Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/7662

Bill Overview

Title: My Child, My Choice Act of 2022

Description: This bill prohibits an elementary school from receiving federal education funds unless a teacher requests written parental consent prior to teaching a lesson specifically related to gender identity, sexual orientation, or transgender studies. In particular, the bill requires a teacher to request written consent from the parent of each student enrolled in the class prior to teaching the lesson. If a parent does not submit written consent to the lesson, then the school must provide the student with an alternative period of learning or study hall. Further, the teacher may not teach the lesson if the principal does not receive written consent from the parents of at least 50% of the students enrolled in the class.

Sponsors: Rep. Van Drew, Jefferson [R-NJ-2]

Target Audience

Population: People involved in elementary education regarding lessons on gender identity

Estimated Size: 36370000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Elementary School Teacher (Austin, Texas)

Age: 42 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I believe the policy complicates our curriculum unnecessarily.
  • I understand parents want to have a say, but this method might limit the education kids receive about different identities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 7
Year 2 6 7
Year 3 6 7
Year 5 5 7
Year 10 5 6
Year 20 4 6

Parent (Cleveland, Ohio)

Age: 35 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I welcome the policy as it gives parents the right to choose what their kids are learning.
  • However, it might also mean more work for schools to manage consent forms and alternative lessons.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 5 6
Year 20 5 6

Activist (San Francisco, California)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is a step back from inclusive education.
  • Restricting teachers can restrict the learning and understanding of important LGBTQ+ issues.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 4 5
Year 2 3 5
Year 3 3 5
Year 5 2 5
Year 10 2 5
Year 20 2 5

School Principal (Atlanta, Georgia)

Age: 55 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy will require significant administrative efforts to ensure compliance.
  • Managing resources to provide alternative lessons can be challenging for larger classes.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 6
Year 2 5 6
Year 3 5 6
Year 5 4 6
Year 10 4 6
Year 20 4 6

Parent (New York, New York)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I personally would like my child to learn about LGBTQ+ topics, and this policy might hinder that opportunity.
  • I'd prefer if schools handle the curriculum inclusively without needing heavy parental intervention.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 7
Year 2 6 7
Year 3 6 7
Year 5 6 7
Year 10 6 7
Year 20 6 7

School District Administrator (Chicago, Illinois)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy adds layers of complexity to our implementation strategies for curriculums.
  • Resources will be stretched to ensure both compliance and quality education for all students.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 6
Year 2 5 6
Year 3 4 6
Year 5 4 6
Year 10 4 6
Year 20 4 6

Diversity Consultant (Phoenix, Arizona)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policies like this hinder progress in normalization of diverse identities in education.
  • It's restrictive and creates barriers to understanding important social identities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 4 5
Year 2 4 5
Year 3 4 5
Year 5 3 5
Year 10 3 5
Year 20 3 5

Non-profit Worker (Denver, Colorado)

Age: 30 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Limiting discussion on gender identity and sexual orientation in schools sends the wrong message.
  • It suggests that these are taboo topics, which they are not.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 3 5
Year 2 3 5
Year 3 3 5
Year 5 2 5
Year 10 2 5
Year 20 2 5

Elementary School Parent and Volunteer (Portland, Oregon)

Age: 37 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I am worried that this policy will lead to more fragmented education as information is not uniformly distributed.
  • Knowing is better than not knowing, and we should enhance learning, not constrain it.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 7
Year 2 6 7
Year 3 6 7
Year 5 5 6
Year 10 5 6
Year 20 5 6

Retired Teacher (Miami, Florida)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy reflects a worrying trend towards educational censorship.
  • Understanding starts with learning, and policies like this prevent students from engaging with diverse realities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 6
Year 2 5 6
Year 3 5 6
Year 5 4 5
Year 10 4 5
Year 20 4 5

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)

Year 2: $52000000 (Low: $31000000, High: $73000000)

Year 3: $54000000 (Low: $32000000, High: $76000000)

Year 5: $58000000 (Low: $34000000, High: $82000000)

Year 10: $65000000 (Low: $37000000, High: $92000000)

Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $150000000)

Key Considerations