Select Page

Law Will Hide Children From Parents for Gender Change

Law Will Hide Children From Parents for Gender Change

The Democrats are legalizing their war on parents and children to impose their political agenda of transgenderism on families.

In Washington state, a new bill passed by the Democrats will allow the government to hide children from parents who refuse to allow gender transition procedures on their children.

The Epoch Times reported that Senate Bill (SB) 5599 was passed in the Washington State House on April 12 to authorize state agencies to “hide children” who want transgender medical intervention from their parents.

The bill allows state agencies to shelter minors who run away from their parents in pursuit of changing their gender via medical procedures and refuse to share their whereabouts from the parents while allowing the kids access to gender change procedures.

The bill was passed in the Washington state House over the partisan divide so that all the Democrats voted for it and all the Republicans opposed it. The bill had been approved by the Democrat-led state Senate in early March.

As tweeted by Democrat Senator Marko Liias, who sponsored the legislation, the Democrats claim the bill’s purpose is to ensure “trans rights” and “safeguard youth seeking protected health services.” 

The text of SB 5599 defines “protected health care services” in terms of gender and reproduction:

“Protected health care services” means gender affirming treatment as defined in RCW 74.09.675 and reproductive health care services as defined in RCW 74.09.875.

However, conservative media, including Fox News, The Epoch Times, and others, highlighted the clause of the bill that gives the youth shelters the authority to keep the information from parents of the children taken in by the shelter:

“If there are compelling reasons not to notify the parent, the shelter or organization must instead notify the department.” – Sec. 2 (b) (i)

Republicans opposing the bill called this policy an act of hiding children from their own parents in the name of providing health services. Republican House member Peter Abbarno commented that the crux of the debate was whether the state should have the right to “essentially hide where the child is.”

Chris Corry, another Republican representative, called such authority with the state “really just a bridge too far for us.”

Advocates of parental rights expressed their concern online over the passage of SB 5599.  Danish doctor Anastasia Maria Loupis wrote on Twitter that this policy allows the state to remove people’s children if the parents refuse gender transition treatments. 

The tweet by Dr. Loupis received nearly 6 million views and thousands of comments, many expressing deep concern over how such a law can be abused by trans activists to take control of children and attack basic parental rights.

In related news, the video of a U.S. Navy nurse admitting that the Navy has a policy of talking to minor children of employees about transgenderism without parental consent was posted to Twitter and got millions of hits.

A parent in the audience, the one making the video, is heard confronting the speaker over this policy that he says gives medical practitioners more authority over the children than parents.

About The Author

10 Comments

  1. frank stetson

    Why do Dumpster’s stories say “posted?” Wouldn’t “crapped out” be more appropriate. More Dumpster lies and spins starting with the title which CONveniently leaves out the “compelling reasons” factor because it does not fit the spin.

    “The Democrats are legalizing their war on parents and children to impose their political agenda of transgenderism on families.” Democrats in Washington State, not nationally as Dumpster says.

    “In Washington state, a new bill passed by the Democrats will allow the government to hide children from parents who refuse to allow gender transition procedures on their children.” The DUMPSTER spins the narrative without the “compelling reasons” modifier which I guess holds little interest to a partisan hack.

    “Danish doctor Anastasia Maria Loupis wrote on Twitter that this policy allows the state to remove people’s children if the parents refuse gender transition treatments.” Is DUMPTER drugging out; check those sunglasses…. What does a pastry doctor from another country have to do about it? And, once again, what about the “compelling reasons” clause?

    “In related news, the video of a U.S. Navy nurse admitting that the Navy has a policy of talking to minor children of employees about transgenderism without parental consent was posted to Twitter and got millions of hits.” You got a source on this one? I have serious doubts that the Navy is out hunting employee’s kids in secret to talk transgender. Source? This just does not pass the sniff test. DUMPSTER again relying on strange Tweets as validated, verified, second sourced news.

    This is once again really piss-poor journalism from a partisan hack with an ax to grind and absolutely no nose for the news which he gets from Twitter and Denmark. He’s got a good story here, features a Washington State partisan angle, and touches on the State removing parental control for kids. I am sure the Dumpster is in favor of the State overruling parents to take state-control of their kids when it comes to banning abortions. Who cares in many States, all Republican, what the parents think about what’s right for their kids when it comes to abortion. In Idaho, if a parent drives across state lines to do the deed, they can face years in prison when they get home. The bill is on the Governor’s desk, passed by Republicans. How the Trumpster Dumpster could miss the relevance of “compelling reasons” is beyond me. What are considered compelling, who judges, who adjudicates, —— now there’s the story. And since they don’t tell us squat, there’s probably gold in them there hills. Or you can continue to drink weak tea from the DUMPSTER.

    Tucker this guy.

  2. MikefromTexas

    Whats this country coming to. We’re going down hill fast.

  3. Darren

    Thank you Ernest for the article.
    It would seem the Navy is more concerned about the gender of children than the protecting of
    our country.
    The speaker for the Navy blames children killing them selves because of social pressures.
    Maybe she should be looking at what the drug company’s are pushing in the way of medication.
    5 years ago most medications warned of suicidal thoughts, and warned this medication should not be given to minors.
    I do not even hear this in commercials anymore.
    Thank you big pharma and the fools like the woman in the video pushing parents rights, right out of the way.
    1000 years ago they would have been refereed to as Jokers.

