Certain ideas and values are sufficiently offensive to society that they merit less deference from teachers. For example, a teacher discussing racial equality and civil rights with student whose family preaches white supremacy does not have the same obligation to avoid influencing the student as a teacher discussing spirituality or religion with a students whose family is very religious. Ultimately, it might always be best to err on the side of parents' autonomy except where greater (or deliberate) influence on students is justified by specific issues that trump the autonomous rights of parents. (3) What situations can you think of, or have you encountered, where a teacher's professional life and personal life cause friction or conflict?

I could imagine a science or philosophy teacher being approached by students soliciting the teacher's opinions and beliefs about fundamental concepts such as the origin...

The teacher might believe that there is are no "gods" of any kind, that human beings are just another form of "animal" life, and that the so-called "afterlife" is a complete fabrication by people who are too scared to accept that all life is finite. Because the teacher can substantially interfere with parental autonomy by answering in great detail in his capacity as a role model, he may have an obligation to respond more vaguely. He could fulfill his obligation to the student simultaneously by simply acknowledging that he (the teacher) can not ethically provide a very detailed answer that could conflict with what the student's parents have told him. It would also be appropriate for the teacher to direct the student to outside resources that would enable him to research the answers to his questions independently and reach his own conclusions or return to the teacher for further guidance, if necessary.