-out line or on the street or at a public event would be exhausting.

"I don't blame them. It's new," Hallel says. "The first time, I'll let it slide."

Dropping Hallel at school in a dress was hard for Ari, initially.

"There was an internal squeamishness," Ari says. "I realized it's just because it was different and something I wasn't used to."

Watching Hallel has changed that.

"They have taken such pride in who they are and in telling people," Ari says. "And Hallel's friends have completely embraced Hallel. I'm very grateful to their families for not pulling them back because this is something new or different."

Hallel estimates they've been told "about 50 times," mostly by kids at school, that they're in the wrong bathroom.

They have a system for deciding which bathroom to use.

"On Mondays, Thursdays and Fridays, I go into the boys' or men's bathroom. On Tuesday, Wednesday and Saturday, I go into the women's bathroom. And on Sunday, I just go to whatever bathroom's to my right," Hallel says.

"On Mondays, Thursdays and Fridays, I go into the boys' or men's bathroom. On Tuesday, Wednesday and Saturday, I go into the women's bathroom. And on Sunday, I just go to whatever bathroom's to my right."
Hallel

Sometimes Hallel's parents intervene. Hallel can use the bathroom of their choice in Massachusetts. But laws vary from state to state.

"Remember when we were in the airport in Hawaii, and I said, 'Hallel, you're wearing a dress. I don't think you should be going into the men's room even though there's no line.' Remember that?" Shira asks.

"Well, I really had to go," Hallel says.

"I know," says Shira, "but I was just nervous that you would not be protected in the bathroom."

"But I thought all those questions became laws," says Hallel. The family campaigned for the 2018 ballot Question 3 in Massachusetts, which passed, confirming Hallel's right to use a bathroom aligned with their gender identity.

"We know that you're protected in Massachusetts, but we have to do our research to understand what the protection is in other states," Shira explains.

"Well, everyone in Hawaii is nice," Hallel says.

Hawaii is among the states with laws that specifically protect transgender people in public accommodations.

In addition to legal concerns, there remain big questions for Hallel and their parents.

In a few years, Hallel will begin preparing for a coming-of-age ceremony in the Jewish faith, using Hebrew, a language that doesn't have a gender-neutral pronoun. Hallel plans what they are calling a "bart mitzvah," combining a boy's bar mitzvah and a girl's bat mitzvah.

"But what is that going to look like when the whole ritual is about affirming yourself as a Jewish male or a Jewish female?" Shira asks.

Hallel will be defining a new place for themself within Judaism as they approach puberty, a time when testosterone will deepen Hallel's voice and make irreversible changes in the bone structure of Hallel's face and other areas of the body.

"We've started to talk with Hallel a little bit," Ari says. "Hallel very much understands that there are male bodies and female bodies, and on the basis of this conversation Hallel says they feel comfortable with having a male body. So that's where we are right now."

Ari and Shira are getting some help for Hallel through a program at Jewish Big Brothers Big Sisters for LGBTQ+ youth. Within the family, by the way, Hallel is a brister to two younger sisters, merging "brother" and "sister."

Shira looks forward to guidance from someone who can help her understand life as a nonbinary teenager and adult.

"I am very worried about what Hallel's future will look like," she says. "My kid affirmed who they are, and ... I decided to accept them. But what's that going to look like when Hallel is 11, 12, 13, in adolescence? I hope it's gonna be wonderful. I don't know, though."

Ari says he has a lot of confidence that Hallel will be OK, based, in part, on the culture he sees among the college students he teaches.

"My students are very comfortable with the idea that people don't have just male and female genders, and I think that says a lot for our future," Ari says. "I'm personally very hopeful that Hallel will live in a world where they can be who they want to be."

Shira has heard people ask: "Why are all these kids now being trans? Or why are all these kids now being nonbinary?"

"With Hallel, this is who they envisioned themselves to be, and we just didn't put hurdles in front of them," she says. "That may be the case for more kids who are trans and nonbinary; their parents are just listening to them."

Hallel has lots of projects underway with Legos, a podcast, baking and a comic book series they sometimes imagine will lead to fame and fortune. But they don't spend much time thinking about the future.

"I'll know it when I live it," Hallel says. "I don't really want to think about that stuff because now is now."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'I Just Feel Like Myself': A Nonbinary Child And Their Family Explore Identity

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's 7:30 a.m. on a school day. Two parents are racing to get their three young children dressed, fed, packed for the day, into coats and out the door when 6-year-old Hallel runs downstairs, crying. Ari, Hallel's father, is the first to intercept the distraught child and ask "what's wrong?"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
America’s ‘shame’: Foster kids in the classroom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The KC HALO Housing program provides a home and the foundation of a family to pregnant, parenting, and non-parenting girls ages 16-21, and their children, who are in homeless or high-risk situations. If you or someone you know needs housing at our Jefferson City Home location, please apply now by completing our Housing Inquiry Form.

The number of KC homeless children has almost doubled in the past 10 years. These children are knocking on our doors every night. Watch below to see how our Capital Campaign will provide a large scale home for children in need in our backyard. Email Nicole Gerken (nicolegerken@haloworldwide.org) to help us serve the children of Kansas City.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The KC HALO Housing program provides a home and the foundation of a family to pregnant, parenting, and non-parenting girls ages 16-21, and their children, who are in homeless or high-risk situations. If you or someone you know needs housing at our Jefferson City Home location, please apply now by completing our Housing Inquiry Form.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A local group is raising awareness about teenagers and young adults experiencing homelessness in the Kansas City metro area.The group's advisory board is young, made up of teenagers and young adults who have experienced homelessness. It's that experience that equips them to help others."The percentage of youth that are actually homeless is astounding especially people who think because you are sleeping on a couch doesn't mean you aren't homeless. You can sleep on a couch and be homeless, you can hop houses and still be homeless, that's not a stable house," said Jasmin Anderson, 20. During the 2018-19 school year, the Kansas City, Missouri public school district reported 1,261 students experienced homelessness; 266 (21.1%) of those students were unaccompanied, according to the most recent data available from the Department of Education.Anderson said she slipped into homelessness because of issues at home."For me, it was a very stigmatized experience."She found help at ReStart which connected her with a case manager."They just did everything that they could to support me and get me into college and on the road to finding my path to purpose in life."Now a member of Youth 4 Change, she is advocating for more programs to help young people in need of support. Anderson says many are without documents such as birth certificates and driver's licenses and need help navigating services."I just think if there is more money that can be put into programs and schooling and actually getting us into classes that teach us skills. It's more than that, it's teaching us how to file a loan, how to go to college, do things that we've never known. That's the only way to break that cycle of homelessness."Saturday the group hosted a scavenger hunt downtown to raise awareness about the issue and funds for their initiative."Just the fact that they came here today to be a part of something is just, it makes my heart so happy to see because it's a little bit of hope in the darkness."The event collected more than $800. To donate visit Youth 4 Change's fundraising site.Transitional housing for youth in the Kansas City Metro:ReStart - reStart offers a Transitional Living Program (TLP) for youth ages 16 to 21 who have no safe home to return to. This longer-term program provides up to 18 months of transitional housing, life skills, financial education, case management, and counseling to prepare youth to live independently upon graduating from the program.Hillcrest - Hillcrest offers a rapid re-housing program through its offices in Clay and Clinton counties in Missouri. This program provides case management, housing location assistance, and financial assistance to help literally homeless youth, singles, couples, and families with children obtain rental housing of their choosing within Kansas City's Northland. A rapid re-housing program for those age 24 and younger also exists for teens, young adults, and parenting youth with children.Pride Haven - Pride Haven is SAVE, Inc.'s overnight shelter for transition-aged youth, aged 18-24, facing homelessness. They offer a safe and accepting space with a welcoming and affirming environment for all youth.Avenue of Life Youth House - Avenue Youth House is dedicated to unaccompanied homeless youth in Kansas City, Kansas. The house has 18 bedrooms and offers transformational, wrap-around support for youth. They will provide a long-term home for youth through high school graduation and on to career and higher education.

A local group is raising awareness about teenagers and young adults experiencing homelessness in the Kansas City metro area.

The group's advisory board is young, made up of teenagers and young adults who have experienced homelessness. It's that experience that equips them to help others.

"The percentage of youth that are actually homeless is astounding especially people who think because you are sleeping on a couch doesn't mean you aren't homeless. You can sleep on a couch and be homeless, you can hop houses and still be homeless, that's not a stable house," said Jasmin Anderson, 20.

During the 2018-19 school year, the Kansas City, Missouri public school district reported 1,261 students experienced homelessness; 266 (21.1%) of those students were unaccompanied, according to the most recent data available from the Department of Education.

Anderson said she slipped into homelessness because of issues at home.

"For me, it was a very stigmatized experience."

She found help at ReStart which connected her with a case manager.

"They just did everything that they could to support me and get me into college and on the road to finding my path to purpose in life."

Now a member of Youth 4 Change, she is advocating for more programs to help young people in need of support. Anderson says many are without documents such as birth certificates and driver's licenses and need help navigating services.

"I just think if there is more money that can be put into programs and schooling and actually getting us into classes that teach us skills. It's more than that, it's teaching us how to file a loan, how to go to college, do things that we've never known. That's the only way to break that cycle of homelessness."

Saturday the group hosted a scavenger hunt downtown to raise awareness about the issue and funds for their initiative.

"Just the fact that they came here today to be a part of something is just, it makes my heart so happy to see because it's a little bit of hope in the darkness."

The event collected more than $800. To donate visit Youth 4 Change's fundraising site.

Transitional housing for youth in the Kansas City Metro:

ReStart - reStart offers a Transitional Living Program (TLP) for youth ages 16 to 21 who have no safe home to return to. This longer-term program provides up to 18 months of transitional housing, life skills, financial education, case management, and counseling to prepare youth to live independently upon graduating from the program.

Hillcrest - Hillcrest offers a rapid re-housing program through its offices in Clay and Clinton counties in Missouri. This program provides case management, housing location assistance, and financial assistance to help literally homeless youth, singles, couples, and families with children obtain rental housing of their choosing within Kansas City's Northland. A rapid re-housing program for those age 24 and younger also exists for teens, young adults, and parenting youth with children.

Pride Haven - Pride Haven is SAVE, Inc.'s overnight shelter for transition-aged youth, aged 18-24, facing homelessness. They offer a safe and accepting space with a welcoming and affirming environment for all youth.

Avenue of Life Youth House - Avenue Youth House is dedicated to unaccompanied homeless youth in Kansas City, Kansas. The house has 18 bedrooms and offers transformational, wrap-around support for youth. They will provide a long-term home for youth through high school graduation and on to career and higher education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Kansas City non-profit raising awareness about youth homelessness

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A local group is raising awareness about teenagers and young adults experiencing homelessness in the Kansas City metro area.The group's advisory board is young, made up of teenagers and young adults who have experienced homelessness.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The topics can be tough to talk about-challenges at school, poverty, drugs, and violence-but getting teenagers to open up is critical says Kyle Hollins, CEO of Lyrik's Institute and creator of the Power Moves program."We chose 13 to 19-year-olds because they can articulate trauma. If we can understand what they are going through, we can kind of give them tools to get through it."Hollins said he developed the idea for the program while he was incarcerated in federal prison. He spent much of his time writing and thinking about the skills and mindset needed to navigate different situations in life, tools that can interrupt the cycle of poverty and violence. He said it's important to recognize that young people are dealing with trauma from their environments and experiences."We have to teach them this is not who you are, this is what makes you great. You've been through things, you survived things, and this is how you carry that into the next level."Saturday, his organization hosted the second event in its Power Moves tour at Linwood YMCA in Kansas City. In a session with KC Mothers in Charge, they discussed the impact of violence in their communities."The hardest question is at the end of that session is who has been impacted by violence and you see these little kids, these little hands sticking up in the air and it's like who is telling them how to deal with that if not they are just going to repeat the cycle."As Kansas City focuses on violence prevention efforts, Hollins says solutions must start with listening. "We're looking for solutions when sometimes we just need to be empathetic. Some people just need to be heard. They live real lives and they struggle and they hurt and they feel pain like anyone else but when our pain looks like criminality these big solutions and this tough-on-crime policy comes out and it spurs the cycle."Hollins says his program focuses on the way young people think and how that impacts behavior."If you tell a kid what to do they are going to buck because it's just the system but if you plant a seed and let it manifest inside of them it becomes their idea, they own it, they believe it."

The topics can be tough to talk about-challenges at school, poverty, drugs, and violence-but getting teenagers to open up is critical says Kyle Hollins, CEO of Lyrik's Institute and creator of the Power Moves program.

"We chose 13 to 19-year-olds because they can articulate trauma. If we can understand what they are going through, we can kind of give them tools to get through it."

Hollins said he developed the idea for the program while he was incarcerated in federal prison. He spent much of his time writing and thinking about the skills and mindset needed to navigate different situations in life, tools that can interrupt the cycle of poverty and violence. He said it's important to recognize that young people are dealing with trauma from their environments and experiences.

"We have to teach them this is not who you are, this is what makes you great. You've been through things, you survived things, and this is how you carry that into the next level."

Saturday, his organization hosted the second event in its Power Moves tour at Linwood YMCA in Kansas City. In a session with KC Mothers in Charge, they discussed the impact of violence in their communities.

"The hardest question is at the end of that session is who has been impacted by violence and you see these little kids, these little hands sticking up in the air and it's like who is telling them how to deal with that if not they are just going to repeat the cycle."

As Kansas City focuses on violence prevention efforts, Hollins says solutions must start with listening.

"We're looking for solutions when sometimes we just need to be empathetic. Some people just need to be heard. They live real lives and they struggle and they hurt and they feel pain like anyone else but when our pain looks like criminality these big solutions and this tough-on-crime policy comes out and it spurs the cycle."

Hollins says his program focuses on the way young people think and how that impacts behavior.

"If you tell a kid what to do they are going to buck because it's just the system but if you plant a seed and let it manifest inside of them it becomes their idea, they own it, they believe it."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
KC non-profit helping teens break the cycle of poverty and violence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The topics can be tough to talk about-challenges at school, poverty, drugs, and violence-but getting teenagers to open up is critical says Kyle Hollins, CEO of Lyrik's Institute and creator of the Power Moves program."We chose 13 to 19-year-olds because they can articulate trauma.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Even though July's almost over, there's still time to add some books to your summer reading list.

Reading, whether for pleasure or education, can help us make sense of the world around us. Books can provide people with a better understanding of the experiences of marginalized groups and develop empathy instead of discrimination.

Women and men around the world continue to lack equal opportunities to access education, health care, and well-being. Women's issues still aren't made a priority in many countries worldwide, and the need to accelerate progress toward achieving gender equality is becoming more pressing amid the COVID-19 pandemic. At this rate, it will take 135 years to close the gender gap.

Global Citizen asked activists from around the world who are fighting against gender inequality, period poverty, gender-based violence, and more which books they recommend to help Global Citizens understand why we must continue to advocate for gender equality. They suggested a range of texts that touch on everything from sexual and reproductive health issues to equality and empowerment.
Recommended by Mariya Taher, co-founder of the anti-female genital mutilation (FGM) organization Sahiyo, and Trisha Shetty, founder of gender equality NGO SheSays India
Taher said:" The Feminine Mystique isn't the first book I ever read on gender equality, and I'll admit that I didn't even read it until sometime in the last five to 10 years. I read it because as a feminist and as an advocate in the gender-based violence field, I knew it was considered a revolutionary book that heralded in the second wave of feminism in the US after publication in 1963.

"I was surprised that as I was reading it decades later, I couldn't help but identify between the unhappiness of women in the 1950s and 1960s and their struggles around societal assumptions about what could be the only paths to fulfilling women's happiness (housework, marriage, children), and that of religious culture I had grown up in - Dawoodi Bohra, a Shia Islamic sect that for all intents and purposes was going back to encouraging these paths as the only paths for happiness for women.
Recommended by Nadya Okamoto, founder of period care company August
I couldn't also help but relate to the idea that many of these ideas persisted because women weren't talking to each other about their unhappiness out of fear of being discredited or shamed. Something that I struggled with growing up as I came to question the many ideas of what constituted a good Dawoodi Bohra woman and recognized I could not meet them. This book was written decades ago, but the ideas that surfaced resonated with me strongly as the challenges mentioned are challenges I know many women from a variety of communities and backgrounds still struggle with today."

"It's a classic," Shetty added.

"I read The Birth of the Pill: How Four Crusaders Reinvented Sex and Launched a Revolution several years ago and its riveting message still resonates with me. This book perfectly embraces the intersection of scientific progress and social change. It provided so much insight into the history of the women's movement and gender equality - and how different aspects within advocacy, feminism, and intersectionality have evolved.

"Reading this book has really helped me understand how imperative it is to understand history and science when working with women's health. So much of the period movement is linked with the movement for sexual freedom and reproductive rights - this book inspired me to keep pursuing innovation and product and science in the fight for period access. It's also empowered me to be a badass and be OK with breaking rules in my decision-making since so many of these activists who made history had to be bold and take big risks to fight for their cause."

Recommended by Finn Mackay, author of the forthcoming book Female Masculinities and the Gender Wars: The Politics of Sex

"In terms of the book that I think is full of answers, and which teaches something new on every reading, I have to pick Sexual Politics by the late, great, Kate Millett. It is bold and radical, as befits a womanifesto from a famous Radical Feminist.
Recommended by Diana Sinclair, co-founder of HerStoryDao, an arts foundation for Black women and non-binary Femmes
"Millett provides a fiery and unapologetic study of the workings of patriarchy, what it is, how it operates, and, therefore, importantly, how it can be challenged, changed, and one day, ended. Now, as at every other time, there are so many myths about Radical Feminism, and thus it is as important as ever to actually go back to these texts and see for ourselves just what inspiring wisdom can be found in the words of those who blazed the trail for all of us."

Recommended by Anne-Marie Wilson, founder and executive director of the anti-FGM organization 28 Too Many and author of Overcoming: My Fight Against FGM
Recommended by Shomy Hasan Chowdhury Interested in more? You can join the Global Citizen Live campaign to defeat poverty and defend the planet by taking action here, and become part of a movement powered by citizens around the world who are taking action together with governments, corporations, and philanthropists to make change. The Book of V. by Anna Solomon, which explores how women have fought patriarchy throughout history, is the July pick for the Global Citizen Book Club. Learn how to join our Book Club ! , co-founder of global, youth-led organization Awareness 360
"The author that initially inspired me to help end FGM and work in women's rights was Alice Walker through her books The Colour Purple and Possessing the Secret of Joy.

"These books show the impact of FGM through the life of Tashi, who left Africa for the US yet took "her wound with her." Similar to Tashi's experience, I met Fatima in West Darfur, Sudan, in 2015 after she had [been subjected to] FGM and had been raped, both by age 10. After helping give her a safe delivery and passage to a distant relative, seeing her with her baby left a shard of glass in my heart, like a wound that has never left."

