Parental Rights for some, but not for all

I listened to the June 3rd Senate hearing on “Protecting Children from Irreversible Gender Transition Procedures” held by the Senate HELP (Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. One theme was repeated over and over again by the affirming side: parental rights.

Shannon Minter, Legal Director of the National Center for LGBTQ Rights, stated, “What I defend is the constitutional rights of parents to make decisions for their own children.” Senator Bernie Sanders echoed the same sentiment, saying that gender-affirming care for youth should be decided by doctors, patients, and parents—not politicians or the federal government.

I found it ironic that the side that believes there is such a thing as “trans kids” and that minors should have access to puberty blocking drugs, hormones and surgeries felt that parental rights were an important factor. However, this same side only discussed protecting parents who choose these interventions, in other words, “affirming” parents. But an important question was never asked: What happens when parents do NOT consent?

What about the parents who think these treatments carry significant risks? What about the parents who want to wait until their children are adults before making irreversible medical decisions? What about the parents who have done their research and understand the lack of evidence for the benefits gender affirming care? What about the parents who simply disagree with the idea that a child should undergo medical treatment to identify as the opposite sex? What about the parents who refuse to lie to their children and misled them into thinking that’s possible to change one’s sex?

In the hearing, non-affirming parents’ constitutional rights were never raised as an issue. Instead, these parents are often portrayed as obstacles to their child’s well-being. Many parents have experienced pressure or have had their parental rights overridden by schools, medical providers, therapists, and government agencies. Some have been ridiculed as bigoted transphobes. Some have faced investigations or custody disputes. Whether the affirming side agrees with their position or not, the concerns of these parents deserve to also be acknowledged.

The affirmative side in the hearing repeatedly framed the issue as a choice between parents and government. They believe parental rights are the justification for allowing gender-related medical interventions for minors. If that’s the case, then parental rights must also protect parents who reject those interventions. Perhaps they can’t conceive of a parent who wouldn’t want these medical experiments conducted on their children. Or they are just dismissing these parents.

If he is so convinced of his principled stance, why wasn’t Senator Bernie Sanders defending my constitutional right to make decisions for my child before the school intervened, causing him irreversible damage? If parental rights are the reason to support gender affirming care, then parental rights must also be allowed for those who oppose to it.