Connect with us

Politics

JUST IN: California Passes Radical Law That Punishes Parents For Not ‘Affirming’ Kids’ Gender

Published

1 year ago

on

California has long been a battleground for contentious issues, from immigration to taxation. Now, it’s again at the epicenter of a major debate, this time involving parental rights and gender identity. Assembly Bill 957, introduced by Assembly Member Lori Wilson and coauthored by Senator Scott Wiener, now adds a controversial twist to the state’s family law provisions.

At its core, the bill introduces the consideration of a parent’s affirmation of a child’s gender identity or gender expression into custody rulings. This means that when deciding what is in the “best interests” of a child during custody battles, the court will factor in whether parents have supported and affirmed their child’s gender identity and expression.

The bill does not specify how “affirmation” is to be measured or what exact actions or beliefs qualify as affirming. Instead, it suggests that affirmation can vary from child to child but “in every case must promote the child’s overall health and well-being.”

For many, the bill has sparked concerns over the potential infringement on parental rights. If passed into law, parents could lose custody of their children for not fully affirming their child’s gender identity. Another worry is the vagueness of the bill. Without a clear definition of what constitutes affirmation, could courts be left to make arbitrary decisions based on individual judges’ biases or beliefs.

“Parents affirm their children,” said Wilson. “Typically it happens when their gender identity matches their biological gender. But when it doesn’t, the affirmation starts to wane. Our duty is to affirm our children.”

free hat

The California Senate has already approved the bill, and it is now awaiting Governor Gavin Newsom’s signature to become law.

In May, the bill successfully passed California’s State Assembly and subsequently underwent amendments by a co-sponsor in California’s State Senate on June 6.

This bill proposes two changes to existing law. First, it states that if one parent objects to a name or gender marker change to affirm a minor’s gender identity, the court should strongly consider that affirming the minor’s gender identity is in the child’s best interest. This does not require the court to side with the objecting parent but adds it as a factor to consider. Second, in child custody proceedings, the court would be required to consider a parent’s affirmation of their child’s gender identity when determining the best interest of the child.

“When you say that gender affirmation is in the child’s best interest for health, safety, and welfare, it takes nothing to say [non-affirmation] is now abuse—because you’re not taking care of the health, safety, and welfare if you’re not affirming them,” said Erin Friday in June, a San Francisco attorney.

The California Capitol Connection has opposed the bill as they believe it undermines the existing law that allows parents to object to their child’s request for a change of gender and/or name on official documents. They, like many, argue that the bill would force family courts to disregard parental objections and rule in favor of the minor’s request, arguing that parents should have the final say in major decisions affecting their children. They also referenced religious beliefs and natural gender distinctions as additional reasons for their opposition.



Related Topics: