Opponents of the bill have contended that school districts across Washington were only confused after State Superintendent Chris Reykdal sent letters telling districts not to comply with I-2081 due to conflicts with state and federal student privacy laws
Carleen Johnson
The Center Square Washington
Monday’s public hearing on Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 5181 before the House Education Committee saw supporters and detractors make their respective cases for and against the controversial legislation.
ESSB 5181 aims to amend voter-approved Initiative 2081 – dubbed the parents’ bill of rights – to align it with existing state law. Critics claim it essentially guts I-2081. The bill passed the full Senate on Feb. 5 on a party-line 30-19 vote before moving to the House of Representatives for consideration.
Bill sponsor Claire Wilson, D-Federal Way, told the committee that passing the bill is necessary to clear up confusion surrounding the implementation of I-2081, which voters passed in November. I-2081 ensures that schools notify parents about issues related to their children, including mental health and medical decisions, as well as gender-related counseling or medical care.
“When we passed the parents’ rights initiative last year, we said from day one, if needed, we would come back and make changes,” Wilson continued. “Changes are needed because poorly written provisions in the initiative caused confusion.”
Opponents of the bill have contended that school districts across Washington were only confused after State Superintendent of Public Instruction Chris Reykdal sent letters telling districts not to comply with I-2081 due to conflicts with state and federal student privacy laws.
“The title of the bill says it’s ‘An act related to amending the parents’ rights initiative to bring it into existing law,’” Rep. Travis Couture, R-Allyn, said. “The parents’ rights initiative is existing law, so how could the underlying bill actually amend it and be in order with the title?”
Nicole Kern with Planned Parenthood spoke in support of the bill, arguing that protecting student privacy is paramount.
“Parents would still be notified of most health care decisions, except in very limited areas around reproductive care and mental health,” she said.
Pierce County Pastor Eric Lundberg was the final person to testify in opposition to the bill.
“This bill has crossed a major moral line,” he said. “More and more parents in our state are coming to the realization that we do not need state-run schools to educate our children.”
More than 6,000 people signed in online regarding the bill: 1,203 signed in “pro,” while 4,951 signed in “con.”
Following the hearing, Rep. Matt Marshall, R-Eatonville, told The Center Square bringing up title issues with ESSB 5181 is now on the record and that Republicans are confident that if it becomes law, it would not hold up in court as I-2081 is existing law.
This report was first published by The Center Square Washington.
Also read:
- WA’s transgender prison policy is target of new federal investigation
A federal probe targets WA’s policy of housing transgender women in the state’s women’s prison at Gig Harbor. - Opinion: Income Tax Battle Round Two – Signatures needed
Let’s Go Washington needs 300,000+ signatures in under two months to put IP26-645 on the fall ballot. - Judge rejects lawsuit against rewrite of WA parental rights law
Thurston County Superior Court Judge John Skinder upheld House Bill 1296, a contested 2025 parental rights law expected to face appeal. - Future 42 releases 2026 Clark County Legislative Scorecard
Future 42’s 2026 scorecard grades Clark County’s 17th, 18th, 20th, and 49th District legislators on 12–15 key votes. - Letter: Climate Commitment Act critique rests on fossil-funded denial
Anthony Teso argues CCA repeal would transfer savings to Chevron and BP, not working families.
