Introduced by Democrat State Rep. Lori Wilson, Assembly Bill (AB) 957 seeks to include "affirming" a child's sexual transition to the Golden State's standard for parental responsibility and child welfare. If passed, AB 957 will deem parents who refuse to affirm the insanity of transgenderism guilty of child abuse.
Initially introduced back in February, AB 957 required courts to consider whether a child's parents were "gender-affirming" in certain custody cases. But in June, openly gay State Sen. Scott Wiener introduced an amendment that completely rewrites California's standard of childcare. His inclusion of transgender ideology as part of the health, safety and welfare of the child altered the definition and application of the entire California Family Code. (Related: Pediatricians want parents to leave the room while they groom children for transgenderism.)
Wiener's amendments will empower California courts with complete authority – as outlined in Section 3011 of the state's Family Code – to remove a child from a parent's home if the latter disapprove of LGBT ideology. It will also potentially expand the range of organizations allowed to provide "evidence" of gender "non-affirmation" to California courts.
Activist organizations claiming to provide services to victims of sexual assault or domestic violence would be able to report parents for gender "abuse." This opens the possibility of a child reporting their parents to a local LGBTQ+ organization, such as a Gay-Straight Alliance club at school, who could then report the parents for child abuse.
The bill's far-reaching implications have also raised concerns about the state infringing on parental rights and religious freedom. Schools, churches, hospitals and other organizations interacting with children must agree with whatever "gender" children claim they are under the new law – with charges of child abuse awaiting those who insist on reality.
But according to AB 957's critics, the measure lacks clear definitions of what would constitute "non-affirming" behavior regarding a child's gender. They zoomed in on the bill's intrusion on parental rights.
Jay Richards, the director of the Heritage Foundation's Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Life, Religion and Family, dubbed AB 957 a "grotesque violation" of both children's and parent's rights.
San Francisco attorney Erin Friday, who also serves as the co-lead of the Our Duty parent coalition, expressed her concerns. She said: "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 [child's] health, safety, and welfare' if you're not affirming them."
The Washington Free Beacon's Susannah Luthi looked at the unclear definition of "non-affirming behavior." She wrote: "The bill makes no distinctions regarding the age of a child, how long a child has identified as transgender, or affirmation of social transition versus medical sex-change treatments."
Facts Law Truth Justice founder Nicole Pearson, meanwhile, condemned the bill's unconstitutionality, emphasizing the lack of opportunity for parents to be heard. She told the Daily Signal: "This bill makes law that failure to affirm your child's identity is child abuse. This will be a final, legal determination without any evidence supporting a hearing with notice or the opportunity to be heard."
Transhumanism.news has more stories about the leftist espousal of destroying parental rights in the name of LGBT.
Watch this clip discussing AB 957 and its stance on "non-affirming parents."