Tone policing occurs when school staff, administrators, or support personnel dismiss or diminish the substance of a parent’s concerns by focusing on how the message was delivered. Parents of disabled children are often told they are being “too aggressive,” “too emotional,” or “not collaborative enough”—even when their communication is clear, documented, and urgent. This practice disproportionately affects women, racialized families, and neurodivergent parents who are already navigating power imbalances.
In school settings, tone policing is a form of rhetorical control: it reframes advocacy as a behavioural problem. It creates a chilling effect where parents begin self-censoring, soften their language, and worry more about being liked than being heard. It can also serve as a dog whistle to escalate against parents—labeling them as “difficult” in internal documentation, which can then be used to limit their access or credibility.
The cumulative impact is institutional silencing. Families lose trust, disengage from processes meant to support them, and are made to feel that their distress is the real problem—not the conditions causing it. In many cases, tone policing is a strategic tool to preserve professional comfort and institutional power rather than foster meaningful resolution or support for the child.
-
The politics of politeness: how tone-policing silences parent advocates
When a parent dares to speak plainly about harm—especially when that harm is systemic, ongoing, and inflicted upon a disabled child—they are swiftly met with a familiar response: watch your tone.
