The Tenth Circuit handed down a notable opinion this week in Poe v. Drummond, upholding Oklahoma’s law prohibiting gender transition procedures for anyone under eighteen. The opinion by Judge Joel Carson (joined by Judges Harris Hartz and Gregory Phillips) concluded that parental rights do not trump a state’s determination of what are safe treatments for minor patients.
Opinion polls show that most citizens favor a ban on such transitioning for minors. Other polling shows that the majority also views the transitioning of minors as “morally wrong.”
Various states have passed laws to ban the practice, and various foreign nations have imposed similar bans.
In response, advocacy groups have sought to use parental rights challenges to strike down the law. It is an ironic effort since some of these groups oppose parental rights in areas like abortions for minors without parental notice.
I have been a strong advocate for parental rights for decades. However, such rights are not absolute. The government has a core responsibility in barring practices that may be harmful for minors when based on objective, scientific evidence.
The Court ruled:
Parents have the right “to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children,” which includes “to some extent, a more specific right to make decisions about the child’s medical care,” But we and the Supreme Court have held that parents do not have an absolute “right to direct a child’s medical care.” …
We … have consistently held that individuals do not have an affirmative right to specific medical treatments the government reasonably prohibits. We have held that although patients have a fundamental right to refuse treatment, the “selection of a particular treatment … is within the area of governmental interest in protecting public health.” Thus, the government has the “authority to limit the patient’s choice of medication,” whether the patient is an adult or a child.
The panel found that to rule otherwise would allow parents to “veto legislative and regulatory polices about drugs and surgeries permitted for children.”
The Supreme Court has previously upheld, in Washington v. Glucksberg (1997), a Washington state law banning assisted suicide and found that such a right was not a fundamental liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
In United States v. Skrmetti (2025), the Supreme Court upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors after a challenge under the Equal Protection Clause. Chief Justice John Roberts found that the law did not discriminate based on sex or transgender status, but instead on age and medical need.
The Tenth Circuit is also at the center of a pending case to be heard in the October Term with potentially sweeping implications. In Chiles v. Salazar, the Tenth Circuit upheld a Colorado law banning conversion therapy for minors, finding that it did not violate free speech protections.
I believe that the Tenth Circuit is correct in rejecting the parental rights claim in Poe. However, I disagree with the ruling in Chiles. Colorado’s ban on counseling, in my view, is excessive and violates the First Amendment. These Tenth Circuit cases could prove critical in bringing greater clarity to this area in the coming year.
Notably, yesterday, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi reaffirmed her commitment to mandate gender transitioning procedures on the federal level if the Democrats retake power in Congress.
This is definitely a thought-provoking topic. In a different sense, it also reminds me how important it is to create safe and healthy spaces in our everyday lives. Having a dependable cleaning service & junk removal service can make a big difference in maintaining a stress-free environment. If anyone is looking for professional help, AMPM Residential.
is a great choice.
Commercial Cleaning Services
One might say that the position that parents’ rights do not circumvent the state ban on transitioning minors, would use the same argument that the state used prior, that parents’ rights did not circumvent when states determined that transitioning minors was lifesaving care.
The difference lies in the permanent effects of such treatments on minors. Erring on the side of caution would mean waiting until a child turned 18 before making such life altering changes, whether the entity that supported those changes was a parent or the State.
Just a few years ago, parents would lose custody of their children in a divorce if one parent, usually the mother, decided to transition the minor child, beginning with a social transition, then puberty blockers and cross sex hormones, and ultimately a surgical transition. At that time, the state believed that only transitioning minors would save their lives. This conclusion swept through academia, unfortunately based on faulty, and at some points, unethical, research. During this time, the question of parents’ rights was for a parent to prevent permanent changes, like sterilization, of their minor child, against the State’s position.
The authority of a parent over their children ends at maiming them.
The unethical experiments that started it all- The Reimer Twins and Dr John Money:
https://youtu.be/0Zw1EdRKocI?si=YCkBmeCM5aUElcvG
You make a strong point. Since these treatments have permanent effects, waiting until 18 before making such life-altering decisions seems like the most cautious and balanced approach.
The level of cognitive dissonance required for someone to accept that children are too immature to get married, drive a car, buy alcohol or cigarettes, or get a tattoo, yet also think that a child should be allowed to get permanently sterilized or castrated, and given puberty blockers and cross sex hormones, with known serious and permanent side effects, is astonishing.
The trans craze is already fading. I suspect that many of the proliferation of cases were a mix of Munchausen by Proxy, and social contagion.
I also predict that within a decade, many of the most vocal proponents of the transgender movement, who demanded child social and surgical transitions, will claim they opposed it from the start.
Having owned a sweepstakes publishing website, there are strict rules on who can enter. The minimum age is considered 18, 19 in 3 states, and 21 when alcohol and beer companies are the sponsors. I fail to see how any minor can be granted adult age rules?
I agree with Prof. Turley that parents should be permitted to contract for licensed counseling of their minors, regardless of the subject – gender dysphoria or otherwise.
