07/27/2026
about Section 177: Why are school districts keeping us in the dark?
A parent recently reached out to ask my opinion on parents being “sectioned” by their school district. As you can imagine, I have a lot of thoughts on this.
For those who may not know, of the BC School Act—often colloquially referred to as being "sectioned"— is a provincial law titled "Maintenance of Order." It gives school authorities the immediate legal power to ban, remove, or restrict individuals from school property to protect student/staff safety and ensure education isn't severely disrupted. While the law has a purpose, many in the community have seen it against parents of children with special needs who are simply advocating fiercely for their kids.
The most interesting question this parent raised is:
Why are there no official statistics on how many parents—especially parents of children with diverse needs—are being sectioned in BC?
If you look into it, the standard official response is that “there are no public statistics on the use of Section 177 because school districts are not legally required to aggregate this data, and doing so would conflict with provincial privacy laws.” They often reference the BC Ministry of Education's Policy on the Protection of Personal Information when Reporting on Small Populations.
Admittedly, I find this justification incredibly circular. It feels like a convenient shield that allows school districts to cloak their disciplinary actions in secrecy.
The province's privacy policy states that data must be masked when a population is so small (fewer than 10 individuals) that a person's identity could be reverse-engineered. But that doesn't mean districts can't track or report aggregate data at all.
Why can't we have simple, anonymized monthly reporting at public school board meetings?
For example:
"This month, the Superintendent received reports of X number of Section 177 orders issued across elementary, middle, and high schools."
Reporting a single, district-wide number preserves privacy while providing vital public accountability. If a district is issuing an unusually high number of bans, the public and the board deserve to know so they can ask why.
What are your thoughts? Would this type of data tracking be a useful tool for systemic advocacy, or would it just add to the administrative pile?