"The book Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe gave me a fuller understanding of how gender inequality, and the patriarchy, are destructive to both the people who are oppressed by it, and those who supposedly benefit from it. No one wins under the patriarchy. In Things Fall Apart, the main character deals with an obsession over masculinity, what we often call "toxic masculinity" now.

"This book is set in the Umofia clan, during pre-colonial Nigeria, and it shows just how much misogyny is built into their society. In early life, the main character and his father were often called "Agbala" as an insult, meaning woman or lesser-than-a man. It's noticeable how these roles also affect the women in the tribe. This is a clear example that not only do women and gender-nonconforming people suffer because of the patriarchy, but so do men. It's an important realization to come to because we need to rid ourselves of the oppressive systems that hold us all down."

"This informative book helped me understand the impact the lack of big data has on women and how it fuels gender inequality. The arguments were very well presented by the author with relatable examples and research pointers. Some of the cases [Criado Perez] made regarding the prevalent gender data gap were eye-opening. The passion and rage of the author were evident throughout this book, and it definitely intrigues a thirst for finding out more about the complex issue of gender inequality."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The 7 Best Books to Learn About Gender Equality, Recommended by Activists

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Even though July's almost over, there's still time to add some books to your summer reading list. Reading, whether for pleasure or education, can help us make sense of the world around us. Books can provide people with a better understanding of the experiences of marginalized groups and develop empathy instead of discrimination.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Add to your saved stories Save
When many LGBTQ people look back on their childhood, we remember a mixture of confusingly feeling different; being harassed for our sexual identities; and realizing how important our parents, teachers and other authority figures were in either helping us through those years - or making our lives worse.

Experts say research shows that how parents respond can be fundamental to their children's mental health and well-being, now and in the future. "Family matters most," says Joe Kort, a clinical psychotherapist and author of " LGBTQ Clients in Therapy." "If you're a high rejecting family, you're going to put that child in harm's way. Suicidality will increase the more rejecting the family is."

Numerous studies have documented that LGBTQ youth report significantly higher rates of having seriously considered, made a plan or attempted suicide, compared with young people who are heterosexual and cisgender, meaning their gender identity matches the sex on their birth certificate, according to the Trevor Project, an organization dedicated to suicide prevention efforts for LGBTQ and questioning youth.

Understanding the acronym "LGBTQ"

While demographers don't have fully accurate statistics when it comes to LGBTQ youth, a 2015 Pew research study reported that 2 percent of teens ages 13 to 17 identified as gay, lesbian or bisexual, and 3 percent said they were unsure of their sexual orientation. A separate question found 3 percent identifying as transgender. Whatever the exact percentages, we're talking about many, many young people who are at risk.

Thane Holiday, 17, a rising senior in high school in North Carolina, used to be among them. He identifies as "queer," an umbrella term that conflates different kinds of sexual and gender identities, and as "a trans guy," he says, meaning transgender, someone whose sense of personal identity and gender does not correspond with their birth sex. At the start of middle school, he said, "it was just absolute hell. I was just bullied relentlessly" for being open about his identity, "and my mental health took a plunge to the point where I was pretty suicidal in seventh grade."

Fortunately, he says, he has "very accepting and open parents." When he first came out to them in middle school at age 11, he says, "my parents were like, 'We accept you.' " Their response was key, he says, giving him emotional security and the knowledge he wouldn't be rejected, along with making home a safe place.

Kort, who practices in Royal Oak, Mich., says you don't need to understand someone to accept them - or love them. Expressing your love is key, he says: "Start by saying, 'I love you no matter what and I'll be here with you as you work this out and think this through.' " Or: "I'm not sure I completely agree or am open to this, but I'm willing to listen to you."

Caitlin Ryan, director of the Family Acceptance Project at San Francisco State University, a research education and policy group that helps ethnically, racially and religiously diverse families support their LGBTQ children, is a proponent of the importance of family acceptance to the well-being of their children.

Her research, done over two decades, also delineates how "rejecting behaviors" will harm young people. Those behaviors (often from parents but also from teachers, religious leaders and other adults) include preventing young people from having LGBTQ friends, telling them God will punish them because of their identity, and not standing up for them when others mistreat or denigrate them.

Ryan says her research has made clear how important it is to help families of LGBTQ kids change their harmful behaviors, regardless of their religious or other belief systems.

"This will help reduce their child's risk," of depression, anxiety and suicide, Ryan argues, which is paramount to their well-being.

What parent wouldn't want to make their children's lives easier? The answer might surprise you. Ryan recalled a 17-year-old teen, Mateo, who loved dolls and at age 11 learned how to use his mother's sewing machine to design dresses and evening wear. His father hated what he saw as his son's "femininity," calling him a "faggot," even refusing to let him attend a family reunion with relatives from Mexico. Ryan says "their research has found that ridiculing an LGBTQ youth has the same impact as physically beating them and these were among the most risk-inducing, family-rejecting behaviors for suicide for LGBTQ youth."

Of course, parents aren't always aware of their child's sexual or gender identities, especially when they are young and their identities are in many ways just emerging. This is why Kort says family members should consider that any child might be LGBTQ.

Without knowing a child's ultimate identity, parents can be sending inadvertently damaging messages from a very young age, Kort says. As an example, he told me about one teen in his practice whose father didn't know that he was gay, yet the young man painfully remembered the slur his dad had once used offhandedly with him. ("All the faggots go to dance at that gay bar.") Another example cited by Kort was of a mother who found her teen daughter's lesbian sexual imagery and shouted at her: "You're not a lesbian, are you?" It's those kinds of messages that are harmful and rejecting to closeted LGBTQ young people, or to kids still figuring things out.

Parents can create healthier environments by being matter-of-fact about - if not openly accepting of and embracing - LGBTQ politicians, athletes and TV characters. When I was a teen and still closeted, my parents often invited an openly gay couple to our family dinners along with heterosexual friends. The implicit message to me: "This is okay." For me, that translated to, "I'm okay."

For parents who think their child's identity is "a phase," Kort says that may be so, but the best approach is to accept what they say at the moment. "Going with the phase isn't going to cement an identity," he says.

For instance Thane Holiday first told his parents he was "pansexual," or open to any gender or sex, when he was 11, later amending that to queer, and finally saying he identified as trans at 14. This is not unusual, Ryan says. "In our research, many youth identified as LGB first and then identified as transgender as they began to learn about other identity options."

Lee Airton, the author of "Gender: Your Guide: A Gender-Friendly Primer On What to Know, What to Say, and What to Do in the New Gender Culture," often explains to parents that it's normal and healthy for children to wonder about and play with gender: "It's very important to let your child know with your words and demeanor that you are grateful for their trust."

The New York mother of an 17-year-old who identifies now as non-binary, meaning neither male or female, says the best advice she ever got was from a therapist she consulted when her child was 7 and refused to wear a dress for her first Communion.

"The therapist told me when it comes to sexual orientation and gender identity, parents don't affect the outcome at all, they just affect how their children feel about themselves," the mother, who asked to remain anonymous to protect her child's identity, says. "When it came to haircuts, clothing, whatever, we tried to be as supportive as we could. It can be difficult not to push or pull, just to be there, but we have a happy teen as a result."

Thane's father, Mark Bell, 54, was raised in a family he describes as having a traditional "Southern Baptist mentality" that he and his wife, Virginia, do not share. He told me that when Thane first came out to him six years ago "it was no big deal for us, but we knew it was going to be challenging for Thane because not everyone was going to be as supportive and accepting."

The Bells have done their best to ease Thane's path - for example, by letting relatives know his identity (transgender) and pronouns (he/him/his) ahead of family gatherings. Bell admits, however, "we are more successful with some family members than others."

As for Thane, he has some advice for other LGBTQ kids: "You've just got to have patience with [your parents] because they're trying, trying so hard. Especially since most of them grew up not seeing LGBT people or with a negative viewpoint of LGBT kids."

Still, Thane's own patience goes only so far. "With kids who have parents who are just not supportive and can be pretty cold . . . you shouldn't have to forgive them over and over again. They're choosing not to [accept you]."

Indeed, many kids today remain frightened about coming out.

"There are a million reasons they give why they don't feel safe," Joe Kort says. Parents can change that.

Among thousands of LGBTQ teens, a survey finds anxiety and fears about safety

As Pride celebrations move online during the pandemic, who will hug the queer kids?

Families of gay kids were once seen as the enemy by support groups. That's changing.

Family Acceptance Project: An organization that helps all families support their LGBTQ children. (familyproject.sfsu.edu)

The Trevor Project: An organization dedicated to suicide prevention efforts for LGBTQ and questioning youth. (thetrevorproject.org)

PFLAG: The largest organization for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ+) people, their parents and families, and allies. ( pflag.org)

Scarleteen: Sex education for teens and emerging adults. (scarleteen.com)

It Gets Better: A nonprofit with a mission to empower and connect LGBTQ youth around the globe. ( itgetsbetter.org)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Perspective | Advice to parents on raising a happy and healthy LGBTQ child

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Research shows how parents respond are fundamental to their kids' mental health and well-being, experts say.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Finland's schools outperform most others across the developed world | 7.30

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Kids Explain Why Women Are Paid Less Than Men

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What's the big deal with gender-neutral pronouns? Some readers and our columnist disagreed.

By Rachel L. Harris and Lisa Tarchak

Ms. Harris and Ms. Tarchak are senior editorial assistants at The Times.

Image

Credit Credit Francis Ben

"If we lived in a just, rational, inclusive universe - one in which we were not all so irredeemably obsessed by the particulars of the parts dangling between our fellow humans' legs ... there would be no requirement for you to have to assume my gender just to refer to me in the common tongue," writes Farhad Manjoo in a recent column, " Call Me 'They.' " They make the case for adopting gender-neutral pronouns for reasons both cultural and linguistic, but ultimately in the name of inclusivity.

Some readers - who contributed to the more than 2,000 comments on the column - objected. Grammarians called for a return to order, feminists refused to relinquish the potential power of "she" and others felt that it just wasn't worth the trouble.

[Watch: Farhad Manjoo discussed these and other comments on Twitter.]

Farhad responded to several of these readers in the comments. Selections from those exchanges are below. They have been edited for length and clarity.

I am cisgender and, yes, when someone is telling me about visiting a friend and then uses "they" to refer to that person it can take me half a beat to remind myself that I'm hearing about an individual, not a group. But that's nothing when dealing with a person of unclear gender and I feel I have no reason to intrude upon them by asking their preferred pronouns.

I recently attended a seminar at which people's introductions of themselves were to include their preferred pronouns, and I wanted to answer "they" as a way of saying "my gender really isn't your business" and as a step in the direction Manjoo recommends. I lost my nerve. - Leslie, New Haven

Farhad Manjoo: Leslie, I do t hink it's difficult to broach the subject in person, and as a person with some level of social anxiety, I often chicken out too. But I do think stepping up in these situations is good for everyone.

Phred, Maryland: Leslie, I'm one of the grammarians Farhad referenced in the column. I'm trying to use "they" as a singular pronoun, but it's awkward and grammatically icky. I asked a colleague how long it took him to get used to it. He said about a year. It's probably going to take me longer. But languages change, society changes, and we have to change with it. If I can get used to "his husband" and "her wife," I can get used to "they."

The problem with changing the meaning of "they" is that millions of people in this country have been using a different meaning for decades. It's as if a New York Times columnist suddenly declared that the word "eight" is the number of legs a dog has. You can ask for that change if you want, but you'll confuse those of us who were taught to use the word "four" in that situation. You'd be better off just using a new word. - Upstate Albert, Rochester, N.Y.

Farhad Manjoo: Albert, I'd be happy with a new word - a third-person pronoun that is universally recognized as singular and gender neutral. I'd welcome that; it might work much better than "they." But I think achieving consensus on what the word should be, and then pushing for widespread adoption, would be difficult or impossible. I prefer singular "they" because it's already widely used and has been used for centuries. This is not a case of a Times columnist suddenly introducing a new word. This is a columnist arguing that we should go with the word being widely used already. I'm not staring the party. I'm late to the party.

I appreciate the need to be sensitive to some, but come on. I don't want to be referred to as "they" unless it makes sense grammatically. Let's drop this idea that we're stifling the vast majority of us. It's not language that is defining gender roles, it's how people behave and their willingness to be exposed to different ideas and individuals.

This issue doesn't have real meaning to something like 99 percent of us. As a Gen Xer, I much prefer to adopt the attitude of "I don't care what you do, go make yourself happy" than the attitude that we must all conform to make everyone else feel special and perfect all the time. - Martin, Hillsborough, N.C.

Farhad Manjoo: Martin, "I appreciate the need to be sensitive to some, but come on" is a thing Joe Biden would say. It telegraphs an uncaring, unsympathetic attitude to the rest of the world. Nobody is forcing you to call anyone anything. You're still in charge and you're either making the choice to use language that is inclusive, or you're not, on the grounds that making people feel included is giving them special treatment.

As for your 99 percent claim, even if your numbers are correct, what's wrong with including the other 1 percent? This was the same argument used against the Americans With Disabilities Act: The overwhelming majority is fine! Why spend all this money to make this small number feel "special and perfect all the time?"

AH, Chicago: Farhad, one of the problems in your logic is that you equate uniformity with inclusivity. Those concepts are not interchangeable or necessarily synonymous. In addition, I find your appeal for uniformity by all of society using "they" misguided at best and at worst, arrogant in the assumption that everyone will readily renounce his or her preferred gender pronoun.

Arbie, Virginia: As a nonbinary person, I wish people would stop for a moment before labeling this issue "silly" and "trivial" and engage their empathetic side. I wish they would ask themselves why it's so important for many people to have their preferred pronouns respected while risking rejection and ridicule in response. I'd like to tell most people that this isn't about them - but that would likely make them dig their heels in ever more firmly.

Erica, Pennsylvania: As a millennial, if that's relevant, I much prefer to adopt the attitude that I don't care what you do, but I'll start with kindness. Such a small change, with minimal effort, could open so many people up to different ideas about gender. Look, we're already having a conversation.

I am a transgender man - legally, socially, physically - and addressed unequivocally by those around me as "he/him." This, for me, is a hugely important part of my social recognition given how much all of nature and society conspired against it and what a battle it was to get to this place. Being spontaneously addressed with the right pronouns remains a very important transition milestone for trans people. Its affirmative potential is just beyond words for us.

I will use "they/them" with anyone who asks me to, but I will not accede to my linguistic erasure solely because someone who is clearly overflowing with cisgender privilege suddenly gets it into their head that this might be a cool thing to do. - Stephen, Ireland

Farhad Manjoo: Stephen, I appreciate your perspective, and I did speak with many trans and nonbinary people for this piece about just this question. That's why I tried to be clear that "they" should not replace gendered pronouns, but should be an option.

But I totally reject the insinuation that this is a fad or an attempt to be cool. It's important for cisgender people to recognize people's pronouns; it's important, and will make a real difference in people's lives, if cisgender people ask and respect them. How you get that to happen is through the mainstreaming of this conversation, and getting to a place where cisgender people specify their own pronouns, too, as a way to make it easier for everyone. I think that's an important dynamic.

Charlie, San Francisco: I too am a transgender man and I respectfully disagree with Stephen. Manjoo is making an argument about how language shapes our culture and expectations, a conversation we all get to be a part of. He is advocating for the singular "they" to be acceptable and widely practiced, not for the eradication of "he/she." It is an argument about language, not gender. Languages with no gendered pronouns exist, and those cultures still have male and female gender norms.

I do feel affirmed when referred to as "he," but I know that comes after years of being misgendered, painfully, as "she." I believe an English language with wide use of the singular "they" would be a gift to those who are misgendered regularly, especially trans youth.

I have close friends who are gender-fluid and want to be called they, not he or she. I love them but honestly, in practice, it's pretty silly as well as confusing. Everyone around them frequently forgets and they don't push it, they tell you it's fine. But it creates a situation where they get to tell you it's fine. To me, this is about imposing your will on others, and not seeing the forest for the trees.

The majority of humans on this planet are, and want to be, "pronouned" as "he" or "she." Languages evolve naturally. And this issue is a gift to the queer-haters out there. The more public this issue gets, the more it (rightly) gets ridiculed, and the less we talk about the forest: rights. Not ideology or nomenclature, but being free. Queers are oppressed and this issue is hurting us. - Nile Curtis, Kaneohe, Hawaii

Farhad Manjoo: Nile, I'm not sure you have any data to support the claim that "the majority of humans on this planet are, and want to be 'pronouned' as he or she." For one thing, there are lots of very widely spoken languages that have no gender pronouns. So how do you determine what those people want?

R. Green, Akron, Ohio: Farhad, in a recent study, more than 80,000 teenagers in the United States were asked how they identify themselves, with regard to gender. The findings, published in Pediatrics, showed a combined 2.7 percent of these young people identifying themselves as transgender or gender-nonconforming. Given the physical and emotional volatility of the teenage years, this percentage is likely to be lower among adults.

Nile is right; when there are lots of bigger fish to fry, and the opponents of progress have repeatedly shown a skill for sniffing out wedge issues they can use to scare millions of people to vote against their most basic interests, this article showed a profound tone-deafness with regard to the current American political moment.

Gowan McAvity, White Plains: There is another way to look at it. Rather than seeing a change in common linguistic syntax as a minority trying to impose its will on the majority, try to see it as the majority being more compassionate toward a traditionally oppressed minority.

To evolve toward a truly inclusive society will require some change that may occasionally make the majority discombobulated. Seems a small price to pay to redress historical oppression that has been reinforced by gender labeling. Being asked to use "they" instead of "he" or "she" is not forced conversion therapy. The language police who are offended by this are joining the defenders of heterosexual oppression, whether they realize it or not.

Marilou, Montreal: The use of gender-neutral pronouns would not only be beneficial to the minority of people who are transgender or gender fluid. As Mr. Manjoo wrote, cisgender people also have gender-related norms imposed on them through language that may constrain the way they act or think about themselves.

As for the issue being a minor one, language is fundamental to our perception of ourselves and others. True equality will only be reached when it is also reflected in our speech. I agree with you that changes in language must arise from its speakers and can hardly be imposed, but that fact makes it even more important to discuss the place of gender in language, collectively.

Women are finally breaking through the walls, ceilings and barriers we have faced for generations and you think that's the perfect time to eliminate pronouns based on sex, thus disappearing women? We know what will happen, even before the poor grammarians decide to leap off tall buildings in despair: "They is a doctor, but they is a female doctor."

As with any other sex-neutral term, if the word has a positive connotation, it will come to mean male; if negative, female. The problem is not sex-based pronouns, but the gendered hierarchy of behaviors that define some behaviors as superior and masculine, and others as inferior and feminine. Feminism is not about men and women being equal. Feminism is a movement committed to the end of patriarchy. Radical feminists understand the difference between sex, which is biology, and gender, which is behavior. - Deborah Peifer, San Rafael, Calif.

