A recent court ruling threatened to release the school records of over 10 million California students to the attorneys of two nonprofit organizations, the Morgan Hill Concerned Parents Association and the Concerned Parents Association, which were seeking the data to ensure that schools have been properly educating special needs students in compliance with federal law. The lawsuit was filed against the California Department of Education by the groups after their request for data, which did not include students’ personal information, was originally denied by the Department.

Even though the data search was to be monitored by a court-appointed overseer, parents worried about inadvertent violations of student privacy rights. The judge’s order that parents be allowed to exempt their child’s information from the data release did nothing to calm the situation.

In response to overwhelming protests from parents, the judge backtracked on her original ruling, instead ordering that the records remain solely with the Department of Education, which must assist the nonprofits in gathering the information they need. Unfortunately, they will still be accessing sensitive information such as names, addresses and even records of pregnancy, addiction and criminal activity.

Regardless of the cause these nonprofits claim to be supporting, the privacy of students should still be the top priority. Under no circumstances should anyone be able to access the personal information of minors without direct permission from a parent or guardian.

“I think the cause is good but the solution is sub-par,” senior Ben Stout said. “It is also important to let everyone know that you can opt out.”

Most consider privacy to be one of the most important human rights, especially when it comes to minors. Given their age, they should theoretically be the most protected by the law. If the students’ information were to be hacked or stolen, it could put millions of students at risk for identity theft or even stalking. Even if the chances of this happening seem unlikely, it is very difficult to ensure that the data will remain safely confidential, as security breaches have even occurred at numerous large corporations in recent years.

“In this era of hacking and identity theft, it’s very important for all of us to protect our social security number and date of birth,” parent Angela Tang said. “When the people involved are children, this becomes even more critical because students may not realize for years that someone is impersonating them for financial or other fraud. Any time a child’s name is connected with his or her address and put in the hands of someone [malicious], there is the possibility of personal danger, though I think the odds of this are rather remote.”

Some may defend the nonprofit organizations, as they originally had not asked for the full personal profile of all of the students. It is unclear as to why the Department of Education would not even allow restricted access to a limited portion of the student database, but there could be many factors in its decision. It is also unclear why the nonprofits had claimed that previous data provided to them from a California Special Education Management Information System database, which included the records of special needs students and those being tested, was insufficient. While the intentions of the organizations may be good, it is still too risky to give them complete access to the students’ information.

At the end of the day, the privacy and protection of millions of minors should be the most important issue in this court decision. Perhaps a better agreement could be made about allowing the nonprofits access to only specific parts of the database. It is always better to be safe than sorry.