A baby cannot pick their parents. Good or bad, parents must be in control until the age of eighteen. When does government control end? What if the government does not want Gypsey, Homosexuals or Jews? Let us learn from Caitlyn Jenner. In this case let parents and medical specialists decide.
*. The cry- save me from my parents.
Which parents?
When such questions are asked you’ve found evil.
Within limits. Parents cannot abuse their children or force them to commit crimes, or force them to work long hours, or force them to get sick by being outside in inclement weather, etc. There are compulsory school attendance laws. Generally the state can restrict parental choices for their kids if it protects kids’ health and safety. The challenged law is in that category. Once the kid turns 18, have at it with bodily mutilation, but until then, lay off.
Hey, Strawman.
A minor does not have the maturity to give true informed consent to such life altering medical procedures.
The media [probably with Democrat urging] has attempted to suppress the reports of de-transitioners who deeply regret chemical and surgical changes to their bodies when they were young and under the influence of others. There are a number of them and their reports are both shocking and sad. It seems near the peak of child abuse short of death.
Behind this ‘informed consent’ are parents who are convinced by medical professionals that they must go ahead with it or lose their child to suicide. “Would you rather have a live girl/boy or a dead child?” is the terrifying question put to parents who are hesitant.
Also, too, one cannot rule out Munchausen’s by Proxy. In the past these women [almost always attention seeking women] injure their child in some way so they can garner sympathy and attention. It is not a big stretch to see the same condition extended to having a trans child. The number of celebrities parading a trans child seems to defy the odds for a condition that is known to be rare.
Also there is the problem of social contagion infecting many with the notion that being trans is common and desirable. That contagion is spread by medical people who profit from it, true believers, and politicians [almost entirely Democrat] and news media [also almost entirely Democrat]. One scarcely hopes for sanity from any of those, but the larger population can recover from it.
Lastly, I do believe that there are genuine cases of transgender individuals. They are rare but they almost certainly exist. Everything in human development from the moment of inception to a whole adult person can go wrong. Viruses, chemicals, medicines, stress and many other things can interfere with normal development. Children are born without limbs, without brains, without genitalia, with problems with organs as important as the heart. It would take supernatural intervention to ALWAYS have sexual identity or sexual preference unaffected. Even allowing for occasional supernatural influence the evidence of some transgenders and many homosexuals suggests that supernatural influence is not dipping into this issue. Both will normally occur at discoverable frequencies and, frankly, I don’t care. Brilliant men like Leonardo and Alan Turing were gay. Joan of Arc was likely trans to some degree. The world would be the worse for it without them.
However, accepting people for who they are and as they are, by their character and talents, is one thing, but going a bit crazy and cutting off breasts and genitalia of minors who have been convinced that they are something other than they are is an altogether different matter.
This court made the right decision.
Turely Reptialians, have taken over mankind. This is outragous. Parents comes first. All those judges = Torries belong in cages in zoos! David Icke proven correct!
“Turely Reptialians, have taken over mankind. This is outragous. Parents comes first. All those judges = Torries belong in cages in zoos! David Icke proven correct!”
Does anyone here speak spastic moron and is available to translate, please?
^^^ Noep.
It’s a new day. The groomers are starting to lose.
Start with the age requirement.
The Founders required voters to be 21 because people under that age don’t have the sense God gave lettuce and are eminently incapable of making good decisions.
Notably, “the MLDA is 21 years old in all 50 states, as well as the District of Columbia,” per AI Overview.
How is it that America lost the capacity for critical thinking and became less intelligent and more obtuse since 1789?
How ’bout an “American Renaissance of Good Sense”?
Oh, no! That would inevitably result in the severely restricted vote that the American Founders also imposed per criteria developed by state legislatures.
That would never do.
Anonymously12:59PM-civilization allowed a lot of stupid people to live into their child bearing ages. You know-the people that like to pet Buffalo , wade in hot spring, go looking for bears with a camera, put nearly boiling coffee in their lap. In previous ages you had to be on the ball, smart, could hunt, farm, avoid people with sharp objects, come together to form communities for common defense, if you survived all the childhood diseases. Literally survival of the fittest. Mistakes were often fatal . Makes you wonder.
GEB,
“You know-the people that like to pet Buffalo”
Thank you for the laugh!
Yeah, I know or have seen a number of people who would of tried to pet a Buffalo.
VERY OT:
gotta go but wanted to inform all that I think the D.C. Cir. Ct. of Appeals just overturned Judge Boasberg’s attempt to hold Trump administration in contempt for “disobeying” his order halting deportations under the Alien Enemies Act without the chance to challenge their removals. -And the D.C. Circuit no less!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I’d like to know who these sick perverts were! What are their names? This is absolutely unacceptable. The state has the right over your children. It only violates a goddamn premise of the constitution
*. Can anyone here argue the Kantian moral prin illegal and from there to the sub consequential principle in the parental right?
I’m too tired.
If the mere act of saying, “I’m a girl” would put me in close physical proximity to Taylor Swift and preferably with little clothing (i.e. in the same dressing or bedroom), where do I sign up?
antonio
Pronouns – she/hers
Not sure I can agree with the conclusion of this ruling, even though I agree with its outcome. Parents’s rights over their children always supersede the State’s.