Farhad Manjoo: Deborah, nobody is proposing eliminating any pronouns. I'm proposing adding one that is neutral on gender.

Tallulah Garnett, Oregon: Deborah, the problem isn't the gendered hierarchy. It's that some people don't want to be defined by their gender or don't fit into a male or female gender category. The English language doesn't have a way to address them. We need to give the word "they" a new meaning to accommodate for this very real population. On a different note, you conjugated the verb "be" wrong; you should have said, "they 'are' a female doctor."

Lars, France: Deborah conjugated her phrase correctly, according to nonbinary usage, which just goes to show that our current understanding of "they" as plural will pose a problem until the use becomes more common. I'm all for finding another, specific word; maybe "thee" and "thine" could come back into vogue?

Gnowxela, New York: Whatever its faults, the slogan "I'm With Her" had much more weight and significance than "I'm With Them" would have. The feminine pronoun can have great power. We just have to make it so. It's harder work than just papering over things with ambiguous pronouns.
The Times is committed to publishing Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. a diversity of letters to the editor. We'd like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here's our email: letters@nytimes.com.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What's the big deal with gender-neutral pronouns? Some readers and our columnist disagreed. By Rachel L. Harris and Lisa Tarchak Ms. Harris and Ms. Tarchak are senior editorial assistants at The Times. "If we lived in a just, rational, inclusive universe - one in which we were not all so irredeemably obsessed by the particulars of the parts dangling between our fellow humans' legs ...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Parents Could React If Their Kids Come Out As LGBTQ

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Growing Up Poor In America (full documentary) | FRONTLINE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Arnie the Doughnut' read by Chris O'Dowd

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Every child deserves to grow up healthy, educated and safe - with an equal chance to reach their potential. That's why Save the Children is committed to building a world where girls, boys, and youth of diverse gender identities are heard, valued, and have access to equal opportunities. We believe that ALL children should be empowered to live their lives, speak their minds, and determine their own futures.

We know that from an early age, children learn stereotypical notions of what it means to be a girl and what it means to be a boy. In efforts to break-down rigid, inequitable gender stereotypes and promote diverse and positive expressions of gender identity, we're proud to share this list of books about gender equality for preschoolers and young children. Gender equality books like these can broaden children's horizons and challenge common misperceptions about traditional gender roles. This list offers gender equality books about powerful girls and sensitive boys, and kids who dare to be different.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
9 Children's Books That Celebrate Gender Equality

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Every child deserves to grow up healthy, educated and safe - with an equal chance to reach their potential. That's why Save the Children is committed to building a world where girls, boys, and youth of diverse gender identities are heard, valued, and have access to equal opportunities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How a 13 year old changed 'Impossible' to 'I'm Possible' | Sparsh Shah | TEDxGateway

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Support for rights and legal protections for LGBTQ people is at historic highs, but many gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender young people still report feeling unsafe or unwelcome in their schools, communities and families.

In a national survey of more than 12,000 LGBTQ teens aged 13 to 17, conducted by the Human Rights Campaign and researchers at the University of Connecticut, nearly 8 in 10 reported feeling depressed or down within the previous week, while only a quarter say they feel safe at school.

Nearly all - 95 percent - said they had trouble sleeping at night and 86 percent rated their average stress as five or greater on a scale of one to 10. According to the survey, conducted between April and December 2017, only 41 percent of the 77 percent who reported recent feelings of depression said they had received psychological or emotional counseling in the past year.

Many respondents - especially those who are transgender - described being afraid to express their identities at school, reported bullying from their peers and a lack of support from adults. Without affirmative support from teachers and counselors, teens told surveyors, many are afraid that they'll be outed - to their families or their communities - and thus put at risk of being rejected from their homes or even put into physical danger if they approach school staff for guidance.

The transgender teens describe these fears as disruptive and isolating. Fewer than one-third - 31 percent - say they are able to express themselves in a way that completely reflects their gender identity at school, with only one in three saying they are able or allowed to use the name that reflects their gender identity and just one in five who say they always are able to use their correct pronouns.

More than half of trans and otherwise gender non-conforming teens said they can't use the restroom or locker room at school that aligns with their identity.

Nearly two-thirds of transgender teens say they avoid using the bathroom at school whenever possible, but when they have to, they use a restroom that doesn't match their identity. A quarter of students say they skip physical education in order to avoid showering or changing in locker rooms in front of their peers; another 19 percent say they skip changing or showering at all, even when they should.

Few LGBTQ students report feeling that their schools have fostered safe, inclusive environments, with just 27 percent who say they can "definitely" be themselves at school. Only 12 percent say they've received sexual health or safe sex information that is relevant to LGBTQ people, and just 5 percent say they feel all their teachers and school staff are supportive of LGBTQ people.

As a result, many LGBTQ teens say they have experience sexual harassment: 11 percent say they've been raped or sexually attacked because of their identity; 20 percent said they have had an unwanted sexual encounter in the past year.

More than seven in 10 say they have experienced verbal threats because of their perceived or actual LGBTQ identity; nearly eight in 10 say they've been on the receiving end of unwanted sexual comments, jokes or gestures in the past year. Three in 10 say they have been physically threatened because of their identity, including 50 percent of transgender girls.

All told, 70 percent of LGBTQ youth say they have been bullied at school because of their sexual orientation, including 43 percent who say the bullying has happened in the past year.

Nor do they feel more welcome at home: Two-thirds of LGBTQ youth say they've heard family members make negative comments about people like them; and nearly half - 48 percent - of those who are out to their families say they've been made to feel badly about their sexual orientation or gender identity.

"Despite the change in social attitudes, they're still struggling," Ryan Watson, an assistant professor at the University of Connecticut and one of the researchers on the study, told The Washington Post. "We still see alarming disparities and experiences, disheartening mental health problems and self-esteem issues."

Progress toward equality has been slowed, the researchers say, because of the Trump administration's rollback of policies that are aimed at protecting LGBTQ people from discrimination or harassment.

The Justice Department announced last July a reversal on an Obama administration stance that protections for LGBTQ individuals should be covered by workplace anti-discrimination laws. And in February, the Department of Education announced that it was removing Obama-era rules that required schools allow students to use the bathrooms that match their gender identities.

And fewer than half of states (19, including the District of Columbia) have anti-bullying laws that protect LGBTQ students from being bullied on the basis of the sexual orientation or gender identity, and 13 states have enacted laws that bar discrimination against LGBTQ students, including access to facilities, teams or clubs

"These harrowing statistics [in the survey] show the devastating toll rejection by family and peers, bullying and harassment, and apathy on the part of too many adults is having on America's young people," HRC President Chad Griffin said in a statement. "When this administration rescinds guidance protecting transgender students, or when lawmakers attempt to grant a license to discriminate to schools, colleges, and universities, it further erodes the fragile landscape for young people across the nation. Now more than ever, it is crucial for each of us to do all we can to protect LGBTQ youth and ensure they feel valued, equal, and loved."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
LGBTQ Teens Feel Unsafe and Unwelcome, Despite Growing Support for Rights

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
They still report depression and anxiety at high levels as they say their schools and families aren't willing or able to meet their needs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
All anybody is trying to do is live their lives and be given the service, be treated with respect as anyone else is treated. All we want is equality.
-Petra E., Biloxi, MS, October 4, 2017

Over the past decade, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people have made significant legal and political gains in the United States, including the freedom to marry. Despite this progress, federal law does not expressly prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in fields like employment, housing, and access to services, and fewer than half of the states offer explicit protections for LGBT people at the state level. Without these protections, LGBT people across the United States lack clear recourse and redress when they are fired, evicted, or refused service because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Against this backdrop of legal vulnerability, lawmakers who oppose marriage for same-sex couples and recent moves to advance transgender equality have led an anti-LGBT charge, pushing for, and often succeeding in getting, new laws that carve out religious exemptions for individuals who claim that compliance with particular laws interferes with their religious or moral beliefs. While LGBT equality is not the only area where exemptions have been debated-particularly as lawmakers have sought to substantially broaden exemptions related to sexual and reproductive healthcare-this report specifically examines a worrying wave of exemptions being introduced to blunt the recognition of LGBT rights across the United States.

The freedom of religion, as well as nondiscrimination, is a significant rights issue, and it is important that governments do not unnecessarily burden the exercise of religious conscience. This is especially important to minority religious groups, whose practices are all too easily trampled on by laws and policies enacted by majorities. But when exemptions to laws to accommodate religious beliefs or practices impinge on the rights of others or core societal values like nondiscrimination, lawmakers should proceed with caution.

Proponents of these laws argue that they properly balance religious freedom with the rights of LGBT individuals. In fact, with few exceptions, the laws as drafted create blanket exemptions for religious believers to discriminate with no consideration of or even mechanism for consideration of the harms and burdens on others. Because of their narrow focus on the objector, the laws provide little protection for the rights, well-being, or dignity of those who are turned away.

Statements made by legislative supporters of the laws, and in some cases the content of the laws themselves, moreover, make clear that they aim to push back against recent gains toward LGBT equality and to dilute the rights of LGBT people to secure protection from invidious discrimination.

They send a signal that the state governments enacting them accept and even embrace the dangerous and harmful notion that discrimination against LGBT people is a legitimate demand of both conscience and religion. Particularly in states that lack any underlying laws prohibiting discrimination against LGBT people, many of the laws are not "exemptions" so much as a license to discriminate.

In recent years and mostly since 2015, when the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of marriage equality, numerous states have considered and at least eight US states have enacted new laws that permit people to infringe on the rights of LGBT individuals and their families to the extent they believe that discriminating against them is necessary to uphold their own religious or moral beliefs. In 2018, lawmakers in at least six other states will consider similar legislation.

These laws and bills vary in scope. As has been widely publicized, some would permit people to refuse to participate in same-sex wedding ceremonies or to provide goods and services related to such weddings. Others, less widely publicized, would permit child welfare agencies, physical and mental health providers, businesses that serve the public, and other actors to refuse service to LGBT people and other groups. Such legislation immediately endangers LGBT rights. By allowing people to elevate their prejudices above fairness and equality, it also threatens the broader principle that people should not be refused goods and services solely because of who they are.

Together, the failure of most states to enact nondiscrimination protections and the growing number of religious exemption laws leave many LGBT people with little recourse when they encounter discrimination. While these exemptions are almost always couched in the language of religious freedom or religious liberty, they directly and indirectly harm LGBT people in a variety of ways.

Some laws enable and embolden businesses and service providers to refuse to serve LGBT people, compelling LGBT people to invest additional time, money, and energy to find willing providers; others simply give up on obtaining the goods or services they need. More insidiously, they give LGBT people reason to expect discrimination before it even occurs, and to take extra precautions or avoid scenarios where they might face hostility out of self-preservation.

Such laws also threaten the basic dignity of LGBT people, sending a clear message that their rights and well-being are not valued and are contingent on the goodwill of others. Our interviewees explained that, by enacting religious exemptions to blunt the advancement of LGBT equality, lawmakers sent a powerful signal that they were unequal or unvalued in their community.

Brandiilyne Mangum-Dear, a lesbian pastor in Mississippi, described that harm in these words: "We're not being melodramatic. You're being treated with disrespect, as a second-class citizen-not even a citizen, an outsider. And after a while, that begins to tear a person down, to hurt them emotionally and spiritually. Rejection is hard for everyone, and we get it over and over."

This report documents how religiously motivated discrimination against LGBT people can inflict real harm and why state endorsement of this discrimination is dangerous. From August 2017 to January 2018, researchers interviewed 112 LGBT people, service providers, and advocates, primarily in states that have enacted religious exemptions in recent years, about the discrimination that LGBT people have faced because of an absence of comprehensive nondiscrimination legislation and the passage of legislation that provides for exemptions based on religious or moral beliefs.

The results of this research indicate that the laws already enacted in eight states and the bills still under consideration in many more do not strike a proper balance between the freedom of religion and the equal rights of LGBT people under the law. And in fact, few if any of these laws even represent a serious attempt to do that. Lawmakers at the federal, state, and local level should work to ensure that LGBT people are protected from discrimination in employment, education, housing, healthcare, adoption and foster care, and public accommodations, and should repeal religious exemption laws that give government support to those who would discriminate based on their religious or moral beliefs.

Human Rights Watch conducted the research for this report between August 2017 and January 2018. To identify interviewees, researchers conducted outreach through national and state LGBT groups, legal advocates, and service providers who circulated information about the project to their networks. The outreach focused on eight states where statewide exemptions affecting LGBT people had been legislatively enacted at the time the research began: Alabama, Michigan, Mississippi, North Dakota, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. Researchers conducted a total of 112 interviews, including 30 individuals who were affected by discrimination and 82 advocates and providers working with affected individuals.

Interviews were primarily conducted by telephone due to the geographic dispersion of the interviewees for the project. Interviews were conducted in person in Mississippi in November 2017, Tennessee in December 2017, and Michigan, Mississippi, and Tennessee in January 2018. No compensation was paid to interviewees. Researchers obtained oral informed consent from interviewees, and notified interviewees why Human Rights Watch was conducting the research and how it would use their accounts, that they did not need to answer any questions, and that they could stop the interview at any time. Interviewees were given the option of using pseudonyms in published materials for the project; where pseudonyms are used in this report, that is reflected in the footnote citation.

On June 26, 2015, the US Supreme Court issued its decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which invalidated bans on marriage for same-sex couples across the United States. As marriage equality became a reality, first in individual states and then nationally, lawmakers proposed allowing those with religious or moral objections to refuse or decline to provide a range of goods and services to same-sex couples.

When they are carefully designed, religious exemptions can play a valuable role in safeguarding the freedom of religious exercise and belief. The laws that states have introduced in response to recent advances towards LGBT equality, however, tend to tip the scales much too far in one direction, often with complete disregard for the very real harm they are likely to inflict. As this report describes, they are born of hostility to a marginalized group, and display little regard for the rights of those who are turned away. These laws undermine the central principle of nondiscrimination protections, deliberately embracing rather than pushing back against the denial of goods and services to individuals simply because of their identity or the services they need. In short, they give license to discriminate.

Addressing Discrimination on the Basis of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

Nonetheless, people in most US states lack these protections, as neither Congress nor most state legislatures have expressly prohibited discrimination against LGBT people. At the beginning of 2018, only 19 states and the District of Columbia had explicitly prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing, and public accommodations. In three other states, narrower protections exist. New Hampshire and Wisconsin prohibit discrimination in employment, housing, and publications based on sexual orientation, but do not prohibit discrimination based on gender identity. Utah prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in employment and housing, but not public accommodations.

With these laws, states have recognized that there is an urgent need to combat discrimination that denies people access to goods and services because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. The enactment of religious exemption laws bucks this trend, signaling a broad acceptance and even an encouragement of service providers who would discriminate against LGBT individuals.

Advances and Struggles in LGBT Equality

As public attitudes across the United States have become more favorable toward LGBT equality in recent years, LGBT people have won significant gains. The Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell, which recognized that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry, gave those who choose to marry and their families access to a range of economic and legal protections. The Obama Administration took steps to address discrimination against LGBT people, and particularly transgender people, in regulations around healthcare, housing, and education.

Religious Exemptions as a Backlash against LGBT Equality in the United States

In recent years-and particularly as marriage equality gained ground in state and federal courts-proponents of exemptions have drafted bills and filed lawsuits that would exempt people who say that their religious or moral convictions are irreconcilably at odds with what generally applicable anti-discrimination laws require of them in some circumstances. In many instances, lawmakers have proposed laws to prevent the government from denying funding, licenses, contracts, and other forms of support to service providers who discriminate based on religious or moral beliefs.

Religious Exemption Laws

Recent license-to-discriminate laws break from that tradition. They do not create a nondiscrimination rule; instead, they only create the exemption allowing discrimination to flourish. And rather than strike any kind of careful balance between assertions of religious liberty and LGBT equality or other rights and values that could be at stake, many grant a nearly unfettered license to discriminate while brushing aside the rights and freedoms of others. On both fronts, most of these laws bear no resemblance to religious exemptions that are motivated by a concern for human rights and are narrowly drawn to respect the rights of all involved.

A License to Discriminate Under State Law

The religious exemptions that have been considered or enacted by state legislatures take different forms. Some are comprehensive, providing blanket protection for entities that do not wish to provide various services to LGBT people because of their religious or moral beliefs. Others are more narrowly circumscribed, focusing particularly on adoption and foster care services and physical and mental healthcare services.

While these laws are typically characterized as exemptions, the term "exemption" is misleading. Few of the states that have enacted these laws have protections in place that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. In most cases, states are enacting "exceptions" allowing providers to discriminate based on religion without first prohibiting anti-LGBT discrimination more generally. In this context, these laws function first and foremost as a license to discriminate, signaling that discrimination against LGBT people is acceptable in the state.

Comprehensive Exemption Laws

The most sweeping exemption law enacted to date is Mississippi's HB 1523, enacted in the first legislative session after the Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges. The law specifies three protected "religious beliefs or moral convictions": "(a) [m]arriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman; (b) [s]exual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage; and (c) [m]ale (man) or female (woman) refer to an individual's immutable biological sex as objectively determined by anatomy and genetics at time of birth." It prevents the government from taking "any discriminatory action" against religious organizations or persons that discriminate in a variety of ways against LGBT individuals (and in some cases against unmarried heterosexual individuals) "consistent with a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction." The bill explicitly protects an extraordinary range of discriminatory conduct, in spheres that range from the conduct of wedding ceremonies and the provision of wedding-related services to the hiring and firing of employees, the rental or sale of housing, child placement services, psychological counseling, fertility or transition-related healthcare, and the restriction of access to shared facilities. "Discriminatory action" is defined very broadly so as to preclude most of the avenues the government might use to sanction or withhold government support for such an organization or individual. The sponsor of the bill expressly cited the Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell and the desire to protect those who believe marriage is between one man and one woman as the motivation for the law.

Adoption and Foster Care Services

In 2003, North Dakota enacted a law stating that "[a] child-placing agency is not required to perform, assist, counsel, recommend, facilitate, refer, or participate in a placement that violates the agency's written religious or moral convictions or policies." Under the law, the state's department of human services may not deny a child-placing agency a license, grant, or contract based on such an objection.

In 2012, Virginia enacted a law establishing that "no private child-placing agency shall be required to perform, assist, counsel, recommend, consent to, refer, or participate in any placement of a child for foster care or adoption when the proposed placement would violate the agency's written religious or moral convictions or policies." The law prevents the state from sanctioning or withholding licensing or support-including contractual relationships-from agencies that refuse to participate in a "placement that violates the agency's written religious or moral convictions or policies." At the time of its passage, Senator Adam Ebbin-who opposed the law-told press that his colleagues intended the bill to shield agencies from placing children with same-sex couples. On the day a Senate subcommittee approved the religious exemption, it rejected Ebbin's bill that would have prohibited discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in adoption and foster care placement.

