Amid the whirlwind of changes taking place in Kentucky education, it can be easy for certain bills and developments to be overlooked. However, one bill in particular has certainly not gone unnoticed and has been causing considerable controversy across the state: Senate Bill 181. Students and teachers across the state are raising concerns that the bill, even if written with honorable intentions, is causing potential professional and personal harm.

Senate Bill 181, signed into law on April 1, 2025, prohibits virtual communication between students and school district employees or volunteers outside of district-approved traceable systems of communication. The bill requires each district to choose one form of district-wide traceable communication. Any infractions by district employees, such as using social media or another non-district-approved mode of communication to contact a student, must be immediately reported by employees aware of the infraction. Such an offense would result in investigation by the Educational Professional Standards Board (EPSB).

Within the original finalized version of the bill, some notable exceptions were laid out. District employees may contact underage family members, and waivers can be signed by parents to allow their students to contact certain district employees in a non-district-approved manner. However, this is where the specificities end, and the vagueness surrounding other details of this bill has led to inconsistent means of enforcement across Kentucky.

One of the biggest concerns from students and educators alike lies in the vague wording of the bill and the possible inequities raised by it. Some districts have taken a more relaxed approach, while some enforce it with such strictness that it adds new anxiety to the jobs of many teachers. In some parts of the state, uncertainties surrounding waivers and activities outside of school can lead to confusion and fear of a full investigation. Without clear guidance from the bill, educators say those concerns are valid. 

Allison Slone is a special education teacher at Rowan Academy in Morehead, Kentucky, an advocate for education across the state, and the first teacher to serve on the Kentucky Board of Education. This summer, the bill raised alarms for her as a problem for educators and students. In protest of the bill in its current state, she went as far as to hand-deliver a petition to Governor Andy Beshear to communicate its dangers.

In the beginning, the law states that each district makes its own policy, according to Slone. That created inconsistencies.  

“You have students who live in one district and go to school in another district, students who move from district to district, [and] it does create a problem,” Slone explained. “Because I may be a teacher in one district, but I may have a virtual student who’s in another district, or I may have students with special education who move in from other places.”

Slone also noted potential equity issues in general, explaining her concerns with the vague nature of the bill.

“Absolutely, there’s always equity issues when you write a law that is so vague, so wide, and so impossible to enforce, and you don’t have input from the very people that it impacts the most,” she said. 

Slone feels the intent of the bill was right, in terms of the goal of protecting children. However, she believes it needs to be more specific. Some of the changes needed, in Slone’s view, are specifications regarding whether or not the restrictions for teachers extend into different districts and what modes of communication should be forbidden for teacher-student contact. She also argued that the bill should focus more on preventing sexual abuse or inappropriate communication rather than general messaging.

Students say the bill’s effects have reached them as well. Some report feeling disconnected from their school communities and struggling to participate in extracurricular activities.

Grace Wilson, a junior at the STEAM Academy and a member of the Kentucky Student Voice Team, said the bill temporarily disrupted student organizations. “It did, for a little while, limit communication with our National Honor Society as well as our Student Council,” Wilson said in a fall 2025 interview. “We couldn’t use Remind, we couldn’t use GroupMe. We couldn’t use any of that.”

Caroline Segebarth, a sophomore at Paul Laurence Dunbar High School and a member of KSVT and Scouting America, also reported difficulties with the bill. Segebarth is a part of Scouting America, and her work with the organization includes working on a week-long course that requires a small team to organize. 

“Some of the adults I have to work with to organize it … are usually teachers in Kentucky,” Segebarth explained. “Because I have to communicate with them constantly and in depth, more than just emails, it’s been a real challenge to get everyone on our team to sign waivers and have them authorized.”

The well-intentioned nature of the bill made it originally popular with lawmakers. Naturally, opposition toward a bill regarding such a sensitive topic as children’s safety can easily paint skeptics as the villain. However, there are notable logistical and ethical concerns raised by educators, students, and families.

Senator Lindsey Tichenor, the sponsor of the bill, described her reasons for proposing it in a July interview. Tichenor cited data on sexual misconduct involving educators, counselors, volunteers, and coaches, and that “in 70 percent of abuse cases, the access point was through technology and communications.”

Teachers and students who spoke with The New Edu emphasized that the bill had good intentions, and that they shared concern around keeping students safe. But some stress that parents and teachers should also be “joining the conversation” in the crafting of such bills.

“I think teacher and student voices are the most important for this kind of legislation, because that’s what it’s directly affecting,” Wilson said. “It’s directly affecting the relationship between the students and the teachers and how schools are able to function.”

Rowan County Senior High School speech coach and longtime educator Misty Litton echoed that concern. “I think any legislation that is going to impact schools and students and families needs to take the input of students, families and schools into account before the legislation is ever written,” Litton said. “Ask the experts in the field. Ask the students who need to communicate with their teachers how they can do so safely and still meet their needs.”

Litton mentioned that she will be traveling with students out of state. “It makes me really uncomfortable to think that I don't have a legal means of communicating with my students while we're traveling. I do think that's a safety issue,” Litton said. Considering the role that travel plays in many school extracurricular activities, safety concerns about communication during faraway travel with students have begun to overshadow those about teacher-student communication. Many fear that this bill could actually pose a safety threat to students. If a situation occurs while students are spread out in an unfamiliar environment, communication with trusted adults is essential.

All things considered, it is time that the bill be revisited and revised to take the weight of its implications off of educators’ shoulders. Fortunately, there are amendments in the works that could solve some of these problems. In late January 2026, a bill revising the restrictions, sponsored by Sen. Tichenor, passed out of the Senate, according to the Kentucky Lantern.

New amendments to the bill were proposed that specified the bounds of “family” in terms of who is allowed to contact students, made exemptions for emergency situations, and defined what forms of social media are appropriate in certain situations.

“One of the most significant and welcome changes is the revised definition of family,” said Slone. "As we all understand, family is no longer a one-size-fits-all concept.”

Slone was pleased to see amendments that allow schools to use social media: “We live in a highly digital world, and schools rely on these platforms to highlight student achievements, celebrate progress, and share school activities with their communities.” She also described the inclusion of explicit language addressing emergency situations as “both prudent and necessary.” 

As of Friday, March 6th, the House will vote on HB 67, which builds on SB 181. Then, it will move to the Senate.

It is clear that commendable steps are being taken to solve the problems raised by this bill. However, not every problem has been addressed.

Slone said that the amendments reflect a “genuine willingness to listen to educators and to take their feedback seriously”. That said, she described concerns with parts of SB 181, including the section addressing a parent’s ability to revoke consent for private communications. “For the safety and protection of all parties involved, this language must be more precise,” said Slone. She also has concerns about the bill only applying within an educator’s own district, stressing that inappropriate communication can occur across district lines, and legislation should reflect that reality.

With changes in education on the rise, it is the responsibility of lawmakers to ensure that those changes are for the better. Senate Bill 181 was created to solve very real and important issues of grooming and predation. However, without vital input from students and educators, this bill can't be a realistic or functional solution.