State bill would let minors have sex change without parental knowledge

Posted on April 10, 2020 11:06 am

From Greg Burt/California Family Council

SACRAMENTO – One of Planned Parenthood’s priority bills in California this year requires health insurance companies to hide from parents “sensitive” medical procedures given to their adult and minor children. These “sensitive” services, as defined by SB 1004, include abortions; drug abuse and mental health treatment; and under certain circumstanced transgender hormones and sex-change operations.

In a fact-sheet from bill author Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, (D) Santa Barbara, the legislation is necessary to protect young adults, who remain on their parent’s health insurance until age  26, from being shamed or hurt by the policyholder who disagrees with their healthcare choices.

Yet, this bill not only hides the medical service used by young adults from their parents, but it also hides services for “a minor who can consent to a health care service without the consent of a parent or legal guardian… .”

“Government bureaucrats should not be helping Planned Parenthood undermine parents’ rights to guide and oversee the healthcare of their children,” said California Family Council President Jonathan Keller.

“Transparency matters. The owner of an insurance policy deserves to know what medical procedures they are paying for. If an adult under 26 wants insurance privacy, they can and should purchase their own insurance.”

According to the California Healthcare Foundation, California law permits minors of various ages to consent to the following medical procedures and treatment: abortion; drug­ and alcohol ­related problems; HIV/AIDS; certain infectious, contagious, or communicable diseases, including sexually transmitted diseases; mental health drugs and counseling; pregnancy and birth control; and sexual assault.

Under SB 1004, insurance companies would be criminally charged if they let parents know their health insurance policy was paying for these procedures for their minor children.

Not included in this minor medical procedure consent list is what SB 1004 defines as “transgender health, including gender-affirming care.”

Planned Parenthood clinics around California have started to aggressively promote “Transgender Hormone Services,” or “Gender Affirming Care,” which include puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones; drugs that will permanently sterilize children.

So far Planned Parenthood says on its website that minors must get parental approval, before receiving transgender hormone services. But a senior attorney with the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI), believes a 23-year-old California Supreme Court decision could be used to justify letting minors consent to transgender drugs without parental approval.

PJI Senior Attorney Kevin Snider pointed to American Academy of Pediatrics v. Lundgren, a 1997 California Supreme Court decision he said, “emasculated parental rights… leaving moms and dads impotent to act as parents.” Snider explained how this case overturned a law requiring parental notification before a minor can have an abortion.

The State’s high court found “that minors have informational and autonomy privacy in terms of intimate personal decisions which trumps the rights of parents.  It is doubtful that the ruling would not extend to minors ingesting cross-sex hormones,” Snider said.

Although Planned Parenthood is not publicly advocating letting minors use transgender hormones without parent approval, the California Teacher’s Association (CTA) is publicly headed in that direction.

According to a recent Epoch Times report, the CTA changed its policy for school-based health clinics so that services for “transgender and non-binary youth” is equal to the privacy given to other students.

The new policy reads: “CTA believes comprehensive school-based health care clinics are needed to bring caring and responsive services to young people. The clinics shall provide cisgender, transgender and non-binary youth equal and confidential access to decision-making rights for students and their families.”

The Epoch Times when on to write: The rationale behind this policy change was printed in a CTA Report of Board of Directors, Committees, and Items of New Business in June 2019.

The rationale states: “Current interpretation of California state law does not allow trans students to begin gender identity confirming hormone therapy without the consent of both legal guardians, however it does allow for cis minors to receive hormones (e.g. birth control) without the barrier of parental permission.

“This inequity of decision-making forces some children to go through the wrong puberty and can negatively impact the child’s mental health.”

Last December Planned Parenthood announced plans to set up health centers within 50 high schools in the Los Angeles Unified School District to directly provide students their array of services. If SB 1004 pass, services can be paid for by a student’s insurance without the parent ever knowing out it.

SB 1004 has not yet been assigned to a Senate committee for a hearing, and will not be assigned a hearing until the Senate returns to session in May.

SOURCE

Spread the love
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
7 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
trackback

[…] even if parents object, assuming they are notified at all. And in California, a proposed bill would allow minors to have sex-change surgery without parental […]

trackback

[…] above comes from an April 10 story in Press […]

Jolhn Steele
Jolhn Steele
1 year ago

These people are sick, sick, sick.. Can we neuter them so they can’t reproduce. ..

Mike Foley
Mike Foley
1 year ago

I hope people sue the state of CA up one side and down the other. It’s none of their damn business.

showandtell
showandtell
1 year ago

Ask yourself why do these legislators care SO MUCH about something like this that they would still bang away at it when they should be concerned with “CV-19 devastation?” As if…
Evil phonies. This kind of stuff should definitely be on the cutting room floor given the circumstances.
Hasn’t everyone had ENOUGH YET?
I know I have.

showandtell
showandtell
1 year ago
Reply to  tippermart

Yes they are, aren’t they? Great point.