I was enjoying a drink or two on a recent Friday afternoon with the afterwork crowd. Good people, and a good mix of them. The crowd is not only mixed in regard to race, color, creed, national origin, and gender, but the bar having been a Women’s bar that gained a more inclusive clientele after an axe attack in the Gay bar a few blocks away, and this and the closure of one or two “straight bars” in the area caused a migration that settle in this one.

The only expectation is that as you are in a bar originally a safe haven for women, especially Lesbians, understand you are basically a guest in another’s space, so act respectfully.

Occasionally the situation arises where a Gay person might have to explain something to a straight patron who, in their innocence and not their malice, made a statement that needs to be addressed for clarification and the education of the person with the wrong impression or idea and sometimes just explaining things from the non-heterosexual side of the aisle.

One of the aspects of the dreaded “Homosexual Lifestyle” often overlooked is the continuing education component as Gay people are constantly teaching Straights what Gay is all about.

Such a “teachable moment” recently became necessary when in response to a news report on the bar’s television about Trans girls and laws banning them from high school sports teams and that these laws required that school personnel must “out” a student to the parents whether the child wants the parent to know or the parents aren’t ready for this news yet before the kid has even processed the whole thing, the patron next to me, a straight man who has grown a lot over the years but still needs some minor clarifications of residual misconception  asked what is the objection to telling the parents.

Rather than cover the difficulties of coming out from a Gay person’s experience which would require additional explanations along the way, I went a more direct route and answered the question knowing this his wife’s job required she sign the legally binding statement that she would report any suspicions of child abuse or face dismissal, legal proceeding and decertification if she did not and it was found she hadn’t.

I related to him that at some point in my teaching career, in order to deal with child abuse and sexual molestation, a law was passed requiring that teachers report any suspicions of child abuse, physical or mental, erring on the side of caution, the requirement, judging from her age his wife had always had to do in her profession. information he was aware of because of his wife.

Once the teacher passed a suspicion into the main office, the teacher would be out of the loop as the suspicion was investigated further up the line until it was either proven or dismissed, and it would only be when a conclusion was reached requiring a hearing at which the teacher might have to testify that the teacher would be brought backed in.

Confidentiality and anonymity allowed for such reports to be made without the fear of harm to the staff member reporting the suspicion and/or the student who would most likely face some retribution from the abuser.

The teacher was protected by this because it eliminated the chance for the alleged perpetrator to take any retaliatory actions off school grounds.

If a teacher were to be found to have been in a position to pass on a suspicion and didn’t and if it turns out there was abuse, the teacher could lose certification and further harm could have been done to the student.

The choice between following the law and self-preservation is thus eliminated.

One year I had a student whose arms were often covered in black and blue bruised. He often wore long sleeve shirts to class or kept a coat or jacket on in class, but in gym other students could see the bruises that weren’t seen in the classroom, and some became concerned.

I would occasionally notice them when he would move in such a way his clothes did not move fast enough to cover the bruised when he would stand at the end of class.

Because of what I and his classmates noticed and mentioned, and with more than one essay written by the student hinting at unpleasantness at home, concerned for the student and required by law to report suspicions, I informed the principal of my suspicions and assumed, my part being done, he would follow the procedure that was required of him. The steps after my reporting would be taken with me knowing nothing until the conclusion of any investigation and the student and eventually the abuser unaware who filed the report.

The morning after I submitted my report, the student was not in class. During that class there was a knock on my door and when I opened it, there stood the principal, the student, and his grandfather with whom he lived, a man I had seen often as he lived near my neighborhood so we frequented the same local merchants and eateries and who I assumed knew me the same way.

The principal then asked me to explain to the grandfather what my suspicions were and upon what I based them.

Instead of the protection of anonymity, there I stood facing an angry man who, if the suspicions were found to be true, would be capable of objecting to my reporting suspected abuse in a very physical way.

Next to him was his visibly bruised grandson who would have to deal with his grandfather’s anger for purposely or by not being careful enough to hide the signs “turned him in” and would later face a physical response for that being confirmed by this hallway meeting.

The student, meanwhile, under these circumstances was angry with me because I had filed a report for which he would now pay without letting him know I intended to do that.

As things worked out, it was a good thing I had passed on my suspicions but breaking the anonymity and confidentiality could have resulted in an additional potential victim, the teacher, who could potentially become, along with the student, a victim of his grandfather’s anger.

What I told the principal was confidential, but his having passed this info on to the kid’s grandfather could have had long-lasting, life-threatening consequences with the breaking of the trust such a report relies on.

A trans student confiding in an adult because that person is trusted and safe, and, perhaps, as kids do, this was the teacher with whom they established rapport, is a serious thing. The student does not want or need the consequences that being out might produce before they are completely ready to face that

In exchange for a supportive ear.

And Trans student face consequences outside of school that should not be faced until ready.

I went to the principal in confidence. Who knows what damage and harm that kid faced from that hallway meeting which resulted only in the student being remove from my class because of my reporting and the grandfather not wanting me to see more of what I had seen, as he claimed I was exaggerating?

The gentleman next to me may not have grasped the full weight of a Trans student being outed to parents before the time is right, but he did recognize the danger in a confidence being broken and saw that school staff were being put in the position of having to act like that principal regardless of consequences. I know all analogies limp, but as this parable worked in this case, walk it off.

.

.

.

.

.

.