California’s AB 1967 is a Democrat-sponsored bill introduced by state assembly member Rick Chavez Zbur in February. It intends to amend Sections 329, 331, and 388.1 of the Welfare and Institution Code regarding juveniles.
Greg Burt, vice president of California Family Council (CFC), spoke on “Washington Watch,” last week saying that this is one new way for California to remove parental rights and challenge child custody for parents who balk at the transgender lifestyle.
“We have legislators here in California who really believe that parents who do not affirm a kid's transgender identity are actually harming their children, that they are in danger, that the kids will commit suicide,” Burt told show host Casey Harper.
This bill specifically targets parents, he says, who have a troubled child that they have admitted into a residential facility, whether for emotional issues or drug abuse.
“If you put your kid in a drug rehab program, and your child doesn't like it or he thinks the real problem is the parent, he can file a complaint with his social services, and social services will start an investigation and inquiry into the parents,” Burt explains. “They take this case to a judge, and the parents are brought in, didn't know this was even happening. With an activist attorney helping out, kids can be removed from your home, and then parents are going to have to fight to keep the kid in the home over the next several months.”
LGBTQ activists are starting “rainbow homes,” which are replacements for Christian families, who believe in biblical values, Burt said.
“They try and persuade kids to leave their families and go to these homes. They do it by convincing these kids that their parents are harming them because they're not being affirming to the gender that (the child) picked,” Burt says.
Burt says that this is a pattern in California, secretly transitions kids, especially in schools. He mentions the Mirabelli v. Bonta case, which made it all the way to the Supreme Court. It challenged a California law that required public school officials not to inform parents of their child’s gender identity. Even if the parents ask, the information cannot be given without the student’s consent.
“The Supreme Court just recently has put this policy on hold and, more or less, told California you must respect parental rights,” Burt states.
Parents are unprotected in the current legislation.
CFC has written an opposition letter requesting an amendment to the bill. Harper says the language of the proposed bill is broad enough that “it errs on the side of giving all the power to the government” while taking it away from the parents.
Christians have concerns that social workers or judges will define “serious emotional harm” of child abuse as a parent not being affirming. Burt notes stories of parents who lost custody of their children for not referring to their chosen gender, making their home considered abusive.
Another safeguard CFC would like, he adds, is for parents to be made aware of when their home is being evaluated. That way it won’t be done in secret, and parents can get an attorney to defend themselves.
“We want there to be an amendment in there to simply say that people, Christians, following their religious beliefs about gender cannot be considered abusing their own children. We would love to have this in law, but right now it is not,” Burt says.