    • Tom

      Darren, do not worry, I can tell you as a USN veteran, the USN is still much more concerned about protecting the country, and its primary mission is still protection of the Constitution of the USA. You are safe. The USN is also a large entity that must be concerned with social situations and the human condition of its members. So it must respond to these gender issues, it really has no choice. Now as far as I know, side effects of medications are still stated in the drug literature and on tv commercials. I have heard many of these ads, and I have heard it mentioned when there are suicidal thought concerns. In some cases, I have heard side effect listings that seemed longer than the actual drug information. But, if you are taking any drugs, you must consult the information that comes with the drug and that the pharmacist gives you when you purchase the drug. And, you may be like me, and need a very big magnifying glass to read the paperwork! :>)

  4. Tom

    I am all in favor of parents knowing what is going on with their children whether they live at home or in some other habitat setting. Parents should always know what is going on with their children But I agree with Frank that this article is way out of balance. This article does not pass my smell test. A good article would have cited statements in the law and the underlying reason why such a statement is needed. In this article the underlying reasons for the law and reasons for statements within the law seem to be missing in action. Not good. Also, it might be nice to know what percent of the state’s population this law affects, as well as who funds these state authorized medical interventions on children.

  5. mike

    what will happen when all said and done
    Mom and Dad have moved
    or the child is now no longer the child they brought into the world
    and reject them?
    But just like the left they do not think it thru

  6. FlASHFLY

    How many of those Democrat legislators are queer or transgender?

  7. Shelba Herring

    Concerned parents have the right to object to the so-called law taking their children and doing surgery on them without the parents consent seems this law need to be challenged in court and if necessary, go to the Supreme Court, if someone took my child I would react with violence, so these people had better think twice before taking someone’s children away from them without a legitimate reason

    • frank stetson

      Spot on sister Shelba, I like the cut of your jib. But bear in mind that DUMPSTER regularly falls below the line of journalistic professionalism and ethics. What he writes as happening often is not exactly what’s really happening.

      IMO, as Shelba states, this one should go to court, the Supremes if needed. IMO, the key word in the law, the story, is the caveat of “compelling” and how some social worker becomes the court to adjudicate “compelling” without even necessarily even allowing the parents their day in court. I, as a parent, would consider violence is my kid was held by the State without informing me.

      But don’t be fooled by the devious Dumpster, he lies. He does not follow the ethics of journalism, the rules of journalism. He is a failed journalist. And if PBP even has editors, my suggestion is to review you process, Houston, you have a problem here. (fyi – my “ax” to grind here is basically I like to respond to right-wing posts to exercise my liberal ideas and to learn. I like that PBP allows me the freedom to do that. I would like PBP to be the best it can be. Dumpster lowers the bar, IMO, he’s below the bar and the worst that PBP has (unless he changes his ways and improves)).

      For this article, his fact base, sources, include The Epoch Times, Danish doctor Anastasia Maria Loupis from Twitter, and some guy in Bahrain reporting on the Navy on Twitter. He attributes a few quotes to office holders, not sure what dumpster he dove into for those.

      The Epoch Times is a far-right leaning media outlet associated with the Falun Gong that produces mixed factual reporting according to Media Bias. The next level is Extreme Right. That in itself does not preclude using the info, but certainly would require a professional journalist, with ethics, to obtain secondary sourcing. A pause to consider. Twitter is not that, Danish doctors with no stated standing is not that, and some unknown guy talking about the Navy do not add value to The Epoch Times reporting either, far from it.

      In this story, I was struck from the beginning at the undefined term “compelling” which is the keystone in all this. We all know some parents, and some kids, can be assholes and should be separated. Some kids should be returned home. They may be off-base or even gaming the system to leave home using this law as a dodge. This should never be in the sole hands of social workers, IMO. At the end of this, I still do not know what “compelling” means and, therefore, I agree with Shelba, take the law to court before the violence starts.

      But Dumpster’s story is an abortion of the truth and should be banned. TUCKER this guy. You want the truth? Can you handle the truth?

      Here’s a Republican talking about the bill. Does it sound like Dumpster’s reporting? Not even close. The next one is from the AP entitled: “FACT FOCUS: Posts distort Washington estranged minors’ law,” which I contend could have the word “Posts” changed to Ernest Dempsey, aka the Dumpster. AP News has a just left-of-center media bias with HIGHLY FACTUAL reporting. Judge for yourself the truth:

      *https://johnbraun.src.wastateleg.org/bill-threatening-rights-parents-passes-senate/*

      *https://apnews.com/article/washington-minors-shelter-law-faa73cb08aad4b040d9c32e90ab6f8c0*

      Folks can believe what they want; IMO the Dumpster fails journalism 101, regularly, and should seek massive improvement or change of career. IOW, TUCKER this guy before he Alex Jones PBP.

      Just because there is freedom of speech, that right does not mean unprofessional journalism is OK.

      Sorry Ernest if you feel I have put a target on your ass, but you have put it there yourself. You can slough me off with the ole “he’s a crazy liberal,” but I feel any logical person looking at this objectively will come to the same conclusion: you need re-training at minimum.

  8. EMMA

    IT IS NOT THE GOVERNMENT’S JOB . THE PARENTS HAVE THE RIGHT OVER THEIR CHILDREN. ONLY THE DEMOCRATS ARE FOR THIS WOKE ”ABOMINATION’ AND ALL SHOULD BE IN PRISON. INCLUDING OUR GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS WHO MUST BE ALL PEDOPHILES. DISGUSTING. STOP THIS INSANITY NOW.