In recent years, a disturbing pattern has emerged in American family courts: parents losing custody of their children not because of abuse, neglect, or abandonment—but because they refuse to “affirm” a child’s sudden identification as transgender. From Indiana to Montana, from California to Ohio, and even in Republican-led states like Texas, Child Protective Services (CPS) and judges have stepped in, often siding with activists and medical experts over mothers and fathers who hold traditional, religious, or simply cautious views about childhood gender transition.
A New Fault Line in Custody Battles
Conservatives have long warned about government overreach into the family. But until recently, most people believed the state intervened only in clear cases of danger. Now, disagreement over pronouns, names, and medical treatments—decisions that used to fall squarely under parental authority—are being weaponized against parents.
Take the Cox family of Indiana. Their 16-year-old child, struggling with an eating disorder, was removed from their home because Mary and Jeremy Cox declined to use preferred pronouns. The Indiana Court of Appeals upheld the removal, even restricting the parents from speaking about gender in visitation. Despite appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court on religious freedom grounds, the justices declined to intervene.
Or look to Montana, where Todd and Krista Kolstad lost their daughter after CPS decided their refusal to call her by a boy’s name amounted to harm. Despite living in a Republican-dominated state, the Kolstads were locked out of their daughter’s medical decisions, while bureaucrats and activists decided what was “best.”
In California, Abigail Martinez begged for mental health treatment for her depressed daughter instead of fast-tracking hormones. The courts stripped her custody and gave activists and doctors the reins. A few years later, her daughter tragically took her own life. This case, more than any, underscores the cruel irony: the state claimed to “save” the child, but the family lost everything—including her life.
The Jeff Younger Case: National Symbol of the Fight
No case better illustrates this new frontline than Jeff Younger’s years-long battle in Texas and California. Younger fought to stop his ex-wife from socially and medically transitioning one of their twin boys. His resistance earned him gag orders, accusations of abuse, and eventually the loss of all parental rights. His children now live in California, where “sanctuary” laws protect gender interventions regardless of parental objections.
Younger’s case sparked legislative battles in Texas, including Gov. Greg Abbott’s 2022 directive labeling gender-affirming care as child abuse. Though courts later blocked parts of that policy, Younger’s advocacy exposed what many conservatives see as the heart of the matter: the state no longer treats parents as guardians of their children, but as obstacles to an ideological agenda.
Gag Orders and the Silencing of Parents
To make matters worse, many of these cases are shrouded in secrecy. Gag orders prevent parents from speaking publicly, sealed records hide details from the press, and CPS often operates with little accountability. Critics argue this leads to massive underreporting and shields the system from public scrutiny. Parents who do speak out risk contempt charges, while activists and state agencies freely frame the narrative.
What’s Really at Stake
Advocates for transgender youth claim these interventions prevent suicide and emotional harm. But critics rightly point out that these claims are based on politicized science, often cherry-picked to fit activist goals. Meanwhile, the state is arrogating to itself the most fundamental parental right: the right to raise your own child according to your values, beliefs, and judgment.
America must ask a hard question: if a Catholic, evangelical, or simply cautious parent cannot object to experimental medical interventions on their own minor child without losing custody—do we still live in a nation that respects religious liberty, parental rights, and family autonomy?
A Conservative Call to Action
These cases are not isolated anecdotes. They are the logical consequence of a progressive agenda that seeks to replace parents with the state. Conservatives must push for ironclad protections of parental rights at both the state and federal level. This means legislation clarifying that refusal to “affirm” is not abuse, curbing the power of CPS to intrude in ideological disputes, and rolling back gag orders that silence mothers and fathers.
At its core, this battle is about who raises children in America: parents or the government. And if conservatives do not fight back, the answer will be decided by activist judges, bureaucrats, and ideologues—leaving families shattered and children used as pawns in a culture war they never asked for.
Discover more from RIPTIDE
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
