Parents send their children must be aware that some public school educators nationwide are preparing to indoctrinate students with the latest fads in education.
In Wisconsin, our amicus brief for Parents Protecting Our Children v. Eau Claire Area School District challenges the legality of a district policy in which schoolteachers and administrators facilitate students’ gender transition without informing parents or seeking their consent.
The U.S. education system is fueling this effort. There are at least 1,116 school districts that have implemented transgender and gender nonconforming policies that permit district personnel to withhold a student’s transgender status from parents. Parental authority should not come second to the state’s authority, except in instances of negligence and abuse. Advancing American Freedom has filed four amicus briefs challenging efforts to normalize transgenderism and expand “gender-affirming” care.
While numerous democratic countries worldwide have restricted or banned access to gender-bending surgeries and chemical interventions, the federal government is committed to pushing children struggling with gender dysphoria to act upon their feelings. This approach to adolescent transgenderism enables anguished youth to opt into irreversible medical procedures.
The original Dutch Protocol, which established the foundations for pediatric gender transition, urged medical professionals to institute intensive psychological prescreening of candidates. However, this is not true within the American healthcare system.
Between 2017 and 2021, the number of new gender dysphoria diagnoses in children ages 6 to 17 in the United States tripled. In the four years, the number of children ages 6 to 17 with a prior gender dysphoria diagnosis beginning puberty blockers or hormone therapy treatment doubled.
In Florida, our amicus brief for Littlejohn v. Leon County Schools challenges the legality of the Leon County Schoolspolicy that encouraged the appellant’s daughter to adopt a new identity and conceal this change from her parents. The policy instructs school employees to engage in secret manipulation and conceal students’ gender identity status from their parents.
In Massachusetts, our amicus brief for Foote v. Ludlow questions the actions taken by officials of Ludlow Public Schools. These administrators, acting consistent with the guidance issued by the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, encouraged children to use new names and pronouns to adopt an entirely new identity while at school and sought to hide these significant personal decisions from their parents.
Progress has been made in combatting this gender-dysphoric youth, but the fight is far from over. In Iowa, our amicus brief for Parents Defending Education v. Linn-Mar Community School District challenged the Linn-Mar Community School District’s policy, “Administrative Regulations Regarding Transgender and Students Nonconforming to Gender Role Stereotypes.”
The policy effectuated students’ “gender transition” requests, and it kept the district’s actions secret from the students’ parents, preventing them from having any knowledge or control over their child’s interests and questions involving gender identity.
Following grassroots pressure, Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds signed legislation banning surgical and chemical interventions for minors. In response, the Linn-Mar Community School District deleted the secretive policy from its board policies.
Some school officials are attempting to unravel the cultural fabric of our nation. We cannot stand idly by and allow our youth to be harmed in the name of “progress.”