In 2015, Michigan enacted a law stating that "a child placing agency shall not be required to provide any services if those services conflict with, or provide any services under circumstances that conflict with, the child placing agency's sincerely held religious beliefs contained in a written policy, statement of faith, or other document adhered to by the child placing agency." The law prohibits the state or local governments from taking "adverse action" against a child placing agency because of its refusal to provide services on the basis of those religious beliefs. In addition to requiring that the child placing agency set out its beliefs in writing, the law requires agencies that decline to provide services to refer the applicant to another agency or a list of agencies maintained by the state. As the bill was under consideration, Representative Jeff Irwin, who opposed the bill, stated that "[t]he whole goal of this package is to allow agencies to discriminate against same-sex couples." Representatives of the Michigan Catholic Conference and Michigan Family Forum, who supported the bill, justified it as a preemptive move to prevent adoption and foster-care agencies from having to comply with nondiscrimination laws requiring them to serve same-sex couples.

In 2017, South Dakota enacted a law barring the state from discriminating or taking adverse action against a child placement agency because it declines "to provide any service that conflicts with, or provide any service under circumstances that conflict with a sincerely-held religious belief or moral conviction of the child-placement agency." The committee debate on the bill focused primarily on religious objections to placing children with same-sex couples. Senator Alan Solano, who co-sponsored the bill, cited the Obergefell decision and the decision by Catholic Charities to withdraw from adoption and foster care services in Massachusetts, Illinois, California, and Washington, D.C. rather than comply with nondiscrimination laws that protect same-sex couples as the motivation for the law. Solano co-wrote the bill with Catholic Social Services, an agency which only places children with heterosexual couples. Governor Dennis Daugaard signed the bill into law, voicing a hope that it would prevent individuals in a protected class from suing child welfare agencies if they were denied placement.

In 2017, Alabama enacted a law that bars the state from discriminating or taking adverse action against a child placing agency "on the basis that the child placing agency declines to make, provide, facilitate, or refer for a placement in a manner that conflicts with, or under circumstances that conflict with, the sincerely held religious beliefs of the child placing agency." As the bill was debated, Representative Rich Wingo, who sponsored the bill, told press it was necessary to ensure that child welfare agencies are not compelled to place children with same-sex parents. Representative Patricia Todd, who opposed the bill, remarked that "[t]his bill obviously came about because same-sex marriage is approved."

In 2017, Texas enacted a law that broadly protects religious objections in child welfare services, defined to include not only child placement services but also services for abused or neglected children, counseling for children or parents, and family preservation and support services. It prevents the state from discriminating or taking adverse action against providers who decline to "provide, facilitate, or refer a person for child welfare services that conflict with, or under circumstances that conflict with, the provider's sincerely held religious beliefs" or provides the children in their care with a religious education. If a provider declines to provide a service because of religious objections, the government is supposed to ensure that an alternative provider is available in that area or a nearby area. The provider is supposed to refer the applicant to another service or the list of providers on the state's website. The law specifies that child welfare agencies may not deny placements based on race, ethnicity, or national origin; Representative Joe Moody introduced an amendment to include sex, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability as protected grounds, but the legislature rejected it.

Mental and Physical Health Care

In 2016, Tennessee enacted a law that states that "[n]o counselor or therapist providing counseling or therapy services shall be required to counsel or serve a client as to goals, outcomes, or behaviors that conflict with a sincerely held religious belief of the counselor or therapist." The law states that providers who refuse services should coordinate a referral to another provider who will see the client. According to the bill's sponsor, Senator Jack Johnson, the impetus for the bill was a change in the American Counseling Association's Code of Ethics which states that counselors should "refrain from referring prospective and current clients based solely on the counselor's personally held values, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors." In committee, Senator Jeff Yarbro noted that the public debate on the bill "has been very much focused on issues of same-sex marriage," and Senator Rusty Crowe noted that although same-sex couples can now marry, the bill could exempt religious objectors from having to counsel them. Members of the Tennessee Association of Marriage and Family Therapists testified against the bill, stating that it was unnecessary in light of established referral mechanisms within the profession and would open the door to discrimination.

The framing and scope of these exemption laws differ in many respects, but are alike in several fundamental ways. First, they are motivated to a large degree by hostility to recent advances in LGBT equality; on their face they invoke only a concern for religious liberty but the public debate around and legislative history of many of these laws show quite clearly the animus and the discriminatory intent that underpin them. Second, they permit blatantly discriminatory practices without clear limitations or meaningful safeguards. They do not strike a careful balance-or even suggest that any serious attempt was made to do so-between religious exercise and the purposes of the underlying law from which the exemption is carved out, a feature of rights-respecting approaches to religious exemptions. Third, they often show no regard whatsoever for the harms that the discrimination they legitimize might inflict on those who are turned away from a range of important services and for the nondiscrimination principle itself.

These laws are directly harmful, and they take on added importance because of the larger message they send. By enacting these laws, states send a clear signal that discrimination against LGBT people is permissible-and that message has serious consequences at a time when discrimination against LGBT people remains all too common in the United States.

Proponents of exemptions that allow for anti-LGBT discrimination have framed them in terms of religious liberty, foregrounding how these laws might exempt businesses and service providers from laws and regulations that they find objectionable. The assumption seems to be that the resulting harms to LGBT individuals, or to the core value of equality, are insubstantial. As detailed below, however, the exemptions come at a high price.

To understand the harm, it is important to look at the larger context in which such laws are being considered, including pre-existing anti-LGBT discrimination and how exemption laws can encourage such discrimination, particularly in states without nondiscrimination protections. Anti-LGBT religious exemption laws are likely to exacerbate mistreatment because, both on their face and in the political discourse that surrounds them, they tend to legitimize and signal official acceptance of discrimination against LGBT people. And by restricting the state's ability to prohibit, sanction, or even discourage discrimination, the laws undermine the core principle of nondiscrimination law: that people should not face adverse treatment simply because of who they are.

Denying Goods and Services

Already, LGBT people often face discrimination by service providers who deny them goods and services. Where discrimination against LGBT people is permitted, because nondiscrimination laws do not exist, these problems tend to be worse. The following pages describe the tangible, human impact of such discrimination-which will likely worsen as a result of religious exemption laws-on the people who bear the brunt of it.

Incidents of Refusals

In states without nondiscrimination protections, individuals told Human Rights Watch that they had been denied access to goods and services because of a provider's religious beliefs. Leiana C., a 39-year-old lesbian woman in Mississippi, recalled an incident that occurred around 2012 when she and her wife were seeking a fertility doctor:

Tanya P., a 33-year-old woman in Tennessee, recalled the difficulties she faced obtaining affirming care for her transgender daughter in 2016. To obtain identity documents for her daughter that reflected her gender identity, Tanya needed to submit a note from her daughter's doctor affirming that she was undergoing appropriate clinical treatment. At the time, her daughter was already obtaining that treatment, had socially transitioned, and was seeing a therapist. Nonetheless, her pediatrician refused to provide a letter stating that information, citing his religious beliefs:

LGBT individuals have also experienced religious refusals in child welfare services. Recently, the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan filed suit challenging the state's practice of granting contracts and funding to child welfare agencies that discriminate against same-sex couples. The suit was filed after two sets of prospective parents-Kristy and Dana Dumont and Erin and Rebecca Busk-Sutton-contacted religiously affiliated agencies in the state about adopting children from foster care and were informed the agencies did not work with same-sex couples. The Dumonts wanted to provide a foster home to an older child; they contacted the two agencies in their county that have older children eligible for foster placement and were told the agencies would not work with them as a same-sex couple. The Busk-Suttons were interested in adopting a child with special needs and were initially told by one agency that they would receive an information packet in the mail; when the packet did not arrive, they called to inquire and were told the agency does not specialize in same-sex couples. While the religiously affiliated agencies offered names of providers in neighboring counties, both couples expressed concern about traveling for the trainings and visits associated with becoming foster parents and potentially taking an older foster child or a child with special needs out of a county where they have family or are currently receiving services.

As Zawadski's case illustrates, refusals can occur in circumstances where LGBT people urgently need services and cannot readily access alternatives in the event that they are turned away.

Impacts of Refusals

When LGBT people are refused service, this discrimination has material and psychological consequences. Some individuals will obtain the good or service they sought, but will face additional costs: finding an alternative provider can require time, energy, and money, which can prove discouraging or even prohibitive.

Refusals create barriers to accessing mental and physical healthcare as well. Persephone Webb, an activist in Tennessee, noted:

Rhonda L., the mother of a transgender teenager in Tennessee, recalled how even available alternatives in the urban area could be prohibitively difficult:

Finally, even where LGBT people are ultimately able to obtain needed services elsewhere, incidents of discrimination can be psychologically traumatic and degrading. Rhonda L. said her transgender son had experienced hostility or overt religiosity from multiple healthcare professionals, including a pediatrician, dentist, gastrointestinal specialist, and pulmonologist. She described how these incidents affected him, making him unwilling to seek medical care even when it was urgently needed:

Added Harms of Religious Exemptions

As the incidents described above help illustrate, the absence of laws prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity leaves LGBT people vulnerable to mistreatment, including mistreatment motivated by moral or religious convictions. Many of the incidents above occurred prior to the introduction of religious exemption laws, but were legally permissible because the state lacked any law providing protection from discriminatory treatment.

Second, as statutory provisions, religious exemption laws can override other protections that may exist for LGBT people. In Mississippi, for example, the cities of Jackson and Magnolia have nondiscrimination laws that protect sexual orientation and gender identity; the statewide imposition of HB 1523 allows religious objectors in those cities to cite the state law excusing them from compliance. As statutory provisions, these exemptions can also override administrative policies and practices that departments of health or child welfare have adopted to combat discrimination.

Finally, interviewees emphasized that the scope of religious exemptions is poorly understood, and many people perceive these exemptions as blanket permission to discriminate based on religious beliefs. Chris Sanders, the Executive Director of the Tennessee Equality Project, suggested:

David Dinelli, an attorney with the Southern Poverty Law Center, echoed this assessment. "My observation from being in the Deep South is that it almost doesn't matter what the law says. This narrative has taken hold, and now people are doing things that in no way would be authorized by the law itself."

Discouraging Access to Services

As noted above, most states in the US do not specifically prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, and discrimination against LGBT people remains widespread. Religious exemptions not only license the kinds of refusals discussed above, but encourage people to expect and fear discrimination and adapt accordingly.

It is important to note that, while these initiatives can alleviate gaps in service, they are not a sufficient substitute for full equality under the law. Many LGBT organizations do not have the resources to compile and maintain lists of affirming providers. Where they are developed, such lists tend to be ad hoc and non-exhaustive, as they rely on providers who are known to advocates to be reliably LGBT inclusive. A provider with competency with one population-for example, adult gay men-may not be similarly equipped to serve the needs of another-for example, transgender youth. The approach is particularly limited insofar as known providers are often concentrated in urban areas, with the result that LGBT people who live in rural areas may have to travel hundreds of miles to reach a provider who they know will serve them. And because these lists typically list only a fraction of the providers in a given state, the roster of providers can be quickly overwhelmed by demand.

In Tennessee, where state law allows counselors to decline to see LGBT patients based on their religious beliefs, researchers at the University of Tennessee have studied how these refusal laws impact self-concealment and psychological distress. One researcher on the project noted:

Healthcare providers expressed concern about how fears of discrimination were affecting the mental and physical health of LGBT populations in their states. One pediatrician in Alabama observed:

Kelley Blair, who runs the Diversity Center in Oklahoma City, OK, noted a similar phenomenon for adults at her practice, which specifically caters to the LGBT community:

Harms to Dignity

The harms of religious exemptions are not limited to outright refusals or deterring LGBT people from seeking goods and services. Interviewees in states with LGBT-targeted religious exemption laws in place also emphasized the harms to dignity and stigma that the laws impose on LGBT individuals and families.

While this message could be received from those who discriminated based on their faith generally, some interviewees indicated it was particularly injurious when it was endorsed by the state:

Proponents of sweeping religious exemptions have typically couched their claims in the language of religious freedom or religious liberty. International human rights law recognizes the importance of those rights, but also elaborates their limits, particularly where their exercise threatens to negatively impact the fundamental rights of others. Not only does the United States carry obligations under international law to respect these limits and safeguards, but more broadly the jurisprudence developed under international human rights law offers sound guidance to legislators seeking to strike a careful balance between rights that seem to stand in tension with one another.

Harmonizing Equality and the Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion

The United States is party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which guarantees equal protection under the law as well as the freedom of thought, conscience, and religion.

Other Rights at Risk from Religious Exemptions

The religious exemptions being introduced to license discrimination in child welfare services, physical and mental healthcare, and public accommodations not only impinge upon the rights of LGBT individuals to equal treatment, they also jeopardize the enjoyment of several other rights as well.

Nondiscrimination More Broadly

While the religious exemption laws examined in this report were introduced as a result of gains that LGBT people have made in attaining nondiscrimination protections and the ability to adopt, marry, and form families under state and federal law, many of the exemptions being introduced at the state level are not limited to religious objections related to sexual orientation and gender identity. As critics have pointed out, many bills would broadly preclude states from taking action against religious objectors who operate according to their religious principles to the detriment of other groups as well, and potentially authorize forms of discrimination based on race, ethnicity, sex, religion, nationality, disability, veteran status, HIV status, and other classifications. States that enact these laws relinquish their ability to ensure that state funding and contracts support services available to all qualified recipients, and give a free pass to potentially sweeping discrimination under the color of state authority.

Right to Health

Children's Rights

To the US Congress

Enact the Equality Act or other legislation which would prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, education, healthcare, housing, and public accommodations.

Enact the Do No Harm Act, which would not allow the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to be used to carve out exemptions from federal laws and protections regarding nondiscrimination, labor, children's rights, and healthcare.

Enact the Every Child Deserves a Family Act, which would prohibit child welfare agencies that receive federal financial assistance from discriminating against foster parents based on sexual orientation, gender identity, and marital status.

Reject the First Amendment Defense Act, the Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act, and other legislation that permits discrimination against LGBT people based on a provider's asserted religious beliefs.

To the US Department of Justice

Ensure that existing conscience protections are not misused to excuse or justify discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, and other classifications.

To State Legislatures

Enact legislation prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, education, healthcare, housing, adoption and foster care, and public accommodations.

Repeal religious exemptions that require the state to continue licensing, funding, or otherwise supporting providers who discriminate against others according to their beliefs.

To State Human Rights Commissions

Affirm that discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity is unacceptable and investigate incidents of discrimination based on those grounds.

Ensure that existing conscience protections are not misused to excuse or justify discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, and other classifications.

Ryan Thoreson, a researcher in the LGBT Rights Program, wrote this report based on research that he undertook from August 2017 to January 2018.

The report was reviewed by Graeme Reid, director of the LGBT Rights Program; Grace Meng, senior researcher in the US Program; Amanda Klasing, senior researcher in the Women's Rights Division; Megan McLemore, senior researcher in the Health and Human Rights Division, Chris Albin-Lackey, senior legal advisor; and Joseph Saunders, deputy program director. Production assistance was provided by MJ Movahedi, LGBT Rights Program associate, Rebecca Rom-Frank, Photo & Publications coordinator; Fitzroy Hepkins, administrative manager; and Jose Martinez, senior coordinator.

Human Rights Watch would like to thank the experts and organizations that provided information for the report, especially the American Civil Liberties Union, the Movement Advancement Project, the ACLU of Michigan, Equality Michigan, the Tennessee Equality Project, the Tennessee Transgender Political Coalition, Voices for Trans Youth, the ACLU of Mississippi, and Lighthouse Community Church.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This report documents how recent laws carve out space to discriminate against LGBT people in adoption and foster care, health care, and access to some goods and services. These laws fail to balance moral and religious objections to LGBT relationships and identities with the rights of LGBT people themselves, Human Rights Watch found.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
All anybody is trying to do is live their lives and be given the service, be treated with respect as anyone else is treated. All we want is equality.
-Petra E., Biloxi, MS, October 4, 2017

Over the past decade, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people have made significant legal and political gains in the United States, including the freedom to marry. Despite this progress, federal law does not expressly prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in fields like employment, housing, and access to services, and fewer than half of the states offer explicit protections for LGBT people at the state level. Without these protections, LGBT people across the United States lack clear recourse and redress when they are fired, evicted, or refused service because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Against this backdrop of legal vulnerability, lawmakers who oppose marriage for same-sex couples and recent moves to advance transgender equality have led an anti-LGBT charge, pushing for, and often succeeding in getting, new laws that carve out religious exemptions for individuals who claim that compliance with particular laws interferes with their religious or moral beliefs. While LGBT equality is not the only area where exemptions have been debated-particularly as lawmakers have sought to substantially broaden exemptions related to sexual and reproductive healthcare-this report specifically examines a worrying wave of exemptions being introduced to blunt the recognition of LGBT rights across the United States.

The freedom of religion, as well as nondiscrimination, is a significant rights issue, and it is important that governments do not unnecessarily burden the exercise of religious conscience. This is especially important to minority religious groups, whose practices are all too easily trampled on by laws and policies enacted by majorities. But when exemptions to laws to accommodate religious beliefs or practices impinge on the rights of others or core societal values like nondiscrimination, lawmakers should proceed with caution.

Proponents of these laws argue that they properly balance religious freedom with the rights of LGBT individuals. In fact, with few exceptions, the laws as drafted create blanket exemptions for religious believers to discriminate with no consideration of or even mechanism for consideration of the harms and burdens on others. Because of their narrow focus on the objector, the laws provide little protection for the rights, well-being, or dignity of those who are turned away.

Statements made by legislative supporters of the laws, and in some cases the content of the laws themselves, moreover, make clear that they aim to push back against recent gains toward LGBT equality and to dilute the rights of LGBT people to secure protection from invidious discrimination.

They send a signal that the state governments enacting them accept and even embrace the dangerous and harmful notion that discrimination against LGBT people is a legitimate demand of both conscience and religion. Particularly in states that lack any underlying laws prohibiting discrimination against LGBT people, many of the laws are not "exemptions" so much as a license to discriminate.

In recent years and mostly since 2015, when the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of marriage equality, numerous states have considered and at least eight US states have enacted new laws that permit people to infringe on the rights of LGBT individuals and their families to the extent they believe that discriminating against them is necessary to uphold their own religious or moral beliefs. In 2018, lawmakers in at least six other states will consider similar legislation.

These laws and bills vary in scope. As has been widely publicized, some would permit people to refuse to participate in same-sex wedding ceremonies or to provide goods and services related to such weddings. Others, less widely publicized, would permit child welfare agencies, physical and mental health providers, businesses that serve the public, and other actors to refuse service to LGBT people and other groups. Such legislation immediately endangers LGBT rights. By allowing people to elevate their prejudices above fairness and equality, it also threatens the broader principle that people should not be refused goods and services solely because of who they are.

