Can You Lose Your Child To The State Over Gender Disagreements?

Recent court cases reveal a troubling trend: parents losing custody or facing diminished parental rights due to disagreements over their child's gender identity and associated treatments. These cases raise profound questions about the balance between parental authority and state intervention, particularly when it comes to deeply personal decisions involving minors.

One of the most high-profile examples currently in the news is Jeffrey Younger's ongoing battle over his 12-year-old child, whose mother sought gender transition treatments. Despite Younger's objections and his son's residency in Texas, a California judge ultimately granted the mother authority over the child's medical decisions. California's progressive laws on gender-affirming care played a pivotal role, illustrating how legal frameworks can significantly influence custody outcomes.

Several states already have court rulings that have removed a child from their parents' home after determining the child's mental health and safety were at risk due to conflict over gender identity. This number is expected to grow exponentially if something is not done to change the current laws being passed in mainly progressive Democrat run states.

In Indiana, a couple lost custody of their child after refusing to affirm the child's self-identified gender. State authorities launched an investigation into the parents for not using the child's preferred name and pronouns, citing emotional abuse. The child was removed from their home despite the parents being deemed otherwise fit, with courts restricting their ability to discuss gender identity during visitation. The case has since reached the U.S. Supreme Court, where the parents argue that this sets a dangerous precedent for removing children from parents due to religious beliefs or personal convictions about gender​

A Minnesota court removed a teenage child from parental custody after the parents opposed hormone treatments for gender transition. The teenager was placed under the care of state authorities to access the desired treatments. This case sparked heated debates on the rights of parents versus the autonomy of minors in medical decision-making, particularly regarding gender-related treatments​.

In Montana, the case of Todd and Krista Kolstad made national headlines earlier this year after the parents lost custody of their 14-year-old daughter, referred to as "Jennifer," after she expressed suicidal thoughts and was hospitalized. While the parents sought mental health care for Jennifer, they objected to affirming her gender identity as "Leo," which conflicted with their religious and moral beliefs.

Hospital staff and Child and Family Services (CFS) facilitated social transition measures, such as using male pronouns and chest binders, without parental consent. When the Kolstads opposed transferring Jennifer to a Wyoming facility known for its permissive stance on gender transition procedures, CFS accused them of failing to provide appropriate care and removed Jennifer from their home. Despite the parents' objections and appeals, the court made the ruling permanent, citing their lack of support for their daughter's gender identity as the contributing factor.​

Those with children are not the only one's at risk of losing parental rights over gender issues.  For those couples looking to become involved with foster care or adoption, similar policies are making this impossible for Christian couples who hold to Biblical values.

Specifically, new rules in many states require supporting a child's "self-identified sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression," and provide access to resources that support their health and wellbeing. This means that foster parents would be required to ensure access to "affirming" mental health providers and "gender-affirming care" such as puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgical procedures.  

Mike and Kitty Burke, a Christian couple, were denied a foster care license in Massachusetts because their beliefs about marriage and gender conflicted with affirming practices for LGBTQIA+ children. Despite expressing their commitment to loving and supporting any child, they were deemed unsuitable because they opposed medical interventions like puberty blockers. The Burkes are suing the state, arguing this decision reflects religious discrimination amid a foster care shortage​.

Christian single mother Jessica Bates was "shocked" when Oregon denied her adoption application because she did not support medically transitioning children, she told the Daily Caller News Foundation in an interview.

Bates, a mother of five, was looking to adopt a "sibling pair" after her husband died in a car accident, saying to the DCNF that she felt it was a "calling from God," but after going through the application process, state officials with the Department of Human Services explained that she would need to agree to support any adopted child's desire to have a gender transition. 

As a Christian, Bates told the DCNF that she knew this requirement was "denying reality" as well as her faith, and filed a lawsuit with Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) against the state after they reportedly prevented her from moving forward in the process.

"I think everybody was just really shocked at first that, you know, gender ideology would be the reason why we wouldn't be able to adopt," Bates told the DCNF.

During the adoption process, Bates said there were "hypothetical situations" discussed about a child wanting to identify as a different gender or go through hormone therapy and surgeries, and as a result, she informed the state that she would always love the child but couldn't support those choices. Bates said that she got a call from the certifier from the department who told her that they had determined that she didn't meet the requirements for adoption.

 

Bates explained to the DCNF that she believes "God gives us our gender" and that anything to the contrary is "basically just an untruth." She argued that truly loving a child suffering from gender dysphoria is not about "trying to affirm them in something they think will make them happy" and that procedures like puberty blockers and surgeries are "so radical."

"These kids are so young and the gender surgeries and stuff are so radical and then they have to be on hormones for the rest of their lives," Bates said. "Girls lose their voice. It'll go deep and you don't get that back, not to mention reproductive abilities, and everything else. I think it does more harm in the long run."