Culture Cherry Hill mistakenly released names of at least 92 students who opted out of new sex-ed classes, district says - "mistakenly"

1732090439000.png

The Cherry Hill school district has been accused of violating student privacy by mistakenly releasing the names of at least 92 students whose families opted-out of sex-education classes in the 2022-23 school year.

The names of the elementary school students were released in September 2023 in response to an Open Public Records Act request seeking information about how many parents were excluding their children from classes after the state adopted new controversial standards on sex-education concepts that include gender identity, puberty, and masturbation.

The families of an additional 82 children were also notified that their names may have been released, Superintendent Kwame Morton said this week.

Morton acknowledged the mistake and said the names were removed last week from the OPRAmachine, a website that assists requesters with accessing public records, where the 2023 request had been filed. Morton said the names were redacted in the district’s PDF files, but showed up when they were converted to a different format by OPRAmachine.

Cherry Hill used the incorrect redaction procedure to format a digital record, and that allowed the names to appear despite being blacked out, said Charlie Kratovil, a leader of the OPRAmachine.

District lawyers sent a letter to the website to get the names removed once they were made aware. The district has implemented new security measures, Morton said, and employees were also retrained on confidentiality rules.

“In no way shape or form was the intention to release any names,” Morton said Wednesday. ”The important thing is not ever is it our intention to harm any child.”

In a complaint submitted online last month, parent and former school board candidate Harvey Vazquez asked the U.S. Department of Education to investigate whether the district violated the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act, which protects students’ privacy and education records.

Vazquez, whose 6-year-old son was on the opt-out list, brought up the issue last month at a school board meeting, where Morton says he was first made aware.

Vazquez said the students whose names were made public without parental consent attended Russell Knight, Bret Harte, Richard Stockton, and Thomas Paine elementary schools. A parent notified the district about the release of the names in November 2023, but nothing was done, he said.

Morton confirmed that no action was taken, but said he was not informed about the release at the time.

“A lot of parents are upset,” said Vazquez. “Somebody needs to be held accountable.”

The unauthorized disclosure came to light during a hotly contested race for three school board seats in Cherry Hill among Vazquez and nine others. Vazquez said he discovered the release after he began investigating the New Jersey Public Education Coalition, which labeled three other candidates in the race as “like-minded.” Vazquez narrowly lost.

The coalition, which touts itself as a nonpartisan group of educators, parents, and other stakeholders, made the OPRA request as part of a statewide project surveying districts. The group wanted to dispute claims that a majority of New Jersey parents had opted out of the new sex-education standards, said its founder Michael Gottesman.

The revised guidelines, which took effect in 2022, prompted an outcry from some parents. The state allowed districts to decide whether to amend their curricula to meet the expectations of what students should learn by the end of second, fifth, eighth, and 12th grade. Parents who believe the instruction conflicts with their moral or religious beliefs may have the student excused from that portion of the course.

Gottesman said the coalition’s survey results were analyzed by an outside vendor, and the coalition never saw the students’ names. He said he only recently learned that names had been disclosed.

“As a coalition, we would never release that type of information,” Gottesman said.

Bridget Palmer, one of the newly elected school board members, said she wanted the district to make policy changes to protect students’ privacy and prevent information from mistakenly being released.

“There is no arguing that there was a huge mistake made,” Palmer said. “You can’t undo what has already been done, but we can take steps to make sure it never happens again.”

Vazquez wants the district to better explain how the lapse occurred, and wants there to be disciplinary action against anyone found responsible.

“There needs to be a public apology,” he said. “That’s the least they can do.”

https://www.inquirer.com/education/cherry-hill-mistake-students-sexual-education-20241115.html (Archive)
 
In no way shape or form was the intention to release any names,” Morton said Wednesday. ”The important thing is not ever is it our intention to harm any child.”
We will dox your children if you do not send them to us for gay sex indoctrination
As a coalition, we would never release that type of information,” Gottesman said.
Well you did.
Poor kids, I hope the parents take this further. Is there any action legally they can take ?
 
