Parents NEED to know....
First the government weaponized CPS / DCFS against the parents....... Now they have given them even MORE power that will further take away a parent's rights!!!
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/california-wants-to-take-trans-children-from-their-parents/
To see the America the Democratic Party wants, look to California.
Assembly Bill 927,
introduced by Assemblyman Lori Wilson, would amend the state's family
code to make parents' affirmation of their children's "gender identity" a
criterion in custody disputes. Judges would be able to grant or deny
parents custody of their children at least in part on the basis of
whether they affirm their children's false beliefs about their
sex—beliefs that, in many cases, will change over time.
"Non-affirming parents" are considered especially grave sinners in the
progressive moral universe because they commit what progressives
consider the worst sin of all: denying another person's autonomy, even
when that person is a child—your child—and even when that person is manifestly delusional.
Earlier this year, Washington State
passed a bill
allowing youth-services providers to decline to inform the parents of
runaways that their children received "gender affirming care" while on
the lam. The
Biden CDC
set up a chat room targeted at transgender-identifying children,
particularly "LGBTQ youth in the South," who may have been "confined
to...non-affirming home environments." These are whispers of what
California Democrats are now saying out loud: Toe the line, or we will
take your child from you.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB957
Let's have a look at the precise wording of this legislation that aims to steal your children!!!
Status shows it is IN PROGRESS - meaning they are actively debating and voting on it!!!
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billStatusClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB957
Here is what the law is TODAY on the matter - the law they want to amend to give DCFS more power and control over YOUR children!!!!
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB957&showamends=false
Here is th current cote status - PASSED means it now goes to be signed into law. It must be repealed folks because it PASSED the vote and WILL become law unless YOU stop it!!
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billVotesClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB957
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE—
2023–2024 REGULAR SESSION
Assembly Bill
No. 957
Introduced by Assembly Member Wilson
(Principal coauthor: Senator Wiener)
|
February 14, 2023 |
An act to amend Section 1277.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and to amend Section 3011 of the Family Code, relating to family law.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 957, as amended, Wilson.
Family law: gender identity.
Existing
law authorizes a person to petition for a court order conforming the
person’s name to the person’s gender identity. Existing law requires the
court, upon the filing of a petition commencing a proceeding for a
change of name to conform the petitioner’s name to the petitioner’s
gender identity, to make an order reciting the filing of the petition
and directing all persons interested in the matter to make their
objections known, as specified. Existing law requires the petition and
order to be served on the parent who did not sign the petition if a
petition to change the name of a minor to conform to their gender
identity does not include the signature of both living parents, as
specified.
This
bill would require the court to strongly consider that affirming the
minor’s gender identity is in the best interest of the child if a
nonconsenting parent objects to a name change to conform to the
minor’s gender identity.
Existing
law governs the determination of child custody and visitation in
contested proceedings and requires the court, for purposes of deciding
custody, to determine the best interests of the child based on certain
factors, including, among other things, the nature and amount of contact with both parents and the health, safety, and welfare of the child.
This
bill would require a court, when determining the best interests of a
child, to also consider a parent’s affirmation of the child’s gender
identity.
This
bill, for purposes of this provision, would include a parent’s
affirmation of the child’s gender identity as part of the health,
safety, and welfare of the child.
Digest Key
Vote:
MAJORITY
Appropriation:
NO
Fiscal Committee:
NO
Local Program:
NO
Bill Text
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
(a)(1)If
a proceeding for a change of name to conform the petitioner’s name to
the petitioner’s gender identity is commenced by the filing of a
petition, the court shall thereupon make an order reciting the filing of
the petition, the name of the person by whom it is filed, and the name
proposed. The order shall direct all persons interested in the matter to
make known an objection to the change of name by filing a written
objection, which includes
the reasons for the objection, within six weeks of the making of
the order and shall state that if no objection showing good cause to
oppose the name change is timely filed, the court shall, without
hearing, enter the order that the change of name is granted.
(2)(A)If
a petition is filed to change the name of a minor to conform to their
gender identity
and the petition does not include the signatures of both living
parents, the petition and the order to show cause made in accordance
with paragraph (1) shall be served on the parent who did not sign the
petition, pursuant to Section 413.10, 414.10, 415.10, or 415.40, within
30 days from the date on which the order is made by the court. If
service cannot reasonably be accomplished pursuant to Section 415.10 or
415.40, the court may order that service be accomplished in a manner
that the court determines is reasonably calculated to give actual notice
to the parent who did not sign the petition.
(B)If
a nonconsenting parent objects to a name change to conform to the
minor’s gender identity, the court shall strongly consider that
affirming the minor’s gender identity is in the best interest of the
child pursuant to Section
3011 of the Family Code.
