The Patriot Post® · Parental Rights in the 21st Century

Three recent stories highlight the way the rights of parents to determine the physical and emotional health and well-being of their children have changed in the 21st century. Looking at all three at once provides an interesting analytical exercise.

First, we have the ongoing measles outbreaks around the country in areas with a higher number of so-called “anti-vaxxers” — people who reject vaccines of various diseases for their children. Without rehashing the debate here, those who oppose vaccinations, or even merely advocate the freedom of parents to choose, are encountering vigorous challenges from others who believe vaccines are a responsibility of being a good citizen — never mind those (sometimes in authority) who argue that vaccines should be mandatory. Parents are faced with a choice, and sometimes it’s a costly one.

Second, in Chandler, Arizona, a mom took her feverish two-year-old son to an alternative medical practice. The doctor noted that the boy was unvaccinated and recommended the mother take him to the hospital. She said she would, but as he improved that day, she decided against it. The doctor followed up, and she gave the same promise, but again, ultimately declined to take her son to the hospital. Eventually, the cops showed up, burst through the door, arrested the father, and sent the couple’s three children to foster care with their grandparents. Both parents were charged with one count of child abuse. The case is ongoing, but it hinges on whether the mother had the right to do what she deemed best for her child, or whether the doctor had the right to alert the cops to “a possibly life-threatening situation.”

And third is the heart-wrenching story of a mother who was rendered powerless to prevent doctors from shepherding her daughter through a sex “transition.” Here’s how she explained the process: “If you take your child to a clinic to seek help, affirmative care means the therapist must follow the child’s lead. The professionals must accept a child’s professed gender identity. In fact, this is the law in many states. Under ‘conversion therapy’ bans, questioning a child’s professed gender identity is now illegal. So, if a little boy is 5 years old and believes he is the opposite sex, affirmative care means going along with his beliefs.”

She and her daughter found themselves in that situation, and now doctors and authorities are preventing the mother from doing anything to stop what we believe is child abuse. Similar stories have played out in other parts of the U.S. and Canada.

There are indeed parental choices that are patently wrong and do harm to children. But the same is true for certain institutional and medical decisions. And parents have little reason to trust those authorities in the face of so much demonstrably false information and coercive force. Thus, legitimate scientific advancement is sometimes rejected because there is no trust basis. Meanwhile, authorities and medical experts no longer trust parents to see through all the harmful misinformation out there. It’s a vicious cycle.

Often lost in this destructive debate is what’s actually best for kids. Parents are supposed to be the best determiners of that, and they should endeavor to make informed decisions that protect their kids from harm. This includes taking action again preventable communicable diseases and refusing to contribute to a vulnerable child’s gender dysphoria. Yet advocating smart decisions is a far cry from allowing the state to impose its will on parents and their children.