Myles Fitzpatrick Reported Anti-trans Bullying. His School Failed to Protect Him Before His Death

The 17-year-old trans student and his mother repeatedly sought help as classmates harassed him, staff failed to stop it, and requests for safer conditions went unanswered.

At 17, he endured anti-trans harassment that his family says Manville school officials failed to stop. Photo courtesy Danielle Warshefski.

Myles Fitzpatrick was 17 years old when he died by suicide in November 2022. The lawsuit filed by his mother, Danielle Warshefski, describes a trans teenager enduring relentless harassment at Manville High School while repeated complaints, visible distress, and requests for safer conditions failed to produce the protection he needed. Classmates targeted his gender identity, mocked his transition, misgendered him, used slurs, and told him he would never be male. The harassment followed him through hallways, classrooms, bathrooms, and the boys’ locker room, where school officials had the authority to intervene. The district has now resolved the case through a settlement reported at approximately $950,000, but Myles needed adults to protect him while he was alive.

Myles entered the Manville school system during the 2018–2019 academic year and came out as trans around December 2020. He began his transition while classes were virtual during the COVID-19 pandemic, a period when the physical school environment could not yet expose him to the treatment that followed. When students returned to in-person learning for the 2021–2022 school year, the lawsuit says Myles became the target of severe and persistent anti-trans harassment. His classmates attacked his identity, appearance, clothing, and transition status throughout the school day. What began as verbal cruelty also became physical intimidation and violence.

The complaint describes classmates pushing Myles into lockers, kicking him, pulling his hair, and throwing objects at him. It says the abuse occurred in spaces controlled by the school, including hallways, bathrooms, the locker room, and other areas where teachers and staff were responsible for maintaining safety. The lawsuit says some incidents happened in front of school employees who did not intervene. That failure matters because the danger was not confined to hidden corners or private messages that administrators could claim they never saw. Myles was being targeted inside an institution staffed by adults with both the authority and responsibility to stop it.

This was not ordinary conflict between students. Myles was singled out because he was trans, and the attacks were designed to deny his identity and punish him for living openly. Classmates deliberately referred to him as a girl, called him anti-gay slurs, and insisted that he would never be male. That language carried a clear message: his presence was unacceptable, his identity was available for public attack, and the school environment would not reliably protect him. Anti-trans harassment works by making every ordinary part of a student’s day—walking between classes, changing clothes, using a restroom, sitting in a classroom—another opportunity for humiliation or confrontation. Myles was expected to keep returning to the same spaces where that harm continued.

Myles and his mother did not remain silent. The lawsuit says they complained to school officials and to his counselor, asking the district to respond to the abuse and protect him from further harm. Those warnings should have triggered an urgent, coordinated intervention capable of separating Myles from the students targeting him, monitoring the spaces where the harassment occurred, and holding responsible students accountable. Instead, the bullying continued and intensified. The issue was not that the school lacked notice; the family’s case is that Myles and his mother repeatedly told the institution what was happening and still did not receive sufficient protection.

As the harassment continued, Myles’s distress became increasingly visible. The complaint describes severe depression, anxiety, and signs of self-harm that appeared during the school day. Teachers were not being asked to diagnose a hidden condition or predict an unknowable future. They were responsible for recognizing that a child enduring reported harassment was visibly deteriorating and needed immediate protection and support. When a student’s suffering becomes visible inside a classroom, documenting the concern is not enough if the student remains exposed to the environment causing the harm. The adults around Myles had the power to interrupt that pattern before it deepened.

The school also controlled practical measures that could have reduced Myles’s exposure to abuse. Because he faced harassment in the boys’ bathroom and locker room, he was permitted to use the faculty lounge restroom and the nurse’s office restroom. The lawsuit says that permission was later withdrawn without explanation, taking away spaces that had offered some separation from the students targeting him. Requests for virtual instruction or homeschooling were also denied, leaving Myles inside the same environment he and his mother were trying to escape. The institution did not merely fail to stop classmates from harming him; it removed or refused alternatives that could have provided greater safety.

Every one of those decisions carried a human consequence. A bathroom accommodation was not a special privilege but a response to an unsafe environment. Virtual learning was not an attempt to avoid school responsibilities but a request to protect a teenager who was struggling under sustained harassment. When those options were withdrawn or denied, Myles was returned to the same hallways, classrooms, bathrooms, and locker-room conditions where the abuse had continued. The school’s authority extended over every one of those spaces. Its responsibility could not end with acknowledging a complaint while leaving him exposed.

Myles died before he could graduate. He would be 21 years old now, with years of adulthood that his family never got to see. He was a son, a brother, a student, and a child loved by his mother, stepfather, siblings, and family. His obituary remembered his bond with his cat, Simba, and his mother described him as her “sweet boy,” promising that he would never be forgotten. Those details matter because institutions and court records can reduce a child to allegations, filings, settlement figures, and legal fees. Myles was a whole person whose life cannot be measured by the amount paid after his death.

The settlement ends the family’s lawsuit without a public trial resolving every claim. It does not return the protection Myles sought, restore the school days consumed by fear, or create the intervention that should have occurred when the complaints were made. Money can compensate an estate, pay legal costs, and close litigation, but it cannot replace the adults who should have stepped between Myles and the students tormenting him. It cannot reopen the safety measures that were withdrawn or approve the alternative education his family requested. It arrives only after the institution’s opportunity to protect him has permanently passed.

The responsibility of a public school is not passive. Administrators control discipline, staffing, supervision, restroom access, locker-room conditions, classroom intervention, counseling, accommodations, and alternative instruction. When a trans student reports identity-based harassment and visibly deteriorates, every part of that authority becomes part of the duty to act. A school cannot treat anti-trans abuse as ordinary adolescent cruelty when it is persistent, physical, targeted, and linked to a student’s worsening crisis. Protection must mean changing the conditions around the child, not repeatedly sending him back into them.

Myles’s case carries a warning for every trans student and family told to report bullying and trust the adults in charge. Reporting cannot be called a solution when complaints do not stop the abuse. Visibility cannot be called awareness when warning signs do not produce urgent intervention. An accommodation cannot be called protection when it can be withdrawn while the danger remains. Accountability cannot be measured only by what a district pays after a student is gone. It must be measured by whether the institution acts decisively while the child is still walking through its doors.

Myles and his mother were not asking for a future settlement. They were asking Manville school officials to stop the harassment, create safer conditions, and protect a 17-year-old trans boy who was visibly struggling. The district had authority over the students, staff, facilities, accommodations, and educational options surrounding him. That authority carried a responsibility to intervene before the damage became irreversible. Myles needed protection while he was alive. Accountability after his death cannot replace it.

---

Myles Fitzpatrick and his mother repeatedly asked his school for protection from anti-trans harassment. The district reached a settlement only after the protection he needed while alive could no longer be provided.

Upgrade to a paid subscription for exclusive Trans United reporting, deeper analysis of anti-trans institutional harm, and continued documentation of the people, policies, and systems placing trans lives at risk.