In a concerning development for parental rights and child welfare, a bill under consideration in the New York state legislature, A0 6761, is drawing criticism from legal experts and parental advocates. Introduced by Democratic state Assemblywoman Karines Reyes and eight other Democratic members, the bill ostensibly focuses on allowing homeless youth to provide “effective consent to certain medical, dental, health, and hospital services.” However, critics argue that the legislation’s purposefully vague language could potentially permit children, without parental knowledge, to consent to life-altering sex-change medical procedures.
While Assemblywoman Reyes has asserted that the bill primarily targets services like flu shots for a specific group of vulnerable young people, the bill’s text appears broader, stating that “any person, including a minor,” comprehending the need, nature, risks, and benefits, may give effective consent to such services for themselves. Legal experts, including Sarah Parshall Perry from the Heritage Foundation, express concerns that the bill, with its focus on “gender-affirming” care, aims to facilitate medical decisions without parental involvement.
Critics argue that framing children as capable of making consequential healthcare decisions while denying them the ability to engage in other activities like voting or getting a tattoo is an effort to evade parental notification, particularly in cases where parents may not support such decisions. Parental advocate January Littlejohn warns that children lack the cognitive maturity to make significant medical decisions independently, emphasizing the critical need to include parents in such matters.
The bill would also prohibit healthcare providers from informing parents about medical or mental health treatments sought by their child unless the child explicitly objects. Concerns arise over potential scenarios where vulnerable children could be influenced, either at school or through online platforms, without parental awareness. Teachers and guidance counselors may become instrumental in implementing state policies, potentially affirming a child’s gender dysphoria without due diligence.
Parental advocate Emily Viola, a mother of a detransitioner, highlights the potential consequences of such legislation, recounting her daughter’s desire for cross-sex hormone treatment and top surgery at a young age. Viola expresses gratitude for the current legal framework that allowed her to intervene and prevent her child from making irreversible decisions.
Natalya Murakhver, founder of Restore Childhood, voices concerns about parents being kept out of the loop, enabling vulnerable children to be preyed upon in various settings. The bill’s potential implications raise alarms about emergency complications, as parents would be entirely unaware of medical decisions or their aftermath.
Additionally, critics point to the broader context of New York’s legislative landscape, where Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul signed a law in June 2023 designating New York as a sanctuary state for minors seeking sex-change medical procedures. Legal experts suggest that if the bill passes, it might lead to scenarios where minors from out-of-state run away to New York to obtain transgender treatments without parental knowledge.
The bill’s opponents emphasize the urgency of fighting against what they perceive as a threat to children’s well-being, asserting that parental concerns should transcend political affiliations. They warn that the state may be setting itself up for legal challenges, considering the potential implications of granting children autonomy over significant medical decisions without parental involvement.