Together, the failure of most states to enact nondiscrimination protections and the growing number of religious exemption laws leave many LGBT people with little recourse when they encounter discrimination. While these exemptions are almost always couched in the language of religious freedom or religious liberty, they directly and indirectly harm LGBT people in a variety of ways.

Some laws enable and embolden businesses and service providers to refuse to serve LGBT people, compelling LGBT people to invest additional time, money, and energy to find willing providers; others simply give up on obtaining the goods or services they need. More insidiously, they give LGBT people reason to expect discrimination before it even occurs, and to take extra precautions or avoid scenarios where they might face hostility out of self-preservation.

Such laws also threaten the basic dignity of LGBT people, sending a clear message that their rights and well-being are not valued and are contingent on the goodwill of others. Our interviewees explained that, by enacting religious exemptions to blunt the advancement of LGBT equality, lawmakers sent a powerful signal that they were unequal or unvalued in their community.

Brandiilyne Mangum-Dear, a lesbian pastor in Mississippi, described that harm in these words: "We're not being melodramatic. You're being treated with disrespect, as a second-class citizen-not even a citizen, an outsider. And after a while, that begins to tear a person down, to hurt them emotionally and spiritually. Rejection is hard for everyone, and we get it over and over."

This report documents how religiously motivated discrimination against LGBT people can inflict real harm and why state endorsement of this discrimination is dangerous. From August 2017 to January 2018, researchers interviewed 112 LGBT people, service providers, and advocates, primarily in states that have enacted religious exemptions in recent years, about the discrimination that LGBT people have faced because of an absence of comprehensive nondiscrimination legislation and the passage of legislation that provides for exemptions based on religious or moral beliefs.

The results of this research indicate that the laws already enacted in eight states and the bills still under consideration in many more do not strike a proper balance between the freedom of religion and the equal rights of LGBT people under the law. And in fact, few if any of these laws even represent a serious attempt to do that. Lawmakers at the federal, state, and local level should work to ensure that LGBT people are protected from discrimination in employment, education, housing, healthcare, adoption and foster care, and public accommodations, and should repeal religious exemption laws that give government support to those who would discriminate based on their religious or moral beliefs.

Human Rights Watch conducted the research for this report between August 2017 and January 2018. To identify interviewees, researchers conducted outreach through national and state LGBT groups, legal advocates, and service providers who circulated information about the project to their networks. The outreach focused on eight states where statewide exemptions affecting LGBT people had been legislatively enacted at the time the research began: Alabama, Michigan, Mississippi, North Dakota, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. Researchers conducted a total of 112 interviews, including 30 individuals who were affected by discrimination and 82 advocates and providers working with affected individuals.

Interviews were primarily conducted by telephone due to the geographic dispersion of the interviewees for the project. Interviews were conducted in person in Mississippi in November 2017, Tennessee in December 2017, and Michigan, Mississippi, and Tennessee in January 2018. No compensation was paid to interviewees. Researchers obtained oral informed consent from interviewees, and notified interviewees why Human Rights Watch was conducting the research and how it would use their accounts, that they did not need to answer any questions, and that they could stop the interview at any time. Interviewees were given the option of using pseudonyms in published materials for the project; where pseudonyms are used in this report, that is reflected in the footnote citation.

On June 26, 2015, the US Supreme Court issued its decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which invalidated bans on marriage for same-sex couples across the United States. As marriage equality became a reality, first in individual states and then nationally, lawmakers proposed allowing those with religious or moral objections to refuse or decline to provide a range of goods and services to same-sex couples.

When they are carefully designed, religious exemptions can play a valuable role in safeguarding the freedom of religious exercise and belief. The laws that states have introduced in response to recent advances towards LGBT equality, however, tend to tip the scales much too far in one direction, often with complete disregard for the very real harm they are likely to inflict. As this report describes, they are born of hostility to a marginalized group, and display little regard for the rights of those who are turned away. These laws undermine the central principle of nondiscrimination protections, deliberately embracing rather than pushing back against the denial of goods and services to individuals simply because of their identity or the services they need. In short, they give license to discriminate.

Addressing Discrimination on the Basis of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

Nonetheless, people in most US states lack these protections, as neither Congress nor most state legislatures have expressly prohibited discrimination against LGBT people. At the beginning of 2018, only 19 states and the District of Columbia had explicitly prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing, and public accommodations. In three other states, narrower protections exist. New Hampshire and Wisconsin prohibit discrimination in employment, housing, and publications based on sexual orientation, but do not prohibit discrimination based on gender identity. Utah prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in employment and housing, but not public accommodations.

With these laws, states have recognized that there is an urgent need to combat discrimination that denies people access to goods and services because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. The enactment of religious exemption laws bucks this trend, signaling a broad acceptance and even an encouragement of service providers who would discriminate against LGBT individuals.

Advances and Struggles in LGBT Equality

As public attitudes across the United States have become more favorable toward LGBT equality in recent years, LGBT people have won significant gains. The Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell, which recognized that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry, gave those who choose to marry and their families access to a range of economic and legal protections. The Obama Administration took steps to address discrimination against LGBT people, and particularly transgender people, in regulations around healthcare, housing, and education.

Religious Exemptions as a Backlash against LGBT Equality in the United States

In recent years-and particularly as marriage equality gained ground in state and federal courts-proponents of exemptions have drafted bills and filed lawsuits that would exempt people who say that their religious or moral convictions are irreconcilably at odds with what generally applicable anti-discrimination laws require of them in some circumstances. In many instances, lawmakers have proposed laws to prevent the government from denying funding, licenses, contracts, and other forms of support to service providers who discriminate based on religious or moral beliefs.

Religious Exemption Laws

Recent license-to-discriminate laws break from that tradition. They do not create a nondiscrimination rule; instead, they only create the exemption allowing discrimination to flourish. And rather than strike any kind of careful balance between assertions of religious liberty and LGBT equality or other rights and values that could be at stake, many grant a nearly unfettered license to discriminate while brushing aside the rights and freedoms of others. On both fronts, most of these laws bear no resemblance to religious exemptions that are motivated by a concern for human rights and are narrowly drawn to respect the rights of all involved.

A License to Discriminate Under State Law

The religious exemptions that have been considered or enacted by state legislatures take different forms. Some are comprehensive, providing blanket protection for entities that do not wish to provide various services to LGBT people because of their religious or moral beliefs. Others are more narrowly circumscribed, focusing particularly on adoption and foster care services and physical and mental healthcare services.

While these laws are typically characterized as exemptions, the term "exemption" is misleading. Few of the states that have enacted these laws have protections in place that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. In most cases, states are enacting "exceptions" allowing providers to discriminate based on religion without first prohibiting anti-LGBT discrimination more generally. In this context, these laws function first and foremost as a license to discriminate, signaling that discrimination against LGBT people is acceptable in the state.

Comprehensive Exemption Laws

The most sweeping exemption law enacted to date is Mississippi's HB 1523, enacted in the first legislative session after the Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges. The law specifies three protected "religious beliefs or moral convictions": "(a) [m]arriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman; (b) [s]exual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage; and (c) [m]ale (man) or female (woman) refer to an individual's immutable biological sex as objectively determined by anatomy and genetics at time of birth." It prevents the government from taking "any discriminatory action" against religious organizations or persons that discriminate in a variety of ways against LGBT individuals (and in some cases against unmarried heterosexual individuals) "consistent with a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction." The bill explicitly protects an extraordinary range of discriminatory conduct, in spheres that range from the conduct of wedding ceremonies and the provision of wedding-related services to the hiring and firing of employees, the rental or sale of housing, child placement services, psychological counseling, fertility or transition-related healthcare, and the restriction of access to shared facilities. "Discriminatory action" is defined very broadly so as to preclude most of the avenues the government might use to sanction or withhold government support for such an organization or individual. The sponsor of the bill expressly cited the Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell and the desire to protect those who believe marriage is between one man and one woman as the motivation for the law.

Adoption and Foster Care Services

In 2003, North Dakota enacted a law stating that "[a] child-placing agency is not required to perform, assist, counsel, recommend, facilitate, refer, or participate in a placement that violates the agency's written religious or moral convictions or policies." Under the law, the state's department of human services may not deny a child-placing agency a license, grant, or contract based on such an objection.

In 2012, Virginia enacted a law establishing that "no private child-placing agency shall be required to perform, assist, counsel, recommend, consent to, refer, or participate in any placement of a child for foster care or adoption when the proposed placement would violate the agency's written religious or moral convictions or policies." The law prevents the state from sanctioning or withholding licensing or support-including contractual relationships-from agencies that refuse to participate in a "placement that violates the agency's written religious or moral convictions or policies." At the time of its passage, Senator Adam Ebbin-who opposed the law-told press that his colleagues intended the bill to shield agencies from placing children with same-sex couples. On the day a Senate subcommittee approved the religious exemption, it rejected Ebbin's bill that would have prohibited discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in adoption and foster care placement.

In 2015, Michigan enacted a law stating that "a child placing agency shall not be required to provide any services if those services conflict with, or provide any services under circumstances that conflict with, the child placing agency's sincerely held religious beliefs contained in a written policy, statement of faith, or other document adhered to by the child placing agency." The law prohibits the state or local governments from taking "adverse action" against a child placing agency because of its refusal to provide services on the basis of those religious beliefs. In addition to requiring that the child placing agency set out its beliefs in writing, the law requires agencies that decline to provide services to refer the applicant to another agency or a list of agencies maintained by the state. As the bill was under consideration, Representative Jeff Irwin, who opposed the bill, stated that "[t]he whole goal of this package is to allow agencies to discriminate against same-sex couples." Representatives of the Michigan Catholic Conference and Michigan Family Forum, who supported the bill, justified it as a preemptive move to prevent adoption and foster-care agencies from having to comply with nondiscrimination laws requiring them to serve same-sex couples.

In 2017, South Dakota enacted a law barring the state from discriminating or taking adverse action against a child placement agency because it declines "to provide any service that conflicts with, or provide any service under circumstances that conflict with a sincerely-held religious belief or moral conviction of the child-placement agency." The committee debate on the bill focused primarily on religious objections to placing children with same-sex couples. Senator Alan Solano, who co-sponsored the bill, cited the Obergefell decision and the decision by Catholic Charities to withdraw from adoption and foster care services in Massachusetts, Illinois, California, and Washington, D.C. rather than comply with nondiscrimination laws that protect same-sex couples as the motivation for the law. Solano co-wrote the bill with Catholic Social Services, an agency which only places children with heterosexual couples. Governor Dennis Daugaard signed the bill into law, voicing a hope that it would prevent individuals in a protected class from suing child welfare agencies if they were denied placement.

In 2017, Alabama enacted a law that bars the state from discriminating or taking adverse action against a child placing agency "on the basis that the child placing agency declines to make, provide, facilitate, or refer for a placement in a manner that conflicts with, or under circumstances that conflict with, the sincerely held religious beliefs of the child placing agency." As the bill was debated, Representative Rich Wingo, who sponsored the bill, told press it was necessary to ensure that child welfare agencies are not compelled to place children with same-sex parents. Representative Patricia Todd, who opposed the bill, remarked that "[t]his bill obviously came about because same-sex marriage is approved."

In 2017, Texas enacted a law that broadly protects religious objections in child welfare services, defined to include not only child placement services but also services for abused or neglected children, counseling for children or parents, and family preservation and support services. It prevents the state from discriminating or taking adverse action against providers who decline to "provide, facilitate, or refer a person for child welfare services that conflict with, or under circumstances that conflict with, the provider's sincerely held religious beliefs" or provides the children in their care with a religious education. If a provider declines to provide a service because of religious objections, the government is supposed to ensure that an alternative provider is available in that area or a nearby area. The provider is supposed to refer the applicant to another service or the list of providers on the state's website. The law specifies that child welfare agencies may not deny placements based on race, ethnicity, or national origin; Representative Joe Moody introduced an amendment to include sex, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability as protected grounds, but the legislature rejected it.

Mental and Physical Health Care

In 2016, Tennessee enacted a law that states that "[n]o counselor or therapist providing counseling or therapy services shall be required to counsel or serve a client as to goals, outcomes, or behaviors that conflict with a sincerely held religious belief of the counselor or therapist." The law states that providers who refuse services should coordinate a referral to another provider who will see the client. According to the bill's sponsor, Senator Jack Johnson, the impetus for the bill was a change in the American Counseling Association's Code of Ethics which states that counselors should "refrain from referring prospective and current clients based solely on the counselor's personally held values, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors." In committee, Senator Jeff Yarbro noted that the public debate on the bill "has been very much focused on issues of same-sex marriage," and Senator Rusty Crowe noted that although same-sex couples can now marry, the bill could exempt religious objectors from having to counsel them. Members of the Tennessee Association of Marriage and Family Therapists testified against the bill, stating that it was unnecessary in light of established referral mechanisms within the profession and would open the door to discrimination.

The framing and scope of these exemption laws differ in many respects, but are alike in several fundamental ways. First, they are motivated to a large degree by hostility to recent advances in LGBT equality; on their face they invoke only a concern for religious liberty but the public debate around and legislative history of many of these laws show quite clearly the animus and the discriminatory intent that underpin them. Second, they permit blatantly discriminatory practices without clear limitations or meaningful safeguards. They do not strike a careful balance-or even suggest that any serious attempt was made to do so-between religious exercise and the purposes of the underlying law from which the exemption is carved out, a feature of rights-respecting approaches to religious exemptions. Third, they often show no regard whatsoever for the harms that the discrimination they legitimize might inflict on those who are turned away from a range of important services and for the nondiscrimination principle itself.

These laws are directly harmful, and they take on added importance because of the larger message they send. By enacting these laws, states send a clear signal that discrimination against LGBT people is permissible-and that message has serious consequences at a time when discrimination against LGBT people remains all too common in the United States.

Proponents of exemptions that allow for anti-LGBT discrimination have framed them in terms of religious liberty, foregrounding how these laws might exempt businesses and service providers from laws and regulations that they find objectionable. The assumption seems to be that the resulting harms to LGBT individuals, or to the core value of equality, are insubstantial. As detailed below, however, the exemptions come at a high price.

To understand the harm, it is important to look at the larger context in which such laws are being considered, including pre-existing anti-LGBT discrimination and how exemption laws can encourage such discrimination, particularly in states without nondiscrimination protections. Anti-LGBT religious exemption laws are likely to exacerbate mistreatment because, both on their face and in the political discourse that surrounds them, they tend to legitimize and signal official acceptance of discrimination against LGBT people. And by restricting the state's ability to prohibit, sanction, or even discourage discrimination, the laws undermine the core principle of nondiscrimination law: that people should not face adverse treatment simply because of who they are.

Denying Goods and Services

Already, LGBT people often face discrimination by service providers who deny them goods and services. Where discrimination against LGBT people is permitted, because nondiscrimination laws do not exist, these problems tend to be worse. The following pages describe the tangible, human impact of such discrimination-which will likely worsen as a result of religious exemption laws-on the people who bear the brunt of it.

Incidents of Refusals

In states without nondiscrimination protections, individuals told Human Rights Watch that they had been denied access to goods and services because of a provider's religious beliefs. Leiana C., a 39-year-old lesbian woman in Mississippi, recalled an incident that occurred around 2012 when she and her wife were seeking a fertility doctor:

Tanya P., a 33-year-old woman in Tennessee, recalled the difficulties she faced obtaining affirming care for her transgender daughter in 2016. To obtain identity documents for her daughter that reflected her gender identity, Tanya needed to submit a note from her daughter's doctor affirming that she was undergoing appropriate clinical treatment. At the time, her daughter was already obtaining that treatment, had socially transitioned, and was seeing a therapist. Nonetheless, her pediatrician refused to provide a letter stating that information, citing his religious beliefs:

LGBT individuals have also experienced religious refusals in child welfare services. Recently, the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan filed suit challenging the state's practice of granting contracts and funding to child welfare agencies that discriminate against same-sex couples. The suit was filed after two sets of prospective parents-Kristy and Dana Dumont and Erin and Rebecca Busk-Sutton-contacted religiously affiliated agencies in the state about adopting children from foster care and were informed the agencies did not work with same-sex couples. The Dumonts wanted to provide a foster home to an older child; they contacted the two agencies in their county that have older children eligible for foster placement and were told the agencies would not work with them as a same-sex couple. The Busk-Suttons were interested in adopting a child with special needs and were initially told by one agency that they would receive an information packet in the mail; when the packet did not arrive, they called to inquire and were told the agency does not specialize in same-sex couples. While the religiously affiliated agencies offered names of providers in neighboring counties, both couples expressed concern about traveling for the trainings and visits associated with becoming foster parents and potentially taking an older foster child or a child with special needs out of a county where they have family or are currently receiving services.

As Zawadski's case illustrates, refusals can occur in circumstances where LGBT people urgently need services and cannot readily access alternatives in the event that they are turned away.

Impacts of Refusals

When LGBT people are refused service, this discrimination has material and psychological consequences. Some individuals will obtain the good or service they sought, but will face additional costs: finding an alternative provider can require time, energy, and money, which can prove discouraging or even prohibitive.

Refusals create barriers to accessing mental and physical healthcare as well. Persephone Webb, an activist in Tennessee, noted:

Rhonda L., the mother of a transgender teenager in Tennessee, recalled how even available alternatives in the urban area could be prohibitively difficult:

Finally, even where LGBT people are ultimately able to obtain needed services elsewhere, incidents of discrimination can be psychologically traumatic and degrading. Rhonda L. said her transgender son had experienced hostility or overt religiosity from multiple healthcare professionals, including a pediatrician, dentist, gastrointestinal specialist, and pulmonologist. She described how these incidents affected him, making him unwilling to seek medical care even when it was urgently needed:

Added Harms of Religious Exemptions

As the incidents described above help illustrate, the absence of laws prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity leaves LGBT people vulnerable to mistreatment, including mistreatment motivated by moral or religious convictions. Many of the incidents above occurred prior to the introduction of religious exemption laws, but were legally permissible because the state lacked any law providing protection from discriminatory treatment.

Second, as statutory provisions, religious exemption laws can override other protections that may exist for LGBT people. In Mississippi, for example, the cities of Jackson and Magnolia have nondiscrimination laws that protect sexual orientation and gender identity; the statewide imposition of HB 1523 allows religious objectors in those cities to cite the state law excusing them from compliance. As statutory provisions, these exemptions can also override administrative policies and practices that departments of health or child welfare have adopted to combat discrimination.

Finally, interviewees emphasized that the scope of religious exemptions is poorly understood, and many people perceive these exemptions as blanket permission to discriminate based on religious beliefs. Chris Sanders, the Executive Director of the Tennessee Equality Project, suggested:

David Dinelli, an attorney with the Southern Poverty Law Center, echoed this assessment. "My observation from being in the Deep South is that it almost doesn't matter what the law says. This narrative has taken hold, and now people are doing things that in no way would be authorized by the law itself."

