A California state senator suggested at a packed Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on a pro-transgender bill that fighting to preserve parental rights in the state is a lost cause and advised California parents to leave if they know what’s best for their children and families.
State Sen. Scott Wilk (R-Santa Clarita) made the remark at a June 13 hearing on proposed legislation that critics claim has been crafted to pressure family court judges to favor “gender-affirming” parents in child custody disputes.
In the past, Wilk said he has “encouraged people to keep fighting” to protect parental rights. But, not anymore.
“I’ve changed my mind on that: If you love your children, you need to flee California,” he said. “You need to flee. We are moving towards the pathway of The Handmaid’s Tale. California is becoming the new Gilead.”
Wilk, a native-born Californian who has served in the state legislature for more than a decade, said he’s seen the state shift away from protecting children and parental rights.
“I’ve come to conclusion that we need to start protecting parents, and it’s just not happening. I’ve been here and witnessed a full-frontal assault on charter schools, taking away parents’ choice on how their children can be educated, to the detriment particularly of children of color,” he said. “In recent years, we have put government bureaucrats between parents, children and doctors when it comes to medical care, and now we have this where if a parent does not support the ideology of the government, they’re going to be taken away from the home. ... I can assure you this not going to end with divorce proceedings.”
Wilk said he loves California but will leave the state someday because of its policies.
“I’m not going to stay in this state, because it’s just too oppressive,” he said. “I believe in freedom, and so I’m going to move to America when I leave the legislature.”
The original text of the bill stated it “would require” family court judges to consider a parent’s willingness to affirm their child’s chosen gender identity as being in the best interest of the child, but was amended to “include a parent’s affirmation of the child’s gender identity as part of the health, safety, and welfare” considerations in determining what is in the best interest of the child.
Custody Disputes
Erin Friday, a western U.S. regional co-leader of Our Duty—an international organization that opposes transgender ideology—told the committee that AB 957 would make California the only state in the nation to codify into law that parents who don’t comply with pressure to affirm a child’s chosen gender identity of the child are “abusive.”Friday, an attorney whose daughter “used to believe that she was a boy,” said AB 957 will allow Child Protective Services to target parents who reject transgender theory and refuse to use a child’s preferred pronouns.
In child custody cases, she said, family court judges will be compelled to favor the parent who will affirm their child’s “delusion,” regardless of the child’s age, comorbid mental health issues, or “absurdity of the identity adopted.”
“My daughter was murdered by a gender ideology. CPS took my daughter when she was 16 years old,” she told the committee. “I lost my daughter over a name and pronouns. Even after I promised to call her a male name, it wasn’t enough.”
Yaeli was in “horrible” mental and physical pain from taking testosterone, which she was prescribed without parental consent, Martinez said.
“My daughter was not a boy trapped in a girl’s body. She had mental health issues,” Martinez said. “My daughter was given testosterone instead of therapy.”
When Yaeli was taken from her mother’s care, Martinez said LGBT groups used her story to raise money and promote the trans agenda.
By the time the child abuse claim against her was finally dropped, Martinez said it was too late.
“My daughter knelt down in front of a train,” Martinez said. “I beg you. Stop pushing gender ideology. I don’t want any parent to feel what I feel every day. Affirmation is not good for the health, safety, and welfare of any child.”
“It has been three years and 164 days since I lost my daughter, Yaeli,” she told the committee. “I miss her every single day.”
Assemblywoman Lori Wilson (D-Suisun City), the mother of a transgender child, who introduced the bill, told the committee that when parents do not agree on affirming a transgender, gender diverse, or intersex (TGI) child’s gender identity, California family law “fails to provide guidance on how judges should consider the best interests of a TGI child.”
Initially, the bill was written to amend a section of the state’s family law and the Code of Civil Procedure but was narrowed in scope to change only family code 3011. However, “the amendments taken do not substantially differ from its previous version,” she said.
The changes “provide better clarity” so that judges can include the affirmation of a child’s gender identity as a factor when deciding what is in the best interest of the child’s health, safety and welfare in-custody disputes, she said.
“This amendment allows judicial discretion when conducting an analysis of the best interests of the child,” Wilson said.
She argued that parental acceptance is a crucial to protect LGBT youth from depression and substance abuse, and that social support from friends and family members “is strongly associated with the positive mental development, physical health and overall well-being” of the child.
“Being antagonistic to a child’s gender identity dramatically affects a child’s mental well-being. Conversely, in TGI children that experience familial acceptance, suicide attempts are reduced by half,” she said. “Many TGI children are not safe in their own homes because of a non-conforming or abusive caretaker. This leads many TGI youth to run away from home, leaving them vulnerable to housing, instability, exploitation, and abuse.”
Melissa Thomas of the Women’s Foundation of California, a co-sponsor of the bill told the committee current law doesn’t address “the unique needs of TGI kids, particularly in the really difficult situations where only one parent affirms their child’s gender identity.”
Thomas, who announced her preferred pronouns as “they/them,” said AB 957 would conform to guidelines set by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) and American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) that “affirming a child’s gender identity is integral to their health, safety and welfare.”
