“This bill seeks to say that employees at school cannot use a name other than the child’s given name on their birth certificate that aligns with their sex at birth,” said Newman, who now has several bills aimed at expanding parental rights. “A name like that can’t be used unless the parents agree and give permission, written permission, that they’re aware of it and they condone their child transitioning.”
The bill goes further than just regulating teachers’ ability to use a child’s preferred name. As proposed, it would also:
- Prohibit addressing a student by any name other than their given name or a derivative thereof without parental consent;
- Prohibit addressing a student by “a pronoun or title that is inconsistent with the student’s biological sex” without parental consent;
- Block faculty or contractors from informing students about their own preferred pronouns or titles if they are “inconsistent with the employee’s or contractor’s biological sex;”
- Bar faculty or school contractors from asking students for their preferred pronouns or names;
- Bar faculty or school contractors from penalizing a student for failing to respond to a request for preferred name or pronoun;
- Require faculty and school contractors to report any students’ request to be addressed by a preferred pronoun or name to the school administrator, who is then required to report that request to the student’s parents.
H.B. 190 would also set up a parental complaint system with the state if they believe school faculty have been using different pronouns or names for their child without their consent. Under the bill, that complaint would prompt a investigation from the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce into the alleged incident, which Newman said could involve parents, faculty or the students themselves.
Asked if he had reservations about a student potentially being swept into a state investigation, Newman said it was “a great concern.”
“But the greater concern is that this would happen to a student (without parental consent),” Newman said.
Under the bill, if the state determines a school or employee violated the law, the state would be required to “withhold ten per cent of the school’s state foundation aid ... each month until such time that the school is confirmed by the director to be in compliance with this section,” H.B. 190 reads.
“We’re not trying to hurt the schools, we’re not trying to take funding from the schools,” said Newman. “But it’s enough, it’s a message, that this is a serious matter that parents take seriously.”
The bill has not yet had a hearing in the Ohio House Education Committee, but leading public school lobbying organization the Ohio Education Association told this outlet that it flatly opposes the bill.
“House Bill 190 does nothing to support Ohio’s public school students or to address any of the real issues facing our schools,” OEA President Scott DiMauro said in a statement. “The Ohio Education Association urges lawmakers to reject this latest attempt to distract and divide Ohioans, so they can focus on the important work of ensuring our students have the resources and funding they actually need to succeed.”
Dara Adkison, who serves as the executive director of an advocacy group called TransOhio, called the bill “bad legislation” in an interview with this outlet.
“(H.B.) 190 is going to ask teachers and staff to misgender trans students — and if they themselves are transgender, ask them to misgender themselves — all at the risk of losing a percentage of state funding,” Adkison said.
Adkison denied the notion that schools are “socially transitioning” students. They argued H.B. 190 would damage teacher-student relationships, which are “based off of trust and acceptance to help garner and foster (a student’s) ability to receive an education.”
Ultimately, Adkison framed H.B. 190 as another legislative attempt to remove transgender Ohioans from public spaces.
“That is unabashedly the goal,“ Adkison said. ”We have seen our legislatures and public spaces talk about how they would like it if trans people did not exist at all.”
When this outlet asked Newman if he thought K-12 students were capable of determining if they truly wanted to be called by a different name or different pronouns without their parents’ consent, he denied that anyone could be transgender and called it a case of “confusion.”
“I don’t think there is such a thing as transgender,” Newman said. “That’s not reality. A boy never, ever becomes a girl. A girl never, ever becomes a boy. That’s not reality. That cannot happen.”
Newman told this outlet that H.B. 190 would actually help students, if it became law.
“We want to see children who have confusion like this, we want to see them get the help that they really need to address the confusion,” Newman said. “I think the message is affirming the confusion is the wrong direction. We want to see them get the help they need to address the confusion.”
Newman’s views are antithetical to those held by an array of leading medical organizations, including the American Medical Association. In 2024, the American Psychological Association published a resolution that criticized states’ attempts to take away access to gender-affirming care.
For more stories like this, sign up for our Ohio Politics newsletter. It’s free, curated, and delivered straight to your inbox every Thursday evening.
Avery Kreemer can be reached at 614-981-1422, on X, via email, or you can drop him a comment/tip with the survey below.
About the Author