Discouraging Access to Services

As noted above, most states in the US do not specifically prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, and discrimination against LGBT people remains widespread. Religious exemptions not only license the kinds of refusals discussed above, but encourage people to expect and fear discrimination and adapt accordingly.

It is important to note that, while these initiatives can alleviate gaps in service, they are not a sufficient substitute for full equality under the law. Many LGBT organizations do not have the resources to compile and maintain lists of affirming providers. Where they are developed, such lists tend to be ad hoc and non-exhaustive, as they rely on providers who are known to advocates to be reliably LGBT inclusive. A provider with competency with one population-for example, adult gay men-may not be similarly equipped to serve the needs of another-for example, transgender youth. The approach is particularly limited insofar as known providers are often concentrated in urban areas, with the result that LGBT people who live in rural areas may have to travel hundreds of miles to reach a provider who they know will serve them. And because these lists typically list only a fraction of the providers in a given state, the roster of providers can be quickly overwhelmed by demand.

In Tennessee, where state law allows counselors to decline to see LGBT patients based on their religious beliefs, researchers at the University of Tennessee have studied how these refusal laws impact self-concealment and psychological distress. One researcher on the project noted:

Healthcare providers expressed concern about how fears of discrimination were affecting the mental and physical health of LGBT populations in their states. One pediatrician in Alabama observed:

Kelley Blair, who runs the Diversity Center in Oklahoma City, OK, noted a similar phenomenon for adults at her practice, which specifically caters to the LGBT community:

Harms to Dignity

The harms of religious exemptions are not limited to outright refusals or deterring LGBT people from seeking goods and services. Interviewees in states with LGBT-targeted religious exemption laws in place also emphasized the harms to dignity and stigma that the laws impose on LGBT individuals and families.

While this message could be received from those who discriminated based on their faith generally, some interviewees indicated it was particularly injurious when it was endorsed by the state:

Proponents of sweeping religious exemptions have typically couched their claims in the language of religious freedom or religious liberty. International human rights law recognizes the importance of those rights, but also elaborates their limits, particularly where their exercise threatens to negatively impact the fundamental rights of others. Not only does the United States carry obligations under international law to respect these limits and safeguards, but more broadly the jurisprudence developed under international human rights law offers sound guidance to legislators seeking to strike a careful balance between rights that seem to stand in tension with one another.

Harmonizing Equality and the Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion

The United States is party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which guarantees equal protection under the law as well as the freedom of thought, conscience, and religion.

Other Rights at Risk from Religious Exemptions

The religious exemptions being introduced to license discrimination in child welfare services, physical and mental healthcare, and public accommodations not only impinge upon the rights of LGBT individuals to equal treatment, they also jeopardize the enjoyment of several other rights as well.

Nondiscrimination More Broadly

While the religious exemption laws examined in this report were introduced as a result of gains that LGBT people have made in attaining nondiscrimination protections and the ability to adopt, marry, and form families under state and federal law, many of the exemptions being introduced at the state level are not limited to religious objections related to sexual orientation and gender identity. As critics have pointed out, many bills would broadly preclude states from taking action against religious objectors who operate according to their religious principles to the detriment of other groups as well, and potentially authorize forms of discrimination based on race, ethnicity, sex, religion, nationality, disability, veteran status, HIV status, and other classifications. States that enact these laws relinquish their ability to ensure that state funding and contracts support services available to all qualified recipients, and give a free pass to potentially sweeping discrimination under the color of state authority.

Right to Health

Children's Rights

To the US Congress

Enact the Equality Act or other legislation which would prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, education, healthcare, housing, and public accommodations.

Enact the Do No Harm Act, which would not allow the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to be used to carve out exemptions from federal laws and protections regarding nondiscrimination, labor, children's rights, and healthcare.

Enact the Every Child Deserves a Family Act, which would prohibit child welfare agencies that receive federal financial assistance from discriminating against foster parents based on sexual orientation, gender identity, and marital status.

Reject the First Amendment Defense Act, the Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act, and other legislation that permits discrimination against LGBT people based on a provider's asserted religious beliefs.

To the US Department of Justice

Ensure that existing conscience protections are not misused to excuse or justify discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, and other classifications.

To State Legislatures

Enact legislation prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, education, healthcare, housing, adoption and foster care, and public accommodations.

Repeal religious exemptions that require the state to continue licensing, funding, or otherwise supporting providers who discriminate against others according to their beliefs.

To State Human Rights Commissions

Affirm that discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity is unacceptable and investigate incidents of discrimination based on those grounds.

Ensure that existing conscience protections are not misused to excuse or justify discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, and other classifications.

Ryan Thoreson, a researcher in the LGBT Rights Program, wrote this report based on research that he undertook from August 2017 to January 2018.

The report was reviewed by Graeme Reid, director of the LGBT Rights Program; Grace Meng, senior researcher in the US Program; Amanda Klasing, senior researcher in the Women's Rights Division; Megan McLemore, senior researcher in the Health and Human Rights Division, Chris Albin-Lackey, senior legal advisor; and Joseph Saunders, deputy program director. Production assistance was provided by MJ Movahedi, LGBT Rights Program associate, Rebecca Rom-Frank, Photo & Publications coordinator; Fitzroy Hepkins, administrative manager; and Jose Martinez, senior coordinator.

Human Rights Watch would like to thank the experts and organizations that provided information for the report, especially the American Civil Liberties Union, the Movement Advancement Project, the ACLU of Michigan, Equality Michigan, the Tennessee Equality Project, the Tennessee Transgender Political Coalition, Voices for Trans Youth, the ACLU of Mississippi, and Lighthouse Community Church.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This report documents how recent laws carve out space to discriminate against LGBT people in adoption and foster care, health care, and access to some goods and services. These laws fail to balance moral and religious objections to LGBT relationships and identities with the rights of LGBT people themselves, Human Rights Watch found.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why gender equality is not just about women | Caroline Strachan | TEDxFolkestone

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What You Can Do to Reduce Gender Bias And Why You Should | Susan Fleming | TEDxCornellUniversity

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Brené Brown | Daring Classrooms | SXSWedu 2017

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Greatest Showman | "This Is Me" with Keala Settle | 20th Century FOX

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ellen Meets LGBT Activist & Valedictorian Seth Owen

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A handful of states, including California and Texas, are set to receive a disproportionate number of the tens of thousands of Afghans evacuated to the U.S., while other states are expected to resettle fewer than a dozen evacuees or none at all, according to government data obtained by CBS News.

The Biden administration this week notified state authorities of the number of Afghan evacuees each state could receive in the coming weeks as part of the first phase of a massive resettlement operation that is slated to place nearly 37,000 refugees from Afghanistan in U.S. communities.

California is expected to receive 5,225 Afghan evacuees, the most of any state. Texas is set to receive 4,481 Afghans, followed by Oklahoma, which is expected to host 1,800 evacuees. Washington state and Arizona are each slated to receive more than 1,600 evacuees.

The other states set to receive more than 1,000 Afghan evacuees during the first resettlement phase are Maryland, Michigan, Virginia, Missouri, New York, Georgia, North Carolina and Florida, according to the government statistics that were first reported by The Associated Press.

Alabama, Delaware, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana and North Dakota are all set to resettle fewer than 100 Afghans. Alabama and Mississippi are expected to receive just 10 evacuees.

Hawaii, Wyoming, West Virginia and South Dakota are not currently slated to resettle any evacuees from Afghanistan.

The 37,000 Afghans expected to be resettled in communities across the country in the coming weeks form a subset of a larger number of evacuees from Afghanistan who have been relocated to the U.S.

As of Wednesday morning, there were more than 53,000 Afghan evacuees at eight military installations across the U.S. mainland that are serving as temporary housing sites while the new arrivals complete immigration paperwork, as well as vaccination against measles and COVID-19, according to internal data obtained by CBS News.

Other Afghans who were airlifted from Kabul and taken to the U.S. did not go to the military sites because their immigration paperwork had been completed abroad.

In addition to the Afghans transported to the U.S., more than 12,000 evacuees remained at military sites in Germany, Spain, Italy, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar as of Wednesday morning awaiting U.S. security vetting and immigration processing.

U.S.-bound flights of evacuees are currently suspended because of a handful of measles cases among the new arrivals that were first detected last Friday.

The Biden administration has asked Congress for funding to support the resettlement of up to 65,000 Afghans through October and another 30,000 during the following fiscal year.

Some of the Afghans coming to the U.S. assisted the American war effort and have special immigrant visa cases that also allow their spouses and children to gain permanent U.S. status. Other Afghans have been granted U.S. entry because they were determined to be at-risk in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, including women, children, journalists, activists, humanitarian aid workers and American embassy staff.

Most evacuees have entered the U.S. under parole, a process that allows the entry of immigrants who don't have approved visas on humanitarian grounds.

The State Department set up the Afghan Placement and Assistance (APA) program to help Afghan parolees, who don't qualify for traditional refugee benefits or a direct pathway to U.S. permanent status.

The program is designed to help the nine national resettlement agencies and their local affiliates assist Afghan parolees with housing, food, clothing and other services that facilitate their integration into U.S. communities.

Because many Afghan parolees do not have pending special visa applications, the Biden administration has urged Congress to allow them to apply for green cards after a year in the U.S.

Unless Congress creates a legalization program for them, Afghan parolees may need to enter the backlogged U.S. asylum pipeline to try to stay in the U.S. permanently.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Where Afghan refugees are expected to be resettled, by state

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A handful of states, including California and Texas, are set to receive a disproportionate number of the tens of thousands of Afghans evacuated to the U.S., while other states are expected to resettle fewer than a dozen evacuees or none at all, according to government data obtained by CBS News.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Office of Academic Support and Disability Services (OASDS) was established in 2003 to help maximize the academic success and persistence to graduation of all students. The office provides focused services for students with disabilities and students typically underrepresented in higher education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Academic Support and Disability Services

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Office of Academic Support and Disability Services (OASDS) was established in 2003 to help maximize the academic success and persistence to graduation of all students. The office provides focused services for students with disabilities and students typically underrepresented in higher education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
New PBS NewsHour Video Segment: "Childhood trauma impacts millions of Americans, and it's having devastating consequences"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Here's how the PBS NewsHour introduces tonight's video: Childhood trauma impacts millions of Americans, and its consequences can be devastating. Those experiencing high levels of...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Students across Illinois will be able to take up to five excused mental health days starting in January.

Under a bill signed into law by Gov. J.B. Pritzker last month, students who decide to take a mental health day will not be required to provide their school with a doctor's note and will be able to make up any work that was missed on their day off.

"Having this now for all students across the state will be really beneficial, especially with what's going on with COVID," State Rep. Barbara Hernandez, who co-sponsored the bill, told the Journal-Courier. "Many students feel stressed, and have developed anxiety and depression because they're not able to see teachers and friends, and may have lower grades due to remote learning."

Child psychiatrists say they expect more children will need help

The pandemic has placed unique strains on children, and as a new school year begins, child psychiatrists say they expect to see a surge of kids who need help.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, between March and May of last year, hospitals across the country saw a 24% increase in the number of mental health emergency visits by kids aged 5 to 11 years old, and a 31% increase for kids 12 to 17.

"The younger school-age kids are more anxious about separation from their parents and caregivers," child and adolescent psychiatrist Dr. Ujjwal Ramtekkar at Nationwide Children's Hospital in Ohio, told NPR. "They're worried about getting sick," or their parents getting sick.

For teens, the challenges can be somewhat different, according to Ramtekkar. Most teenagers are struggling with social and academic anxiety, he said, as most are worried about socializing with their peers again and adapting to full-time in-person learning.

The new law is designed to help kids get care

With the new law in Illinois, Hernandez says students will have more of an opportunity to get the care they need.

"I am really excited for this. I think it will help students, parents and teachers, and can help them understand what's going on in their students' lives," Hernandez said.

Once a student requests a second mental health day, a school counselor will reach out to their family and the student may be referred to get professional help, according to the bill.

Hernandez says that after students take their second mental health day, they should understand that a conversation with an adult is needed about whatever it is they're going through.

"Many students are going through a lot mentally and emotionally and they need support," Hernandez said.

Several states have taken similar steps

School districts across Illinois will have until the end of the year to come up with a specific plan to execute the new law ahead of its effective date in January.

Illinois joins states such as Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Nevada, Oregon and Virginia that have passed similar bills over the last two years allowing students to be absent from school due to mental or behavioral health reasons, according to The New York Times.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Kids In Illinois Will Soon Be Able To Take 5 Mental Health Days From School

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Students across Illinois will be able to take up to five excused mental health days starting in January. Under a bill signed into law by Gov. J.B. Pritzker last month, students who decide to take a mental health day will not be required to provide their school with a doctor's note and will be able to make up any work that was missed on their day off.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Academic Success for All Students: A Multi-Tiered Approach

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Colleen Riley: What is a Multi-Tier System of Supports (MTSS)?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For the first time in at least 50 years, a majority of U.S. public school students come from low-income families, according to a new analysis of 2013 federal data, a statistic that has profound implications for the nation.

The Southern Education Foundation reports that 51 percent of students in pre-kindergarten through 12th grade in the 2012-2013 school year were eligible for the federal program that provides free and reduced-price lunches. The lunch program is a rough proxy for poverty, but the explosion in the number of needy children in the nation's public classrooms is a recent phenomenon that has been gaining attention among educators, public officials and researchers.

"We've all known this was the trend, that we would get to a majority, but it's here sooner rather than later," said Michael A. Rebell of the Campaign for Educational Equity at Teachers College at Columbia University, noting that the poverty rate has been increasing even as the economy has improved. "A lot of people at the top are doing much better, but the people at the bottom are not doing better at all. Those are the people who have the most children and send their children to public school."

The shift to a majority-poor student population means that in public schools, a growing number of children start kindergarten already trailing their more privileged peers and rarely, if ever, catch up. They are less likely to have support at home, are less frequently exposed to enriching activities outside of school, and are more likely to drop out and never attend college.

It also means that education policy, funding decisions and classroom instruction must adapt to the needy children who arrive at school each day.

"When they first come in my door in the morning, the first thing I do is an inventory of immediate needs: Did you eat? Are you clean? A big part of my job is making them feel safe," said Sonya Romero-Smith, a veteran teacher at Lew Wallace Elementary School in Albuquerque. Fourteen of her 18 kindergartners are eligible for free lunches.

She helps them clean up with bathroom wipes and toothbrushes, and she stocks a drawer with clean socks, underwear, pants and shoes.

Romero-Smith, 40, who has been a teacher for 19 years, became a foster mother in November to two girls, sisters who attend her school. They had been homeless, their father living on the streets and their mother in jail, she said. When she brought the girls home, she was shocked by the disarray of their young lives.

"Getting rid of bedbugs, that took us a while. Night terrors, that took a little while. Hoarding food, flushing a toilet and washing hands, it took us a little while," she said. "You spend some time with little ones like this and it's gut wrenching. . . . These kids aren't thinking, 'Am I going to take a test today?' They're thinking, 'Am I going to be okay?' "

The job of teacher has expanded to "counselor, therapist, doctor, parent, attorney," she said.

Schools, already under intense pressure to deliver better test results and meet more rigorous standards, face the doubly difficult task of trying to raise the achievement of poor children so that they approach the same level as their more affluent peers.

"This is a watershed moment when you look at that map," said Kent McGuire, president of the Southern Education Foundation, the nation's oldest education philanthropy, referring to a large swath of the country filled with high-poverty schools.

"The fact is, we've had growing inequality in the country for many years," he said. "It didn't happen overnight, but it's steadily been happening. Government used to be a source of leadership and innovation around issues of economic prosperity and upward mobility. Now we're a country disinclined to invest in our young people."

The data show poor students spread across the country, but the highest rates are concentrated in Southern and Western states. In 21 states, at least half the public school children were eligible for free and reduced-price lunches - ranging from Mississippi, where more than 70 percent of students were from low-income families, to Illinois, where one of every two students was low-income.

Carey Wright, Mississippi's state superintendent of education, said quality preschool is the key to helping poor children.

"That's huge," she said. "These children can learn at the highest levels, but you have to provide for them. You can't assume they have books at home, or they visit the library or go on vacations. You have to think about what you're doing across the state and ensuring they're getting what other children get."

Darren Walker, president of the Ford Foundation, was born in a charity hospital in 1959 to a single mother. Federal programs helped shrink the obstacles he faced, first by providing him with Head Start, the early-childhood education program, and later, Pell grants to help pay tuition at the University of Texas, he said.

The country needs to make that same commitment today to help poor children, he said.

"Even at 8 or 9 years old, I knew that America wanted me to succeed," he said. "What we know is that the mobility escalator has simply stopped for some Americans. I was able to ride that mobility escalator in part because there were so many people, and parts of our society, cheering me on."

"We need to fix the escalator," he said. "We fix it by recommitting ourselves to the idea of public education. We have the capacity. The question is, do we have the will?"

The new report raises questions among educators and officials about whether states and the federal government are devoting enough money - and using it effectively - to meet the complex needs of poor children.

The Obama administration wants Congress to add $1 billion to the $14.4 billion it spends annually to help states educate poor children. It also wants Congress to fund preschool for those from low-income families. Collectively, the states and the federal government spend about $500 billion annually on primary and secondary schools, about $79 billion of it from Washington.

The amount spent on each student can vary wildly from state to state. States with high student-poverty rates tend to spend less per student: Of the 27 states with the highest percentages of student poverty, all but five spent less than the national average of $10,938 per student.

Republicans in Congress have been wary of new spending programs, arguing that more money is not necessarily the answer and that federal dollars could be more effective if redundant programs were streamlined and more power was given to states.

Many Republicans also think that the government ought to give tax dollars to low-income families to use as vouchers for private-school tuition, believing that is a better alternative to public schools.

GOP leaders in Congress have rebuffed President Obama's calls to fund preschool for low-income families, although a number of Republican and Democratic governors have initiated state programs in the past several years.

The report comes as Congress begins debate about rewriting the country's main federal education law, first passed as part of President Lyndon B. Johnson's "War on Poverty" and designed to help states educate poor children. The most recent version of the law, known as No Child Left Behind, has emphasized accountability and outcomes, measuring whether schools met benchmarks and sanctioning them when they fell short.

That federal focus on results, as opposed to need, is wrongheaded, Rebell said.

"We have to think about how to give these kids a meaningful education," he said. "We have to give them quality teachers, small class sizes, up-to-date equipment. But in addition, if we're serious, we have to do things that overcome the damages of poverty. We have to meet their health needs, their mental health needs, after-school programs, summer programs, parent engagement, early-childhood services. These are the so-called wraparound services. Some people think of them as add-ons. They're not. They're imperative."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Majority of U.S. public school students are in poverty

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For the first time in at least 50 years, a majority of U.S. public school students come from low-income families, according to a new analysis of 2013 federal data, a statistic that has profound implications for the nation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Park Avenue: Money, Power and the American Dream⎜WHY POVERTY?⎜(Documentary)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The first episode in the three-part series Race: The Power of an Illusion explores if differences exist in biological variation on the basis of race.

