Attorney General Raúl Labrador has weighed in on school districts’ responsibilities under a new law that requires parental consent for health treatment. 

In a letter to state superintendent Debbie Critchfield last week, Labrador said it’s unlikely that a school district will be sued for giving a student a Band-Aid under Senate Bill 1329. And he accused “various groups and individuals” of “pushing an extreme reading” of the law in an effort to undermine it. 

“It appears that these groups and individuals oppose the underlying policy of SB 1329 and are attempting to stir up unnecessary strife and conflict so that the true purpose of the new law, ensuring parents are involved in consequential medical decisions, is unable to be smoothly implemented,” Labrador wrote in the letter, which Idaho Education News obtained through a public records request.

SB 1329 — also known as the “Parental Rights in Medical Decision-making Act” — created a “private right of action” that allows parents to sue a health care provider that furnishes a “health care service” to a minor without parental consent. The law applies to school districts, which typically administer medical screenings, medications and basic first aid.

EdNews reported last month that the Boise School District is asking for parents’ consent for Band-Aids and Tylenol to ensure compliance with SB 1329. And the Moscow and Lewiston school districts similarly are requiring parental consent to provide routine treatment for bumps and scrapes, the Moscow-Pullman Daily News and Lewiston Tribune reported. 

The law defines “health care service” as including the “diagnosis, screening, examination, prevention, treatment, cure, care or relief of any physical or mental health condition, illness, injury, defect or disease.” And school districts have been following the advice of their own attorneys when interpreting the law as well as the Idaho School Boards Association, an advocacy group that lobbies for school trustees and offers them policy guidance. 

“While it may not be the legislative intent of the sponsors to require explicit permission to provide a Band-Aid, ISBA guidance is that school districts and charter schools do need to receive permission from parents or guardians to administer general first aid to their student,” ISBA executive director Misty Swanson previously told EdNews. 

Fearing a lawsuit for offering a student a Band-Aid is “absurd,” Labrador wrote, but if school leaders are concerned about litigation, they should offer tiers of pre-authorization granting parental consent to provide:

• Basic first aid, such as bandages and ice packs,
• Pain relief provisions, such as Tylenol,
• Counseling for emotional and mental health issues, and/or 
• All health care services. 

Labrador also warned against overly broad statements of authorization asking parents to consent to all health care services. “This all or nothing approach is inappropriate and contrary of the spirit of the law,” he wrote.

Labrador didn’t name specific school districts, groups or individuals in his letter. He told Critchfield that, “because of the importance” of this topic, he planned to send a copy to Swanson and Andy Grover, executive director of the Idaho Association of School Administrators, as well as Alex Adams, director of the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare.

Swanson confirmed Tuesday that she received a copy of the letter but said she wasn’t sure whether Labrador’s critiques were aimed at ISBA. “The guidance we issued on SB 1329 is consistent with the suggested direction Attorney General Labrador includes at the bottom of his letter,” she said by email.

Grover did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Critchfield, meanwhile said Labrador’s letter was “necessary and appreciated by many districts.” It’s rare for Labrador to issue a written legal opinion, and Critchfield didn’t solicit his guidance on SB 1329.

“While it does seem extreme that a student who needs a Band-Aid wouldn’t just get a Band-Aid, I understand why schools want to make sure they’re doing everything by the book, down to the last letter of the law,” Critchfield said by email.

The superintendent said she would support revisiting the law next legislative session to ensure the language “clearly reflects” its intended purpose.