Well you did.
It's hard to put my finger on, but as I've gotten older (I'm almost 30 now, horror), I've noticed more and more that people seem very keen to note that they did not 'intend' to do things. Or that they did not 'mean' to have something turn out the way it did. As if that matters? I find it hard to really put into words; but it strikes me as some extreme form of responsibility abandonment. As though if you can just say sorry enough, or demure enough about your intention, that you can somehow make it not your fault, or not your issue anymore.

Children do that - or rather, did that - not adults. My mother is from brum, and whenever I used to say 'I dunno.' or 'Sorry, I didn't mean to?' as a kid, she'd typically respond with something along the lines of "Oh! So the fucking fairies did it?" or "So? You still did it!". It's weird to see a grown adult talk like a scolded child rather than admit to a fuck up, apologise for the fuck up, and try and actually work on where the error(s) occurred.
 
It's hard to put my finger on, but as I've gotten older (I'm almost 30 now, horror), I've noticed more and more that people seem very keen to note that they did not 'intend' to do things. Or that they did not 'mean' to have something turn out the way it did. As if that matters? I find it hard to really put into words; but it strikes me as some extreme form of responsibility abandonment. As though if you can just say sorry enough, or demure enough about your intention, that you can somehow make it not your fault, or not your issue anymore.

Children do that - or rather, did that - not adults. My mother is from brum, and whenever I used to say 'I dunno.' or 'Sorry, I didn't mean to?' as a kid, she'd typically respond with something along the lines of "Oh! So the fucking fairies did it?" or "So? You still did it!". It's weird to see a grown adult talk like a scolded child rather than admit to a fuck up, apologise for the fuck up, and try and actually work on where the error(s) occurred.
South Park addressed this almost a decade ago:
 
I find it hard to really put into words; but it strikes me as some extreme form of responsibility
Intent has replaced outcome as the metric of harm. If you’re legislating against stuff like ‘hate speech’ you HAVE to have this shift because otherwise it won’t stick. You have to reframe the incident away from outcome (someone got hit) to intent (they hit him because he was Sikh/jewish/white/gay.)
The guy who got hit isn’t actually affected by WHY the guy who hit him did this he?
But if you reframe it as intent then offence becomes an offence, and you can say that offence is taken, not given and define it as anything. You move away from policing ACTIONS which are definable, objective and go to policing thoughts, fuzzy intentions etc. anything at all can become a crime.

So people are keen to stress they didn’t mean to do x, because now everyone is tuned to their intent being the greater crime than what they actually did. The end result is this odd evasion of responsibility coupled with allowing nonces to walk free while people who tweet stuff get locked up.
 
This is, as shitty as it is, probably a mistake.

PDFs are notoriously iffy with redacting. Even if a person correctly redacts a mountain of information, there are still a range of tips and tricks to unblur it. Running a series of conversions like here is one, but there are others.

If you ever do one print the documents, use a grease pencil and then scan it into the system. Even this isn't always 100% foolproof and people hate printing mounds of paperwork, but it's a lot harder to with real blackout on base documents than it is for some aspiring office delinquent to dissect electronic layers.
 
Last edited:
It's hard to put my finger on, but as I've gotten older (I'm almost 30 now, horror), I've noticed more and more that people seem very keen to note that they did not 'intend' to do things. Or that they did not 'mean' to have something turn out the way it did. As if that matters? I find it hard to really put into words; but it strikes me as some extreme form of responsibility abandonment. As though if you can just say sorry enough, or demure enough about your intention, that you can somehow make it not your fault, or not your issue anymore.

Children do that - or rather, did that - not adults. My mother is from brum, and whenever I used to say 'I dunno.' or 'Sorry, I didn't mean to?' as a kid, she'd typically respond with something along the lines of "Oh! So the fucking fairies did it?" or "So? You still did it!". It's weird to see a grown adult talk like a scolded child rather than admit to a fuck up, apologise for the fuck up, and try and actually work on where the error(s) occurred.
whiteculture_info_1.png
Accountability is a product of white supremacy, posing a direct threat to black and trans lives.
 
the state adopted new controversial standards on sex-education concepts that include gender identity, puberty, and masturbation.
Vazquez, whose 6-year-old son was on the opt-out list
"We will talk to your 6-year old child about masturbation."
Wonder how many of these degenerates will be erect while doing so?
 