Get full access to this content

This teaching resource includes content that is reserved for logged in visitors to our site.

If you don't have an account, you can sign up -it's fast, easy, and free. Once signed up, you'll also have access to your own Workspace, where you can save resources and create collections.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Race: The Power of an Illusion (The Difference Between Us)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The first episode in the three-part series Race: The Power of an Illusion explores if differences exist in biological variation on the basis of race. This teaching resource includes content that is reserved for logged in visitors to our site. If you don't have an account, you can sign up -it's fast, easy, and free.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Anthony Ramos, Leslie Odom, Jr., and the "Hamilton" casting directors reveal the process behind casting Black and brown faces as historic white figures.

With " Hamilton" available on Disney+ this weekend, the biggest sensation in Broadway history finally found a mass audience. For five years, Lin-Manuel Miranda's Pulitzer-winning refashioning of the Founding Fathers was the rare cultural event that only a select few could witness. Now, anyone can can see the original cast of mostly Black and brown faces assuming the roles of historic white figures, a decision that adds depth and provocation to every moment.

The diversity presented a unique challenge: While the Puerto Rican Miranda always intended to play the lead, he and director Thomas Kail never specified ethnicities for any of the roles. Character breakdowns included a wide range of cultural references: Hamilton was "Eminem meets Sweeney Todd," his wife Eliza was "Alicia Keys meets Elphaba," peer-turned-killer Aaron Burr was "Javert meets Mos Def," and George Washington was "John Legend meets Mufasa." By the end of the original casting process, all of those roles went to people of color.

That outcome was guided by Telsey + Company's Bethany Knox and founder Bernie Telsey, who previously cast Miranda's Broadway debut "In the Heights." With "Hamilton," the pair had no specific directives about the racial breakdown. "It was never led by numbers or whatnot," Telsey said in a phone interview. "It was about wanting to see that everybody from America was on that stage. That's what made it tricky."

However, with "Hamilton" reworking the homogenous notion of America's origins through a more complex prism, that gave them enough of a starting point. "Lin was pretty set on making sure the diversity was there to tell the story," Knox said. "We really just started auditioning people, and the characters sort of fell into place."

Miranda, who has chosen his words carefully ever since "Hamilton" took off, declined to comment for this story. However, in a 2013 interview with Radical Media, he hinted at his approach during the writing process. "I'm not thinking in terms of race at all when I cast it," he said. "I'm going to cast the best rappers I can find, whether they're white or not. It's a thorny issue, but I think that race and gender should be considered the same way that height and age are - they're a factor."

In 2016, the show weathered some backlash for a casting call that encouraged "non-white" actors to audition for main roles. Since then, the wording was changed, but the idea remains intact: The show leans into diversity as guiding principle, yielding conversations about how the longstanding notion of "colorblind casting" no longer has legs.

"The term wasn't wrong at one time," said Telsey, who recalled attending a roundtable in the '80s about "non-traditional" casting approaches. "It was created with the idea that anyone can do anything, and we should be open to that. But now it's much more about consciously making a choice to do something, being seen for the color you are. 'Hamilton' does that."

The concept of "color-conscious casting" has gained traction in recent years, but "Hamilton" stars stressed that the musical served to repudiate the mainstream approach. "I don't know how I feel about the term," said Anthony Ramos, who originated the dual roles of John Laurens and Philip Hamilton before scoring the lead in the upcoming "In the Heights" adaptation from Warner Bros. "But I know how I feel about it in reference to Broadway and Hollywood. They definitely have to work harder as a business to open this up."

Post-"Hamilton," Ramos' star rose with gigs ranging from Netflix's "She's Gotta Have It" to "A Star Is Born," but he said he has been frustrated by the lack of diversity behind the scenes. "Many of the white executives sitting in their chairs have the power to make these decisions," he said. "You have the power to hire that Black or brown person to come onto your team. Open it up."

The implications of the "Hamilton" cast were clear to Leslie Odom, Jr. even before he landed the role of Aaron Burr. Odom said when he sat through a rough version of "The Hamilton Mixtape" in 2014 at a theater workshop in Poughkeepsie, with Utkarsh Ambudkar in the Burr part, it had unmistakable intent. "There is irony, dissonance, and boldness attached to the way Lin and Tommy chose to populate the stage," he said. "That is done consciously. There's nothing blind about it."

In 2020, with Run the Jewels rapping about "all these slave masters posing on your dollar" on their album "RTJ4," the images of those very same men in "Hamilton" take on subversive connotations. "Their deficiencies are well-documented and glaring," said Christopher Jackson, who originated the George Washington role. "It was a very powerful choice to take the idea of these men and present them through the bodies and vessels of Black and brown actors. It represents the fact that our role in building this country has never truly been acknowledged, and I think it opened up the audiences' minds to the spirit of what these men meant, even if they were woefully incapable of living it out in their own experiences."

Aside from the overarching narration, "Hamilton" doesn't break the fourth wall as much as it turns to double meanings. Its biggest applause moment comes when Miranda and Daveed Diggs (as Marquis de Lafayette) high-five to the line, "Immigrants - we get the job done." For Odom, "there's a deliciousness to watching Hamilton and Lafayette say that line." In the wake of "Hamilton," Odom said he has been compelled to contemplate the decision to cast someone who looks like him at every opportunity. "Real questions come up when you cast a person of color," he said. "I want to face those questions head on, and search for the answers to them."

In the initial "Hamilton" auditions, Knox said, "we didn't need to clarify ethnicity. It was never really a conversation." That even extended to the most prominent white role in the show - King George, who comes across as a flamboyant psychopath lording over his colonies and desperate to keep them in line. The gig went to Jonathan Groff, who scored a Tony nomination - but despite the symbolism of a white man treating his subjects like property, that choice was never specified.

"The king is white, but doesn't have to be," Knox said. "In many of our earlier versions, King George was not white." As the company continues to cast touring versions of "Hamilton," Knox keeps her options open. "I don't know that there couldn't be a person at some point playing the role that wasn't white," she said. "I think they'd be open to that. The effort is to get the best person."

When "Hamilton" first hit the road in fall 2016 in Chicago, the show's success brought a new set of issues. "It's about reinventing each character," Knox said. "A small Asian man can be a Lafayette," as opposed to Diggs, a tall African American. "It's about keeping the standards high and continuing to discover the best people for this material that can properly tell this story."

The casting company has found that "Hamilton" comes up on a lot of its projects, which stretch across theater, film, and television. "It's definitely opened up the conversation a lot more in casting and other shows we work on even when the story's completely different," said Telsey. "You wind up talking about it a lot."

Ramos noted the resonance of the approach in Lee's decision to cast him as Mars Blackmon in the Netflix series "She's Gotta Have It," a role that Lee himself originated. "Many people have experienced times where there's only one Asian role, one Latino role, or one African American role," Ramos said. "How do we acquire that space if there's only one available?"

For Odom, the answer has come in a willingness to take on material that may or may not yield strong results. "I know I'm not only going to work on Pulitzer Prize-winning dramas for the rest of my career," he said. "I'm going to take swings on things that might not pan out. We didn't know that 'Hamilton' would at the start, and that really reorders your priorities."

For the casting team behind "Hamilton," the show's national availability on Disney+ provides an opportunity consider the proactive nature of casting today. "It's not just about casting diverse," Telsey said. "It really means having a conversation and making a choice. That's what's happening now in America with everything. 'Hamilton' is only going to remind people that when make that decision, it can be the right one."
"Hamilton" is now available to stream on Disney+.
Sign Up: Stay on top of the latest breaking film and TV news! Sign up for our Email Newsletters here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How 'Hamilton' Became a Color-Conscious Casting Trailblazer, Before It Was Cool

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Anthony Ramos, Leslie Odom, Jr., and the "Hamilton" casting directors reveal the process behind casting Black and brown faces as historic white figures. With " Hamilton" available on Disney+ this weekend, the biggest sensation in Broadway history finally found a mass audience.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In our daily lives, we may encounter phrases like "I am disabled" or "My child has special needs." And to someone who is not part of the community, this wording may seem synonymous. But it's not.

Most experts and advocates vehemently oppose the term "special needs," and believe we need to eliminate it from our vernacular. Furthermore, they say avoiding the term " disabled" only leads to stigmatization.

For some, the term "special needs" feels offensive.

"I am disabled by society due to my impairment," says Lisette Torres-Gerald, board secretary for the National Coalition for Latinxs with Disabilities. "My needs are not 'special;' they are the same, human needs that everyone else has, and I should be able to fully participate in society just as much as the next person."

It can also be counterproductive.

Researchers from a 2016 study found people who are referred to as having "special needs" are seen more negatively than those referred to as having a disability.

Lawrence Carter-Long went viral with the hashtag #SayTheWord several years ago in an effort to promote the use of "disabled."

Carter-Long, communications director for the Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund, says the word disabled connects members of the community "to each other, our common history, and to the lineage of all those who fought, protested and persisted so that one day we could be proud of disability history too."

Torres-Gerald says there is power in the word disabled.

"I am not ashamed to be disabled; I consider it a difference that allows me to view the world in a different way than other people."
Must-watch:'Best Summer Ever' is a feel-good musical and a big win for disability inclusion
The history of the term 'special needs'

It's not clear where the term "special needs" originated; one theory is "special needs" arose following the launch of the Special Olympics in the 1960s, according to the 2016 study published in "Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications."

The National Center on Disability and Journalism says special needs "was popularized in the U.S. in the early 20th century during a push for special needs education to serve people with all kinds of disabilities."

Data shows it permeated the public consciousness over the last few decades. Special needs has grown increasingly popular in books the past several decades, while "handicapped" has decreased significantly.

The term is not a legal one - in fact, it only appears about a dozen times across thousands of pages of laws in the U.S. "Never once are children with disabilities or adults with disabilities referred to as children with special needs or adults with special needs," according to the study. "Rather, individuals with disabilities are always referred to in U.S. law as individuals with disabilities."

Jamie Davis Smith, whose daughter is disabled, points out that people with disabilities are entitled to certain rights as a result - from movie theater seating to Medicaid and more.
Listen: Dad of triplets launches podcast about autism to help parents find hope
"Special needs" doesn't offer the same legal protections.

The term 'special needs' is harmful, experts say

"Special needs" has actually become a "dysphemism" - a derogatory term as opposed to a softer one. Like saying "loony bin" instead of "mental hospital."

Quinn West, a disabled artist living in Chicago, grew up going to a mainstream school and felt the impact of the term "special needs."

"Abled people assume that saying 'special' means a 'good special' when disabled kids who went through the system know that kids would use 'special' as an insult," West says.
In case you missed: Sia's 'Music' angers the autism community: 'I don't even know where to start'
West says it makes those who are disabled sound like an extra burden, when that's not the case; "I'm deaf, so like everyone else I need communication. That need isn't anything extraordinary. It's the same need for human connection, but I just need an accommodation to do so."

Nila Morton, a 22-year old college student, disabled advocate and model in South Carolina, says that words matter. "It's OK to say 'disabled' and 'disability,'" Morton says. "Those words aren't bad. The only reason they are seen as bad is because of the able-normative view of disability."

What parents say about their children with disabilities

Parents may be more comfortable using "special needs." But their children most likely won't take that with them into adulthood.

"While it is used by parents of disabled kids, as those kids become young adults, they do not use this term," Lauren Appelbaum, vice president of communications at RespectAbility says.

Smith doesn't want her disabled daughter Claire to have "special" treatment. Her daughter simply requires extra support. "I think it's really important that non-disabled people, people who don't know people with disabilities, understand that I'm not really asking for anything that special for my daughter, I'm just asking that she be able to participate in her community, in life, on an equal basis as my other kids," she says.

Parents who opt to use the term are not coming from a bad place.

"Parents, like all of us, are prone to adopt whatever is common in the ecosystem that surrounds them," Carter-Long says. "And since most folks aren't born into disabled families, it's no surprise that they just adopt whatever their friends and neighbors do. Even if it's unintentionally bigoted. Even if it harms their kids in ways they don't quite understand."

What you should be saying instead

The National Center on Disability and Journalism recommends never using it: "Our advice: avoid the term 'special needs.' Disabled is acceptable in most contexts, but we advise asking the person to whom you're referring what they prefer."
Interesting: How 'Everything's Gonna Be Okay' avoids Hollywood's (and Sia's) pitfalls portraying autism
Sonja Sharp, a metro reporter with the Los Angeles Times, prefers identity-first language: "disabled" over "person with disabilities." "It's cleaner, it's simpler, and it's more reflective of my reality," Sharp says. "The law defines me as disabled."

For Sharp, disability is at the core of her identity.

"Every significant experience - school, friendships, puberty, sex, career, marriage, motherhood - has been shaped by this body, made different because of this body," she says. "I am disabled the way I am Jewish - intrinsic and inseparable from me."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'I am not ashamed': Disability advocates, experts implore you to stop saying 'special needs'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In our daily lives, we may encounter phrases like "I am disabled" or "My child has special needs." And to someone who is not part of the community, this wording may seem synonymous. But it's not. Most experts and advocates vehemently oppose the term "special needs," and believe we need to eliminate it from our vernacular.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Plyler vs. Doe: A Landmark Supreme Court Case

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Immigration crackdown fears fuel uncertainty for undocumented students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Jimmy Kimmel Talks to Kids - What's the Difference Between a Boy & a Girl?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Supporting Families in a Time of Fear.pdf

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Taken into foster care, through the eyes of a child

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
If a homeless student is worrying about where he is spending the night, it's likely he's not going to be thinking much about his homework. And in one of the poorest districts in Kansas, educators have realized that to help homeless students they needed to do more to help homeless families. Special correspondent Lisa Stark of Education Week traveled to Kansas City to explore their unique program.

JUDY WOODRUFF:
Next: how a school district in Kansas is grappling with the problems of homeless students.

PBS special correspondent Lisa Stark of our partner Education Week reports.

It's part of our weekly series Making the Grade.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
To fight student homelessness, this school district helps the whole family

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If a homeless student is worrying about where he is spending the night, it's likely he's not going to be thinking much about his homework. And in one of the poorest districts in Kansas, educators have realized that to help homeless students they needed to do more to help homeless families.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

What's the Difference?

Empowering Families and Communities

The Temptation to Settle for Involvement

Expanded Possibilities

We need to relate to families not as clients, but as partners in school and community improvement.

Abstract

What's the Difference?

Empowering Families and Communities

The Temptation to Settle for Involvement

Expanded Possibilities

"Hello, is this John's mother? This is his English teacher, Mr. Ferlazzo. John has had a rough day.""I like teaching in this school because the parents don't bother us much.""We need parent volunteers to bake cookies for the fund-raiser.""I wish parents here cared enough to get their kids to do their homework."

These quotes (all of which I've heard-except the first one, which I've said) illustrate how educators often feel about parents: We should contact them when there is a problem, it's good when they don't "bother" us, we need them to raise money, and we can blame them for all kinds of things we're not happy about. Unfortunately, research and experience show that these attitudes do not lead to the kind of school-family connections that raise student achievement.

However, the right kinds of school-family connections-those built on relationships, listening, welcoming, and shared decision making- can produce multiple benefits for students, including higher grade point averages and test scores, better attendance, enrollment in more challenging courses, better social skills, and improved behavior at home and at school (Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, 2002). Such school-family connections address important nonschool factors-such as health, safety, and affordable housing-that account for about two-thirds of the variance in student achievement (Rothstein, 2010). These connections can also improve parents' feelings of efficacy and increase community support for schools.

What's the Difference?

To create the kinds of school-family partnerships that raise student achievement, improve local communities, and increase public support, we need to understand the difference between family involvement and family engagement. One of the dictionary definitions of involve is "to enfold or envelope," whereas one of the meanings of engage is "to come together and interlock." Thus, involvement implies doing to; in contrast, engagement implies doing with.

A school striving for family involvement often leads with its mouth-identifying projects, needs, and goals and then telling parents how they can contribute. A school striving for parent engagement, on the other hand, tends to lead with its ears-listening to what parents think, dream, and worry about. The goal of family engagement is not to serve clients but to gain partners.

It's not that family involvement is bad. Almost all the research says that any kind of increased parent interest and support of students can help. But almost all the research also says that family engagement can produce even better results-for students, for families, for schools, and for their communities (Ferlazzo &amp; Hammond, 2009).

Empowering Families and Communities

Effective family engagement requires the school to develop a relationship-building process focused on listening. One way to begin this process is for teachers and other staff members to make prearranged visits to students' homes.

Unfortunately, in many urban neighborhoods, the only public entities that usually send representatives to visit are the police and child protective services. Schools can fill this void and send a different, more positive message.

At Luther Burbank High School, an urban school serving 2,000 students in Sacramento, California, scores of teachers, counselors, and classified staff make hundreds of home visits each summer. We visit the homes of all incoming freshmen, as well as all older students who have not yet passed the California High School Exit Exam. These visits are not just to tell students and their parents what to expect when they enter high school or to harangue them about the need to work harder to graduate. Our primary goal is to listen to the wisdom that parents have gained in more than 14 years of raising their children. We want to learn about their hopes and dreams for their children and discuss how the school can work with them to make those dreams a reality.

The school coordinates its home visits with the nationally recognized Parent Teacher Home Visit Project ( www.pthvp.org ), which works with school districts throughout the United States to set up similar programs. Independent evaluations of this project have shown that such visits result in numerous academic benefits for students (Cowan, Bobby, St. Roseman, &amp; Echandia, 2002; Tuss, 2007).

The listening process can take many forms. The home visitors sometimes respond to the concerns that parents express by encouraging them to connect with one another and move toward broader action. For example, during one of our home visits with a Hmong immigrant family a few years ago, the father told us how impressed he was with the online literacy program the school was using to help his son. He added that he wished he could afford to have a computer and Internet connection at home so that he and the rest of the family could also use the program to learn English.

The teacher visitor suggested that if the father knew other parents who had a similar interest in getting access to the literacy program, he might want to bring them together in a meeting with school staff members to explore ways to address this need. The father did so, and out of that process, the parents and the school developed a family literacy project that provided computers and home Internet access to immigrant families, who used the school's website to increase their English skills.

Initially, we used discarded computers and obtained a private foundation grant to pay for Internet access. Later, the school district allocated federal grants so refugee students could purchase new computers and continue the program. Students whose families participated in the project had a fourfold increase in their English assessment scores, and the International Reading Association gave the project its 2007 Presidential Award for Reading and Technology.

Our school's successful Parent University began in much the same way. Some parents expressed an interest in learning more about how the schools operate. Parents then came together with school staff and representatives from a local university to develop a curriculum that parents wanted-not a predesigned agenda constructed by others. These monthly classes, which often attract as many as 100 parents, offer simultaneous translation in Hmong and English and include sessions on naturalization and citizenship, high school graduation requirements, and college readiness and financing.

