A mom in Maine suffered a crushing defeat in court following claims that a woke school hid her child’s gender transition from her and their family.
Amber Lavigne, from Wiscasset, found a chest binder in her 13-year-old child’s room while the child was attending a school dance in December 2022.
Yet, an appeal for the lawsuit Lavigne launched against the school in 2023 has dismissed by the First Circuit Court of Appeals.
Lavigne’s child explained that the binder, a garment used to flatten the chest, was provided by a social worker named Sam Roy at Great Salt Bay School in Damariscotta.
In her legal appeal, Lavigne contended that her claims were adequate to demonstrate a policy or custom of withholding information, arguing that the district court made an error by not addressing the initial requirement for municipal liability and asserted that her claims showed that the Board infringed on her right to guide her child’s education.
As per the court’s documents, it was concluded in her appeal that Lavigne’s claims did not convincingly indicate that the Board had a policy of withholding or that it endorsed the actions of the individual defendants in choosing to withhold information from Lavigne.
The court furthered that Lavigne did not provide ‘sufficient’ evidence to argue of a policy or custom for withholding and concealing information.
The court documents further noted that none of Lavigne’s allegations supported the idea that the Board had an unwritten custom or policy of keeping information from parents.
Amber Lavigne uncovered a chest binder in her child’s room while the eighth grader was at a school dance in December 2022. Nonetheless, an appeal in the lawsuit Lavigne filed against the school was granted dismissal by the First Circuit Court of Appeals in 2023.
Lavigne’s child said, at the time, that the binder – a garment used to flatten the chest of the wearer – was bought for them by a social worker named Sam Roy (pictured) at Great Salt Bay School in Damariscotta
‘Without this factual support, Lavigne’s contention that the school acted pursuant to an unwritten “blanket policy, pattern, and practice of intentional withholding and concealment of such information from all parents” is based solely on her “information and belief”.’
The mother and her lawyers demanded, at the time of the initial lawsuit, a ‘full investigation into Mr. Roy’s decision to give a 13-year-old girl an undergarment without notice, consent or involvement of her mother.’
They also claimed the school’s actions broke the Fourteenth Amendment by blocking Lavigne’s fundamental constitutional right to control and direct the education, upbringing, and healthcare decisions of her daughter,’ Adam Shelton, a lawyer at Goldwater, wrote in a letter.
The school district was further accused by Lavigne of withholding and concealing her child’s transition, including the use of a name and pronouns that were not assigned to the child at birth.
The law firm argued that although students have confidential access to mental healthcare through school, social transitioning is ‘not protected by statutory confidentiality’.
‘The “social transitioning” of Ms. Lavigne’s daughter without her notice, consent, or involvement in the process alone violated her constitutional rights,’ the letter said.
‘But even if secrecy were required by Maine law, such secrecy would still violate Ms. Lavigne’s constitutional rights. Ms. Lavigne has a clearly established constitutional right to control and direct the education, upbringing, and healthcare decisions of her child. The actions of the School, school employees, and the District have violated that right.’
Lavigne pulled her child from the school, allowing her daughter to cut her hair short but still referring to her by feminine pronouns.
According to documents, the court concluded in her appeal that ‘Lavigne’s allegations fail to plausibly show that either the Board had a policy of withholding or that the Board later ratified the individual defendants’ decision to withhold information from Lavigne’
The mother told National Review that she believes her daughter is still her daughter at heart and that she acts femininely when she’s not thinking about it.
She added that she was not opposed to her daughters eventual transition, and said: ‘If she at 18 starts taking testosterone and decides to mutilate her body, am I going to express to her some concerns? Absolutely,’ she told the National Review. ‘Am I going to write my kiddo off? Never in a million years. This is my baby girl. At the end of the day, I’m not going to destroy my relationship with my child to be right.’
‘At the end of the day, she is who she is,’ the mother said. ‘If she thinks she’s going to live a more fulfilled life as a male, that’s up for her to decide as an adult. At 13, it’s up to me to safeguard my child against doing things to her body that she can’t reverse.’
The Daily Mail has contacted Great Bay School for comment.