Jonathan Clay of TransYouth Liberation and TransFamily Support Services, said the amended bill would allow judicial discretion and “simply add gender affirmation to the current list of factors to consider for custody and visitation.”
“We have served many families that have found themselves in family court with one parent who’s following the lead of the child and affirming, and one parent who’s not. The situation puts the child and the family in a very vulnerable position,” Clay said.
All Democratic senators on the committee voiced support for the bill, although several suggested it lacked clarity on what constitutes “affirmation.” State Sens. Ben Allen and Angelique Ashby also warned that vague wording in the bill could cause problems with interpretation of the law and for judges in the family court system if the term isn’t more clearly defined.
Wiener’s Rebuttal
Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) objected to Wilk’s reference to The Handmaid’s Tale, a popular TV series based on a science fiction novel by Canadian feminist Margaret Atwood first published in 1985. The story is set in a fictitious country named Gilead.“If you look at that story, what happened there is women were forced to give birth, and LGBTQ people were executed by hanging. I just want to say that, because I just strongly disagree with that remark,” Wiener said.
As the principal co-author of the bill, Wiener pointed out he has been harshly criticized on social media as an “an openly gay man” without children, even more than Wilson, who introduced the bill.
European Models
Niello raised concerns about gender-affirming care being pushed in the U.S. while several European countries, including the United Kingdom, Sweden, Finland, and Norway, are shifting away from this model of health care.Niello said the bill would elevate the “gender-affirming care” model “as an accomplished science,” and “the appropriate approach by parents” in the California family court system, ignoring the warnings of European health authorities that data is inconclusive and that more study is needed.
“Given the conclusions of the UK and those three Scandinavian countries—not exactly restrictive type societies—I have concerns about making the conclusion that this bill does bring into a custody dispute,” he said.
In the U.S., President Joe Biden, in his remarks at the White House on June 8, condemned attempts to ban sex change surgeries and transgender medical interventions on children, calling such proposed legislation “cruel and callous.”
Parental Rights Poll
A recent survey by Rasmussen Reports and Real Impact found that 82 percent of likely voters in California disagree with the notion that parents surrender their parental rights when their children enter the public school system, including 69 percent who strongly disagree.The survey also found that an overwhelming majority of California voters would support laws requiring schools to notify parents if a student identifies as transgender.
Parental Rights Rally
At a press conference organized by a coalition of parental rights advocates preceding the hearings, two fathers embroiled in child custody disputes with gender-affirming ex-wives described how they’ve been shut out of their young son’s lives.Adam Vena, a father who is fighting for custody of his 5-year-old son, Aidan, claims the boy’s mother has been socially transitioning him for two years.
“I have not seen, held or had contact with my son, Aidan, for over two years now,” Vena said. “At 2 years old out of nowhere, his mother started putting my son in a dress and identifying him as a girl. Her family bought him makeup and rainbow shoes. When Aidan was the age of 3, he told me his mom had given him a pink dress for his birthday.”
Vena said he doesn’t support the social gender transitioning of his son, nor AB 957.
“This is crazy. The parent who wants to change the child’s perfect body is abusive,” Vena said at the state Capitol. “My personal beliefs and my First Amendment rights were squashed, because I did not want my son ... wearing a dress.”
When Vena expressed to the boy’s mother that had concerns about how the child was being raised, he was called “abusive” and had a restraining order placed against him.
“My son Aidan was not born in the wrong body. He was born in the wrong state,” he said.
Another dad, Harrison Tinsley, said he lost custody of his 3-year-old son, and claims the boy’s mother is using they/them pronouns and dressing the boy as a girl against his son’s wishes.
“I’ll never stop fighting for him no matter what law California puts in place. They’re coming for our children, and we need to take a stand against it,” he said. “We need to stand together, draw a line in the sand and say, ‘No more! You’re not taking our kids from us.’ Through the darkness, we will be the light for our kids. We will always fight.”
Jennifer Kennedy, a parent and attorney, said AB 957, AB 223, and AB 665 are a series of bills linked with others to usurp the authority of parents over their children and push gender ideology.
“These laws that have come out of the legislature this session ... are like train cars, stacked one after the other with every single one aimed at our children, our relationships with our children, and our rights as parents, and they are barreling down the track at us,” she said
“It’s not protecting trans and non-binary youth. It’s protecting the adults who wish to come into court and change a gender marker of a child and hide ... what they’re doing from the public,” she said. “They’re trying to create a problem in order to hook up this next train car in the train of all these anti-parent and anti-family bills.”
Tara Thornton, founder of California-based civil rights group Freedom Angels, warned parents at the press conference that AB 957 will “weaponize gender identity” in family courts.
At 12, children are at their most vulnerable and are easily influenced by social media, peer groups and tend to behave impulsively, Thornton said.
“We should be building programs, fostering communication between parents and children, and focusing on the mental health ... not emancipating,” she said.
But, moving to a group home might sound good to those don’t want to abide by their parents’ boundaries, she said.
“If you are outraged, if you are choking back tears, that is the appropriate human emotion for what is going on here,” Thornton said. “We can stop this because most people—most of humanity—does not side with this extremism. They want healthy children and healthy families. It’s in our hands.”
