Sundays Don’t Have to Be Scary…. HERE’S HOW:

Jun 25, 2023

Hopefully, by now, you have seen our most recent interview with Britt and Melissa from The Battlecry US and understand what we are facing right now at the California Captiol: 4 Trojan Horsemen of Bad Bills stampeding through both houses to strip you of your right to parent; emancipate children as young as 12 (and inch us closer to no age of majority or minority); require by law affirmation of a child’s gender identity; and collapse the foster care system. No, this is not hyperbole. No, this is not the product of a “right wing outrage machine” or “misinformation” or “something completely made up” (start at 52 mins). This is months of intense research and analysis by three highly-accomplished and educated attorneys who have dedicated their lives to unraveling the gnarled web of California bills presented under the guise of “equity,” “parity,” “empowerment,” “access” and “inclusivity.”

WHICH BILLS AM I TALKING ABOUT?

Will allow, without any allegation – let alone proof – of abuse, incest, or danger (as is currently required by law) for (1) children as young as 12 to run away from home and self-consent into a government “residential shelter” without their parents’/guardians’ knowledge or consent, and (2) parents to be stripped of their rights to care for their children without, first, receiving notice or having an opportunity to be heard (due process).

Codifies (makes law) that affirming a child’s self-selected gender identity is always in line with and supports a child’s health, safety and welfare, regardless of the child’s age or any other unique emotional, psychological or physical needs. Would compel family court judges, in deciding custody, to favor and award custody to the affirming parent and to view a parent’s inability to affirm the child’s gender identity as acting against the child’s “health, safety, and welfare,” exposing non-affirming parents to CPS investigations for emotional, mental, and physical abuse. (Note: this is already happening in California [investigations, termination of custody rights, etc.).

Will allow any adult in custody of a minor child to file for change of a child’s name, sex identifier, and/or gender confidentially, depriving any opposing, interested party (e.g. parent) from knowing about or objecting to the change.

Requires potential foster families to sign an agreement promising to affirm a child’s self-selected gender identity, regardless of the child’s age or any other unique emotional, psychological or physical needs. If enacted, will disqualify over 60% of eligible foster families who are religious and cannot make this promise, although otherwise eligible to foster.

Now that I have your attention, what do we need to do to kill these bills???

ACT NOW:

  1. One-Click your way to freedom courtesy of our partners at PERK:
  2. Call these Senators + your own Senator (if not listed, below) and (1) ask for a 15-20 minute ZOOM to discuss these bad bills + (2) tell them to vote NO or at the very least Abstain on AB665, AB957, AB223, and SB407:
  1. Call these Assemblymembers + your own Assemblyperson (if not listed, below) and (1) ask for a 15-20 minute ZOOM to discuss these bad bills + (2) tell them to vote NO or at the very least Abstain on AB665, AB957, AB223, and SB407:
  2. If you have not done so already, « insert eye-roll emoji here» submit your letter of opposition to legislative portal today.
    • Sample Scripts / Talking Points:
    • Please oppose or abstain on AB665. AB665 intentionally removes the “danger guardrails” of Family Code 6924, which require an allegation of danger to a minor before the minor may consent without parental consent to residential shelter. What facts or public policy support the removal of those specific danger guardrails from Family Code 6924, enacted in 1979? I urge you to either vote no or have the author gut and amend AB 665. Leave Family Code 6924 alone. Instead, amend Welfare & Institutions 14029.8 to remove the word “not.”  This will immediately enable Medi-Cal benefits for disadvantaged kids to receive counseling for any reason under Health & Safety Code 124260.  You can preserve your goal without removing safety guardrails.
    • Please oppose or abstain on AB957. Affirming a child’s self-selected gender identity cannot physically, logically, or possibly be in the best interests of every child of the 9+M living in California, or support every one of those children’s health, safety or welfare. There must be at least one child who should not be affirmed. This is especially true considering these are children in the throes of a divorce, where there is a custody battle being waged over them. Isn’t it possible that, in this context, the child’s entire identity is being shattered and the gender dysmorphia is the result of some other stressor or pressure, not a sincere desire to change sexes? Mandating affirmation means that a parent will be precluded from investigating these other issues and providing their child potentially life-saving treatment and care. Please vote no on this horrible bill. Other talking points:
      • California would become the first state in the nation to criminalize and penalize parents who do not affirm their children.
      • Creates a path for Child Protective Services, law enforcement, and the courts to award custody to the parent who affirms gender identity.
      • Creates a path for CPS to investigate non-affirming parents not acting in the child’s best interests to charges of emotional, mental, and physical abuse, and also creates possibility of parental rights being terminated completely, as a result.
      • There is no age limit for which this bill applies. There is also no consideration of the child’s unique physical, emotional, and/or psychological condition or needs. It is unscientific and dangerous to make blanket affirmation law. If every parent is required to affirm their child’s self-selected gender the parent will be foreclosed on pursuing other psychological treatments or therapies the child might need.
      • AB957 does not define “affirmation.” Is is social? Is it medical? Is the more affirming parent better for the child? As currently written, AB957 creates a perverse incentive for a parent wanting to win custody to go to more extreme lengths to affirm the child, even if the child does not need it.
    • Please oppose or abstain on AB 223. Allowing adults to file petitions on behalf of minors confidentially, opens the doorway to kidnapping by the consenting parent, abuse and even trafficking.
    • Please oppose or abstain on SB407. The law already requires foster parents to receive training on sexual orientation and gender identity. SB407 takes existing law a step further by requiring candidates to swear their allegiance to gender affirmation, even before they know their foster child’s age or unique physical, psychological and/or emotional needs. With limited numbers of eligible foster care candidates, requiring a majority to act contrary to their faith – or even personal moral, philosophical beliefs – is dangerous and unwarranted. Additionally, the overwhelming rate of foster children are people of color and at risk youth. Limiting the pool of candidates will unfairly and disproportionately impact these vulnerable communities, while simultaneously discriminating against candidates based upon their religious beliefs. SB407 is an unconstitutional, unnecessary, cruel and dangerous bill.
  3. BOOK YOUR TICKETS FOR OUR DUTY’s RALLY FRIDAY, JUNE 30, 7:30-9:00 A.M. Corner of L and 10th Street:

  1. SHARE + SHARE + SHARE this post! These bills can be heard any day. The time to push back is right now.

Make the Capitol shake with your righteous indignation.

PROTECT THE CHILDREN.
HOLD OUR PUBLIC SERVANTS ACCOUNTABLE.
SAVE OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC. (Lord, I am such a nerd…)

RISE UP!

The Law Offices of Nicole C. Pearson

How can we help?