(b)The
proceeding for a change of name to conform the petitioner’s name to the
petitioner’s gender identity is exempt from a requirement for
publication.
(c)A
hearing date shall not be set in the proceeding unless an objection is
timely filed and shows good cause for opposing the name change.
Objections based solely on concerns that the proposed change is not the
petitioner’s actual gender identity or gender assigned at birth shall
not constitute good cause. At the hearing, the court may examine under
oath any of the petitioners, remonstrants, or other persons touching the
petition or
application and may make an order changing the name or dismissing
the petition or application as the court may deem right and proper.
SEC. 2.SECTION 1.
Section 3011 of the Family Code is amended to read:3011.
(a) In
making a determination of the best interests of the child in a
proceeding described in Section 3021, the court shall, among any other
factors it finds relevant and consistent with Section 3020, consider all
of the following:(1) (A) The health, safety, and welfare of the child.
(B) As used in this paragraph, the health, safety, and welfare of the child
includes a parent’s affirmation of the child’s gender identity.
(2) (A) A history of abuse by one parent or another person seeking custody against any of the following:
(i) A
child to whom the parent or person seeking custody is related by blood
or affinity or with whom the parent or person seeking custody has had a
caretaking relationship, no matter how temporary.
(ii) The other parent.
(iii) A
parent, current spouse, or cohabitant of the parent or person seeking
custody, or a person with whom the parent or person seeking custody has a
dating or engagement relationship.
(B) (i) As
a prerequisite to considering allegations of abuse, the court may
require independent corroboration, including, but not limited to,
written reports by law enforcement agencies, child protective services
or other social welfare agencies, courts, medical facilities, or other
public agencies or private nonprofit organizations providing services to
victims of sexual assault or domestic violence.
(ii) As
used in this paragraph, “abuse against a child” means “child abuse or
neglect” as defined in Section 11165.6 of the Penal Code.
(iii) Abuse
against another person, as described in clause (ii) or (iii) of
subparagraph (A), means “abuse” as defined in Section 6203.
(3) The nature and
amount of contact with both parents, except as provided in Section 3046.
(4) (A) The
habitual or continual illegal use of controlled substances or the
habitual or continual abuse of alcohol or prescribed controlled
substances by either parent. Before considering these allegations, the
court may first require independent corroboration, including, but not
limited to, written reports from law enforcement agencies, courts,
probation departments, social welfare agencies, medical facilities,
rehabilitation facilities, or other public agencies or nonprofit
organizations providing drug and alcohol abuse services.
(B) As
used in this paragraph, “controlled substances” has the same meaning as
defined in the California Uniform Controlled Substances Act (Division
10
(commencing with Section 11000) of the Health and Safety Code).
(5) (A) When
allegations about a parent pursuant to paragraph (2) or (4) have been
brought to the attention of the court in the current proceeding and the
court makes an order for sole or joint custody or unsupervised
visitation to that parent, the court shall state its reasons in writing
or on the record. In these circumstances,
the court shall ensure that an order regarding custody or
visitation is specific as to time, day, place, and manner of transfer of
the child as set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 6323.
(B) This paragraph does not apply if the parties stipulate in writing or on the record regarding custody or visitation.
(6)A
parent’s affirmation of the child’s gender identity because it is in
the best interest of the child to affirm their gender identity.
(b) Notwithstanding
subdivision (a), the court shall not consider the sex, gender identity,
gender expression, or sexual orientation of
a parent, legal guardian, or relative in determining the best
interests of the child.
Amended
IN
Senate
June 05, 2023
|
Amended
IN
Assembly
March 13, 2023
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
California parents have now lost ALL rights to their children folks!!! If a kid gets pissed at a parent all they have to do is SAY the parent refuses to support their gender identity and BOOM DCFS can and will remove the child!!!!
I highly doubt most California parents even knew this bill existed before it was voted on.
I highly doubt most California parents actually support this bill.
I think parents need to get their children out of California until those who wish to stand and fight this shit can clean it up!!!!
I am not going anywhere. I have no children affected by this thank God! I am staying and will be a voice but standing alone sucks!
Do you really want DCFS to have the power over YOUR children the way California has the power over children right now???
Be fucking honest with yourself AND your child! And if you are honest, you know you never wanted the state to have this much power!!!
Right now the state has enough power to coerce YOU into anything they want by means of DCFS - do as they say or they take your children until you do!!!
WE THE PEOPLE can change that, but only if we stand together!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your message has been sent to the moderator for approval and shall appear very soon!