"We will talk to your 6-year old child about masturbation."
Wonder how many of these degenerates will be erect while doing so?
Wait what the fuck? These kids are SIX? It's obscene enough to even try and teach that shit to a 10-11 year old fifth grader, let alone a goddamn first grader. That's disgusting beyond belief. Like I remember being told a decade ago (and agreeing with it because I was a good left adjacent civil libertarian) that the idea of gay marriage being legal would lead to teaching little kids about masturbation was slippery slope fundie Christian lunacy. Guess the fundies were right (again)!

Once again, you're unironically better off sending your kids to fundie school and learning that world is 6,000 years old and dinosaurs were still alive when Jesus was around than sending them to public school. One is just teaching your kids silly shit, the other is perverting and corrupting your kids.
 
Intent has replaced outcome as the metric of harm. If you’re legislating against stuff like ‘hate speech’ you HAVE to have this shift because otherwise it won’t stick. You have to reframe the incident away from outcome (someone got hit) to intent (they hit him because he was Sikh/jewish/white/gay.)
The guy who got hit isn’t actually affected by WHY the guy who hit him did this he?
But if you reframe it as intent then offence becomes an offence, and you can say that offence is taken, not given and define it as anything. You move away from policing ACTIONS which are definable, objective and go to policing thoughts, fuzzy intentions etc. anything at all can become a crime.

So people are keen to stress they didn’t mean to do x, because now everyone is tuned to their intent being the greater crime than what they actually did. The end result is this odd evasion of responsibility coupled with allowing nonces to walk free while people who tweet stuff get locked up.
On the money. And the even worse part of it is intent is treated as a context specific thing instead of a long-standing objective fact. Generally intent is assessed based on outcome the way I was taught it works, sometimes your intent is severed from the outcome and usually in that case people apologize from guilt. Nowadays an apology is issued only when the person is caught and cannot weasel away, like a magic word which will prevent people from getting angry. Again when I was a kid I was told that sorry is not a substitute for bad action, it's not a magic word which makes the consequences go away but rather an acknowledgement of the consequences and an unwritten agreement that said action won't be repeated. I can see why many adults hate "childish binary morality" cause it's too logically consistent for them to find loopholes in it. Intent is very complex, it's not always easy to discern but one of the ways it can be accurately done so is through actions, independent of their outcome. If intent and action become context specific, then there's no need to assess morality at all cause everybody wants to do good or bad based on arbitrary contexts.
 
obscene enough to even try and teach that shit to a 10-11 year old fifth grader
Growing up in the world before Current Year, I did not know sex existed until I was almost a teenager. And even then I didn't know details beyond the very basic idea until years later. Oh yeah, and when I was a little kid, everyone and their dog did not have "smartphones" with 24-7 ubiquitous internet access: any internet was more a novelty.
 
Wait what the fuck? These kids are SIX? It's obscene enough to even try and teach that shit to a 10-11 year old fifth grader, let alone a goddamn first grader. That's disgusting beyond belief. Like I remember being told a decade ago (and agreeing with it because I was a good left adjacent civil libertarian) that the idea of gay marriage being legal would lead to teaching little kids about masturbation was slippery slope fundie Christian lunacy. Guess the fundies were right (again)!

Once again, you're unironically better off sending your kids to fundie school and learning that world is 6,000 years old and dinosaurs were still alive when Jesus was around than sending them to public school. One is just teaching your kids silly shit, the other is perverting and corrupting your kids.
I'm just thinking of the pRedditor going "Ha, you have a functional and loving family you loser"
 
What you "meant" to do, and whether or not you "desired" an outcome matters little.

All that matters in this world is the consequences of your actions, not your desired outcome for such.

I hope they get sued into oblivion.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: FunPosting101
Back