Thompson considers pregnancy, parental status in nondiscrimination policy
The revisions would apply to students, staff and community members in district programs, with separate board votes planned on the policy and two related exhibits. Broader changes, including an appeals process, remain under review.
Thompson School District is proposing to add pregnancy and parental status to its nondiscrimination statement. The change would appear in Policy AC and two related exhibits. The board plans separate votes on all three Oct. 21, Director Stu Boyd said.
Policy AC and its accompanying rules and exhibits establish the district’s nondiscrimination commitment for students, staff members and community members who interact with its educational programs and activities. The revisions would take effect upon board approval. The revised policy would be updated on the district’s website.
The district’s briefing memorandum ties the update to recent amendments to two Colorado statutes associated with House Bill 26-1141. A staff member said the change in state law extends pregnancy and parental-status protections to students. After Title IX regulations were struck down in 2024, the state acted to preserve protections in state law if federal Title IX protections were no longer enforced, the staff member said.
Broader revisions were deferred after public feedback raised concerns that an earlier version had removed an appeals process for members of the public, the staff member said. The staff member confirmed the process had been removed for that group and said the district chose to advance the protected-status change while reconsidering the other revisions. The old appeals language was poorly written and should not simply be restored, the staff member said. An appeals process should serve the Thompson community’s varied student, teacher and parent relationships and be “reasonable and easy to navigate,” a board member said.
Boyd suggested starting with CASB for sample appeals processes from Colorado districts and elsewhere. A district-specific process carried risks but was worthwhile and would take time to account for students’ and staff members’ due-process needs, the staff member said. The broader policy work would take a few months because several people, including outside legal counsel, would be involved and the timeline partly depended on them, the staff member said.