The Washington State Senate passed a sweeping law on Thursday that permits juveniles to undergo transgender surgery without parental consent. This is how the Washington Senate Democrats describe the law, SB 5599, in a press release.

Under current law, licensed shelters must notify parents if a child comes into their care, unless a compelling reason applies. This legislation allows licensed shelters to contact the Department of Children, Youth and Families (DCYF) in lieu of parents in certain additional instances, like when a young person is seeking reproductive health services or gender-affirming care.  

“We know that young people experiencing homelessness are exposed to dangerous and harmful outcomes. That is why we must take every step we can to ensure their safety,” Sen. Liias said. “This legislation ensures that our trans youth have safe options and access to secure, stable shelter when they may not be welcome at home.”  

The need for SB 5599 comes as states across the country introduce and pass anti-LGBTQ legislation. According to the ACLU, 452 anti-LGBTQ bills have been introduced across 45 states and 29 bills have passed in 14 different states.  

Yes, you read that right. A kid claiming to be transgender can run away from home, go to a shelter, and the shelter is not required to tell the parents the kid is safe.

Legislation to protect transgender and at-risk youth seeking gender-affirming or reproductive care passed the House yesterday! SB 5599 affirms that trans youth are protected in Washington state by removing barriers to safe shelter. #WALeg pic.twitter.com/rlkj7MpvjI

— Sen. Marko Liias (@SenMarkoLiias) April 13, 2023

It will now go to the Washington House of Representatives, where it will quickly pass, and to a willing governor for signing into law.

Charitably, this is an abomination and is part of a multi-year effort by Washington Democrats to encourage juveniles to have life-altering surgery, a surgery that is so risky that both Sweden’s and UK’s public health bureaucracies have stopped performing it (see As Parents’ Rights Becomes a Hot Issue the Groomer Community Goes Nuts Fighting to Control Your Kids).

Last year, via SB 5889, Washington Democrats forced insurers to cover gender dysphoria treatment and gender-affirming care for minors between 13 and 17, without parental consent. It mandates that insurers deal directly with the patient without requiring the policyholder’s authorization.

It builds on SB 5904, which provides outpatient mental health treatment without parental consent for the same age group.

All communication must go directly to the patient. The insurer may not disclose the patient’s medical information to outside parties, like the policyholder, unless given permission. The policyholder, in this case, is the parent.

The standard of care for gender dysphoria in youth is outlined by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH). It includes everything from puberty-blocking hormones and speech therapy, to laser hair removal and counseling on binding. But it also asks doctors to affirm the choice of some to undergo surgical procedures to help them match their gender identity.

Here is KTTH’s Jason Rantz talking about the bill and how it fits into what the Washington Democrats are doing.

This law effectively strips the parent of their rights, allows a minor to make an irreversible surgical decision without the ability to give informed consent, makes the parents pay for it, and dumps the whole dumpster fire of emotional, psychological, and financial impacts back them to deal with as best they can.

Attorney Maria Medvin observes on Twitter:

This is unconstitutional in my opinion. How does this law resolve against SCOTUS opinions?

Santosky v. Kramer: “The fundamental liberty interest of natural parents in the care, custody, and management of their child.”

Prince v. Massachusetts (1944): “it is cardinal with us that… https://t.co/JJrl8why0o

— Marina Medvin 🇺🇸 (@MarinaMedvin) April 13, 2023

This is unconstitutional in my opinion. How does this law resolve against SCOTUS opinions?

Santosky v. Kramer: “The fundamental liberty interest of natural parents in the care, custody, and management of their child.”

Prince v. Massachusetts (1944): “it is cardinal with us that the custody, care and nurture of the child reside first in the parents, whose primary function and freedom include preparation for obligations the state can neither supply nor hinder.”

Troxel v. Granville: “the interest of parents in the care, custody, and control of their children— is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by this Court.”

Pierce v. Society of Sisters: “the child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.”

If you want to look for models of totalitarian regimes using the power of the state to insinuate themselves between parents and their children, you don’t have to search very far. Hitler’s Germany and the communist regimes in the Soviet Union, China, and Cuba all used — and except for the USSR, continue to use state  —coercion to establish ownership over children. This should not be acceptable behavior by any state, and the people who voted for it need to be held personally to account in this world before the Almighty gets His crack at them in the next.