Congress Could Soon Declare That Affirming A Child’s Sex Is Not Abuse

A little girl in Missouri, or maybe Ohio, just wants to wear a dress to school. Her parents, seeing their child struggle, decide the kindest thing is to let her be herself and figure things out without pumping her full of hormones. Under the current logic of some federally funded agencies, those parents could be investigated for child abuse. Senator Eric Schmitt’s new bill says no, and it's about time someone in Washington drew that line.

The Yaeli Martinez Child Protection Act is named after a real girl, and it targets a real problem: the therapy industry’s new habit of treating parental caution as a form of cruelty. We've seen the stories. A 13-year-old says they feel like the opposite sex, and suddenly the school counselor is calling the parents "unsupportive" and threatening them with Child Protective Services. The state shouldn't be weaponized to override a mother's instinct and a father's love. This bill says that the federal government's thumb should be off the scale and that affirming biology is not an act of violence.

To the outrage machine on the left, this will sound like a license to be mean. It isn't. We're not conservatives because we hate people; we're conservatives because we believe families, not bureaucrats, know their children best. That is not child protection; that is family destruction. The people pushing kids toward irreversible medical transitions are the ones who refuse to let children grow up. Schmitt’s bill is a shield for parents who are being terrorized by their own government for the crime of saying "let's wait and see."

This issue is not going away, and the GOP is smart to engage with it legislatively. We should be the party of common sense and of protecting kids from the adults who should know better. If the price of that protection is a fight over federal funding, so be it. Let the debate happen. It’s a debate we can win with the facts, and more importantly, with the parents of this country on our side.