Not always. A single counter-example disproves that universal statement. State laws against murder are constitutional even when applied to parents who kill their children.
So the “rights” of parents who abuse their children are inviolate until the age of 18?
Yes, can this now be used to apply a treatment when a parent disagrees with it. For instance a vaccine or blood transfusion.
Good Column Professor
1. I firmly believe that Pelosi, et al, are less concerned with parental rights and more concerned with reaching out to any possible identity-laden populations in order to buttress their party’s numbers. They are running out of possibilities. You can only compartmentalize a population by so many ways.
2. Apologies in advance, but here’s a no-no topic: neonatal male circumcision.
Mostly attributed to the expansion of foreigners/immigrant populations, U.S. neonatal circumcisions have declined in large urban and coastal populations (hospital data), while INcreasing in males 14-59. https://www.contemporarypediatrics.com/view/are-us-circumcision-rates-rise-or-decline https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196(14)00036-6/pdf
While New Age/’progressive’ studies tend to belittle and prefer to label circumcision as having Biblical/religious origin, these studies fail to note that the “Biblical, religious origins” of circumcision are premised on HEALTH and disease prevention. Indeed, several studies show the origin predating Abraham and his covenant with God by a few thousand years. See, e.g., “The Geography of Genital Mutilations” By James DeMeo at (add the http and www) to .nocirc.org/symposia/fourth/demeo.html, as I am limited to two links).
And the REASON for the rise in the 14-59 population appears to be associated with health and disease problems/incidence.
Soooo, MY POINT here is that parents want to influence and assist a child’s (often ephemeral/flighty) GENDER PREFERENCES by altering their sex, including surgeries???? — but are foregoing neonatal circumcision to allow their older children to make up their own minds?
Ooops. forgot my second reference link.
https://www.science20.com/news_articles/benefits_of_circumcision_exceed_risks_100_to_1-133284
https://vividmaps.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/us-circumcision-768×502.png
*. Lin, my view is far more cynical in disagreement with the first paragraph. The motive is actual harm. The dem deep leadership intend to harm and mutilate US children, intend to forcefully cause US children to adopt insanity, intend to force children into immorality to destroy the US.
It leads to the ultimate crime of homicide. It’s a doorway.
Notably, yesterday, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi reaffirmed her commitment to mandate gender transitioning procedures on the federal level if the Democrats retake power in Congress.
———–
Congress doesn’t doesn’t have the legal authority to mandate that type of medical action on the states, as the states have rights also under the 10th amendment.
It is an ironic effort since some of these groups oppose parental rights in areas like abortions for minors without parental notice.
It will not stop public schools from harming children. As long as our society allows the followers of Moloch to assume leadership positions in government schools, expect more human sacrifices to Moloch. That or parents should foster relationships with their children where their children love and admire their parents. Crazy, I know but it does happen in families.
Fairfax County schools investigates claims staff arranged abortions for students
FAIRFAX COUNTY, Va. (7News) — Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS) tells 7News Reporter Nick Minock that they are launching an investigation into claims that school staff arranged abortions for students and didn’t tell their parents.
This story has blown up on social media — a report that says school officials at Fairfax County’s Centerville High School arranged and bankrolled abortions for girls without so much as a phone call to their parents back in 2021.
https://wjla.com/news/local/student-abortions-fairfax-county-public-schools-investigation-staff-arranged-reproductive-health-fcps-centerville-high-school-minors-taxfunded-virginia-employee-parents-sex-education-regulation-2504
Tell the Israelites: Anyone, whether an Israelite or an alien residing in Israel, who gives offspring to Molech shall be put to death. The people of the land shall stone that person. I myself will turn against and cut off that individual from among the people; for in the giving of offspring to Molech, my sanctuary was defiled and my holy name was profaned. If the people of the land condone the giving of offspring to Molech, by failing to put the wrongdoer to death, I myself will turn against that individual and his or her family, and I will cut off from their people both the wrongdoer and all who follow this person by prostituting themselves with Molech.
Leviticus 20: 2-4
*. For crissake, Estovir, let’s not resurrect Molech.
I used to think a public school wouldn’t give an aspirin to a student without parental permission. But California had a state proposition on parental notification before abortion and it failed, quite some time ago.
I realized then that more voters are non-parents than parents. That sure wasn’t so when I was growing up.
And yet, public schools prohibit asthmatic students from carrying a rescue inhaler on their person. If they have an asthma attack, they have to walk all the way to the nurse, and hope the nurse is in. There are runners on my son’s team who have asthma, and the coach carries their inhalers on them.
They run 9 miles in the hills.
I used to ride with a girl who kept getting hospitalized because she’d start to have a flareup, but have to walk all the way to the nurse across campus. She wouldn’t make it, would collapse, and they’d have to call an ambulance. All because she wasn’t allowed a rescue inhaler to stave off an attack early.
Basically, public schools consider anyone under age 18 too immature to carry and self-administer a rescue inhaler, but they should have the right to get themselves castrated, after taking puberty blockers and cross sex hormones.