Successful engagement efforts like these are similar to the work of traditional community organizers. People first tell their stories and then share them with others. The group develops a different vision of what might be possible and then takes collective action. It's the difference between irritation-challenging others to act on something you're interested in-and agitation-challenging others to act on something they're concerned about.

Using the community organizer model, schools have worked with local religious congregations, businesses, neighborhood groups, and labor unions to tackle community problems. For example, schools have built partnerships to help stop toxic incinerators from being built nearby, assisted in getting approvals for local affordable housing, and challenged officials to increase public safety in entire neighborhoods, not just on the school grounds. The Annenberg Institute for School Reform has extensively documented a multiyear study showing the positive effects community organizing can have on students, schools, families, and neighborhoods (Mediratta et al., 2008).

Schools have a long history of developing and deepening relationships among different entities in the community. In fact, the term social capital, which describes the societal and economic value of building connections among people, was developed by a school superintendent nearly 100 years ago. L. J. Hanifan (1916), a state supervisor of public schools in West Virginia, coined the phrase while promoting a parent engagement strategy that yielded numerous benefits. Hanifan concluded,

I am firmly convinced that the supervisor and teachers whose achievements I have described have struck bedrock in community building. It is not what they did for the people that counts most in what was achieved; it is what they led the people to do for themselves that is really important. Tell the people what they ought to do, and they will say in effect, "Mind your own business." But help them to discover for themselves what ought to be done, and they will not be satisfied until it is done.... The more the people do for themselves the larger will community social capital become, and the greater will be the dividends upon the social investment. (p. 138)

The Temptation to Settle for Involvement

Given the pressures to immediately increase test scores, it is tempting for schools to emphasize family involvement rather than family engagement. After all, most family involvement programs can have a positive effect on student achievement, and they are generally easier to implement than engagement models. Unfortunately, some of the most well-publicized family involvement efforts right now-tempting as they might be-are likely to have negative consequences.

For example, some school districts in Texas and Delaware are planning to pay parents to participate in more school events, despite the fact that New York City ended a similar program because it did not achieve the desired results (Bosman, 2010). In a similar initiative, Detroit schools are working with businesses to offer store discounts to parents who visit school parent centers. As Daniel Pink (2009) has shown in his book Drive, financial incentives may work in the short term to motivate people to do mechanical tasks (such as showing up for a meeting), but they will do little to stimulate more cognitively challenging work (such as making it a priority to ask children about their school day or assist them with their homework). In fact, paying parents for participation can actually reduce motivation for doing these more challenging tasks. And when the incentives are gone, everyone is worse off than before.

In Newark, New Jersey, schools are using $1 million of their $100 million donation from Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg to hire workers, including former census workers, to canvas door-to-door asking people what they think about local schools. Compared with the work required for schools to develop reciprocal, long-lasting relationships, this information-gathering effort is certainly easier-and somebody else is paid to do it. But there's a reason why community organizers call this strategy slash and burn -it can be destructive to the overall community ecosystem because it gives people a sense of doing something by just answering a survey with no serious commitment. As a result, it produces no sustainable long-term benefits.

Expanded Possibilities

Consider the methods your school uses to invite parents to participate. Invitations for parent involvement often come through one-way forms of communication- notes home, automated phone calls, or requests for assistance for a particular project. In fact, the dictionary's first definition for communication is "an act or instance of transmitting." Invitations for parent engagement, on the other hand, tend to come as a result of conversation, a word whose Latin root means "to keep company with; to live with."

Family involvement and engagement are not mutually exclusive; most schools pursue both. But when you think about your school's efforts, you'll probably see a clear direction. Does your school tend toward doing to or doing with families? Does the staff do more talking or more listening? Is the emphasis on one-way communication or on two-way conversation? Is your school's vision of its community confined to the school grounds, or does this vision encompass the entire neighborhood?

Some people see power as a finite pie: If you get more, that means I have less. The vision of family engagement described here, however, views power in a different way. As families move from being school clients or volunteers to being leaders in education improvement efforts, they gain more power. As a result, the whole pie gets bigger, and more possibilities are created.

Schools can help create those expanded possibilities.

References

Cowan, G., Bobby, K., St. Roseman, P., &amp; Echandia, A. (2002). Evaluation report: The home visit project. Sacramento, CA: Sacramento City Unified School District. Retrieved from www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED466018.pdf

Ferlazzo, L., &amp; Hammond, L. A. (2009). Building parent engagement in schools. Santa Barbara, CA: Linworth.

Hanifan, L. J. (1916, September). The rural school community center. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 67, 130-138.

Mediratta, K., Shah, S., McAlister, S., Fruchter, N., Mokhtar, C., &amp; Lockwood, D. (2008). Organized communities, stronger schools: A preview of research findings. Providence, RI: Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University. Retrieved from www.annenberginstitute.org/pdf/OrganizedCommunities.pdf

Pink, D. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. New York: Riverhead Books.

Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. (2002). A new wave of evidence: The impact of school, family, and community connections on student achievement. Austin, Texas: Author.

Tuss, P. (2007). Evaluation of the CAHSEE Home Visit Pilot Project. Sacramento, CA: Sacramento County Office of Education, Center for Student Assessment and Program Accountability.

ASCD is a community dedicated to educators' professional growth and well-being.

Let us help you put your vision into action.

ASCD empowers educators to achieve excellence in learning, teaching, and leading so that every child is healthy, safe, engaged, supported, and challenged.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Abstract What's the Difference? Empowering Families and Communities The Temptation to Settle for Involvement Expanded Possibilities We need to relate to families not as clients, but as partners in school and community improvement. Abstract What's the Difference? Empowering Families and Communities The Temptation to Settle for Involvement Expanded Possibilities "Hello, is this John's mother?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Kanisha Aikin had suspected her son, Carter, might have dyslexia, but it wasn't until his Katy, Texas, school closed in March 2020 that she was certain.

Carter, then in 1st grade, quickly switched to remote learning alongside millions of students around the country as leaders struggled to contain the COVID-19 pandemic. That gave Aikin a rare chance to watch her son's day-to-day learning experience up close.

As his virtual class did reading exercises, Carter struggled to blend sounds together. Even after seeming to master a word on one page of a book, he failed to recognize the same word a few pages later. Sometimes his frustration would lead to misbehavior or a lack of focus. And his reading skills were noticeably different from his classmates' and even his younger sisters'.

"I was panicking," Aikin said. "I thought, 'If we don't do something quick, he's going to be in trouble.' Regardless of the world shutting down, time was still passing, and he was still going to have to go to 2nd grade next year."

Parents and teachers are often the first to recognize the signs of disabilities in students. That's especially true of students with learning disabilities, whose needs may not be as immediately obvious as those of other students who need special education services. And, during the pandemic, both parents and teachers have faced significant interruptions that have made recognizing those needs more difficult, educators told Education Week.

Like Aikin, some families flagged concerns as they supervised their children's participation in online lessons. But many other parents-including those who couldn't afford work interruptions-didn't have the option of staying home to monitor their children's remote learning or might not have recognized any subtle issues as they emerged.

For teachers, extended periods of remote learning or class time interrupted by frequent quarantines robbed them of the small ordinary encounters that can help them gauge students' progress: how quickly children turn pages, how they engage with peers, how they respond to frustrations with reading and math exercises, even the appearance of their handwriting, which may have been replaced by typing into an online program.

Those dynamics combine with other challenges to form a perfect storm for schools as they seek to return to normal: They must work to separate which students need assessments for learning disabilities and which children's academic struggles can be attributed to the ordinary fidgeting and grimacing that comes with learning in front of a computer.

"It's going to be really difficult to assess where students are and to determine whether what we are seeing is the result of a disability or a new baseline for everyone," said Meghan Whittaker, the director of policy and advocacy for the National Center for Learning Disabilities.

Looking for warning signs of disabilities

With a family history of dyslexia, Aikin said her "radar was turned on very high" to warning signs for her children. As she studied up on the special education process, she enrolled Carter in a small private program focused on reading instruction for the last school year. After recently getting a formal evaluation and diagnosis from her school district of dyslexia and dysgraphia, a disability related to handwriting, she's weighing her options for the 2021-22 school year.

But there may be many children showing similar warning signs of disabilities that have gone undetected, said Winnie Williams-Hall, an 8th grade special education teacher in Chicago.

The early signals of disabilities can be very difficult for parents, and even teachers, to recognize, she said. And remote learning made that even more difficult for educators.

"During in-person learning, you are face-to-face with a student, and you can gauge facial expressions, when you need to slow down," Williams-Hall said. "But that's difficult to do during virtual learning and the student doesn't even have the camera on."

Similarly, while a student with a behavioral disorder or emotional disturbance may physically disengage or seem defiant in an in-person classroom, that same student may mute their microphone and ignore their computer in remote learning, and it can be difficult for educators to determine why they are absent from class discussions, Williams-Hall said.

Even for teachers familiar with learning disabilities, the sound quality and limitations of computer programs may have made it difficult to recognize them last year, said Teresa Ranieri, a teacher and literacy coach at a New York City elementary school.

During online reading exercises, it could be difficult to hear if a student was able to blend letter sounds together to form words, to deconstruct words into individual phonetic sounds, and to rhyme, she said.

"There's a delay, there may be poor internet connection, and when all of the children say it at the same time, it's very hard to hear them," Ranieri said.

With parents' permission, Ranieri donned gloves and a mask and went to twin students' home to evaluate them in person last year.

"I was able to identify strengths and needs so much more because I did it in person," she said. "In my mind I'm thinking, 'How can I go to everyone's home to do this?' "

Online learning presents challenges

For Williams-Hall, a return to the physical school building meant two students in the classroom and the rest of them on screens, an experience shared by many of her fellow teachers.

School psychologists-who evaluate children for disabilities and help plan interventions and individualized education plans-anticipate an uptick in concern about issues like time management, student engagement, and social and emotional well-being.

"We are worried about districts and schools using special education as a remedy for what happened in the past year," Vaillancourt Strobach said. "You want to make sure you are accurately identifying students."

In such programs-like response to intervention and positive behavior interventions and support, or PBIS-Tier 1 includes all students. Tier 2 provides more moderate supports for students who need it, often through small group instruction, and Tier 3 provides more intense, one-on-one intervention for students with the highest degree of needs.

"In a typical year you will probably see 20 percent of your students need a little bit more" support Vaillancourt Strobach said. "What we are expecting this year is maybe 80 percent will need a little bit more."

If students respond well to the lower level of support, that means they may have just needed some help reenaging after an atypical school year, psychologists said. But if they struggle even as they advance up the tiers, they may need to be evaluated for special education services.

"We really need to understand why they are so far behind," said Whittaker, of the National Center for Learning Disabilities. "We have to just be careful and intentional in that process."

Whittaker said she hopes that schools will work quickly to invest in improving their systems.

"We have not implemented strong [multitiered systems of support] the way we need to," she said. "Now we are putting such a magnifying glass on this issue. I'm really hoping that now is the time we really do something about this."

But to anxious families who have seen signs of possible disabilities in their children, anything short of an immediate, individualized response could seem like stalling, some parents told Education Week.

That was the case for Lauren, a Massachusetts mother who did not wish to use her last name to protect her children's privacy. During the pandemic, she noticed her twin sons, who just completed kindergarten, struggled with understanding phonics instruction.

"Everyone said, 'Don't worry about it. All kids are struggling. All kids are having problems,'" Lauren said.

But, after seeing one of her sons confuse letter sounds and get frustrated with rhyming exercises, Lauren insisted on an in-person evaluation. Her school district complied, and a psychologist sat with her son outside the administration building to assess him, using the outdoor air as a virus precaution.

After seeing him in person, the evaluator quickly agreed Lauren's son needed targeted supports, and said his descriptions of his own experiences with reading sounded like textbook dyslexia, Lauren said.

After some discussion with the school, Lauren opted not to evaluate her other son right away. Instead, she will watch his progress as he participates in the same small groups and academic enrichment programs his school plans to offer all of its students as it focuses on pandemic recovery.

"I'm still a little wary that another issue might pop up," she said.

A confusing process for parents

Parents who had concerns about their children's learning told Education Week that the process of pursuing evaluations for special education, supporting their children's academic work, and working with schools to create individualized education plans was overwhelming and confusing, even with supportive school leaders on their side.

Liana Durkin, an Alpharetta, Ga., single mother with a demanding work-from-home job, said it began to feel like "a full-time job" to help her 6th-grade daughter, Rylee, keep up with assignments, pay attention during six-hour days of online classes, and process concepts she clearly struggled to grasp.

After seeking her own diagnosis by an outside psychologist, Durkin requested a formal evaluation from Rylee's school that later confirmed she needed support for ADHD. The process was confusing, and Durkin relied on advice from other parents and Facebook groups, where she heard stories about issues like delayed evaluations, confusing meetings with administrators, and a lack of support.

"I kept thinking about, yeah, I can't even imagine the parents who have to go into work every day," Durkin said.

In many cities, concerns about a backlog of special education evaluations predate COVID-19. But, even in the earliest days of school closures, there were signs the pandemic had exacerbated the problem.

"With ingenuity, innovation, and grit, I know this nation's educators and schools can continue to faithfully educate every one of its students," she wrote in April 2020.

Concerns about evaluation backlogs

But there are some signs schools failed to fulfill those mandates.

Beyond those unmet requests, advocates are concerned about children who have fallen through the cracks because the educators who might normally notice their struggles failed to see them.

Aikin, the Texas mom, sees the progress her son has made after she identified his dyslexia, but she's mindful that many other children's needs may have gone unnoticed.

"So many children are missed and overlooked," she said.

As she weighs whether to send Carter back to public school in the coming school year, Aikin has seen signs of progress.

Her son who once ran away from reading assignments now asks to go to the library and bring books with him in the car. Recently, the family was passing through a restaurant drive-thru when Aikin heard Carter pipe up from the back seat. He was trying to read a sign out loud without any prompting.

"I almost hit the car in front of me," she said. "The fact that he was initiating, trying to read, was step one."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Pandemic Made It Harder to Spot Students With Disabilities. Now Schools Must Catch Up

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Kanisha Aikin had suspected her son, Carter, might have dyslexia, but it wasn't until his Katy, Texas, school closed in March 2020 that she was certain. Carter, then in 1st grade, quickly switched to remote learning alongside millions of students around the country as leaders struggled to contain the COVID-19 pandemic.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The influx of Broadway shows introducing diverse and nontraditional casting is at an all-time high, and people of the world are finally seeing themselves reflected on The Great White Way.

However, a trip to New York City and tickets to see "Hamilton" the most popular and diverse show on Broadway, may not be readily accessible for all. These shows, available for digital streaming via BroadwayHD, also celebrate the richness and complexity of diverse casting.

(Courtesy BroadwayHD)

'Sophisticated Ladies'

A dazzling 1920s Cotton Club-inspired musical revue, based on the work of Duke Ellington, is the perfect place to start. Starring legendary vocalist Phyllis Hyman and Tony Award-winning Broadway star and tap-dancing machine, Hinton Battle, this journey is one to experience. It's a toe-tapping good time from beginning to end. "Sophisticated Ladies" not only set the standard for a new musical format in a world of traditional book musicals, but also made history as the first Broadway show to be telecast live during its New York run. It's magic.

Courtesy BroadwayHD)

'Romeo & Juliet'

Everyone knows the classic Shakespearean tale of 'Romeo & Juliet,' but you've never seen it done quite like this. The 2013 Broadway revival starring Orlando Bloom ("Pirates of the Caribbean" and "Lord of the Rings") and Broadway starlet Condola Rashad (Showtime's "Billions"), daughter of "The Cosby Show" matriarch, Phylicia Rashad. The show ran for 93 performances at the Richard Rodgers Theatre but can now run permanently in your home. The consummate cast tells this story with ease and elegance, basing the classic love story around an interracial couple, bringing new elements to the text that will have you enthralled until the very end. You'll also see more recognizable faces, including Corey Hawkins ("Straight Outta Compton") and Justin Guarini of "American Idol" fame.

(Courtesy BroadwayHD)

'Lady Day at Emerson's Bar & Grill'

There are no words to describe how breathtaking six-time Tony Award winner Audra McDonald-one of today's most celebrated American theater artists-is as Billie Holiday in this play, which is set in an intimate Philadelphia nightclub in March 1959 during one of the last performances of the troubled icon. Holiday's classic songs are featured, and there are plenty of laughs, which you need to keep the tears from fully engulfing you. "Lady Day at Emerson's Bar & Grill" is a piece that will leave you with a greater appreciation for storytelling through music. It may even empower you to take on whatever challenges life throws your way.

(Courtesy BroadwayHD)

'Disney's Broadway Hits'

A collective of Broadway stars sing a feel-good shuffle through Disney's top musical hits in concert at London's Royal Albert Hall. You'll hear classics from "Beauty and The Beast," "The Lion King," "Mary Poppins," "The Little Mermaid," "Aladdin" and more. A good watch for the entire family, complete with elaborate costumes, lively choreography and a full orchestra onstage. You may be especially impressed by Merle Dandridge and Alton Fitzgerald White's "Someday" duet from "The Hunchback of Notre Dame," Josh Strickland's rendition of "My Strongest Suit" from "Aida" and the full company's take on "Let it Go" from "Frozen" at the end of Act I. It's worth the trip down memory lane and can be a great way to introduce your family to some less familiar Disney songs..

The classic Sophocles' tragedy, "Oedipus at Colonus" is relived in this production. Told through gospel music, this musical was a Pulitzer Prize finalist for drama and for good reason. The captivating retelling of the Greek myth, using a Pentecostal preacher and the choir of his church, brings life to this long-forgotten parable. You'll also witness the legendary Morgan Freeman, who portrays The Messenger, in one of his few Broadway performance credits. This is a message you'll want to receive.

(Courtesy BroadwayHD)

'Memphis'

This list would not be complete without "Memphis," the 2010 Tony Award Best Musical winner. The rock'n'roll musical is loosely based on disc jockey Dewey Phillips, the first white DJ to play black music in the 1950s. The compelling love story, centered around racial progression in society and the music business is both heartwarming and entertaining. The jumpin'-jivin' tunes will have you and your family singing along with actors you've grown to love, including Tony Award winner James Monroe Iglehart ("Aladdin"), as well as Todrick Hall the YouTube viral sensation and Broadway star.
BroadwayHD delivers incredible live and recorded stage performances to your favorite devices-when you want, where you want-for pennies a day. It's Broadway, Your Way.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
6 Shows That Highlight Broadway's Diversity

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The influx of Broadway shows introducing diverse and nontraditional casting is at an all-time high, and people of the world are finally seeing themselves reflected on The Great White Way. However, a trip to New York City and tickets to see "Hamilton" the most popular and diverse show on Broadway, may not be readily accessible for all.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Minorities, English-Learners, and Special Education—Who’s Keeping Watch Under ESSA?

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.statesmanjournal.com/story/news/2021/10/02/epa-fines-riverbend-landfill-mcminnville-104-482-pollution/5954234001/