Posts falsely claim bill gives California new powers of custody over minors

"California Democrats just passed AB 665 to allow the removal of children age 12+ from their parents’ home without a court order. The liberal media is ignoring this story..." says a June 27, 2023 tweet.

"Remember the whole thing about separating kids from their parents? California and Washington are literally passing laws to do it if parents refuse to trans their children," says a tweet shared on April 13, 2023.

Image

Screenshot of a tweet taken July 11, 2023

Image

Screenshot of a tweet taken July 11, 2023

 

The claim spread across social media including Facebook, Instagram and TikTok -- many saying the proposal would legalize "state-sponsored kidnapping." AFP has debunked similar allegations made about a Washington law that passed in May 2023 here.

Some states, including California, declared themselves "sanctuaries" for transgender youth, but policies aimed to support them have met opposition from conservative politicians and commentators. Anti-LGBTQ rhetoric continues to fuel disinformation.

"If you refuse to bend to the state-sponsored trans agenda, you will have your children taken away," said an April 13, 2023 tweet by Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, in discussion of the bill.

Image

Screenshot of a tweet taken July 11, 2023

Assembly Bill 665 (AB 665 archived here), introduced by California Assemblywoman Wendy Carrillo, aims to allow some children between the age of 12 and 17 to receive mental health treatment without parental consent if the child is "mature enough to participate intelligently." The bill passed the Senate Judiciary in June 2023, and must be approved by the full Senate before being sent to California's governor.

The proposal is not linked to gender-affirming care, but nonetheless has become a source of controversy among conservatives who allege parental custody will be bypassed to allow gender-affirming procedures. These claims misrepresent the bill on several levels, legal experts said.

Amending the current policy

"The claims are false, hyperbolic, and distorted. The bill clearly spells out its purpose of bringing existing law into alignment in order to make minors' access to mental health services more equitable," said Margaret Russell, associate professor of law at Santa Clara University.

"The bill's focus is to address the tremendous rise in need for mental health services for minors and to remove barriers to access while respecting the rights of parents. In no way does the bill 'take away parents' custody without a court order,' as claimed by the tweets," she added.

Current California policy (archived here), passed in 2010, allows minors access to outpatient, psychotherapy, and residential shelter services without parents' consent. But this only applies to those with private health insurance -- often leaving out recipients of Medi-Cal (California's Medicaid healthcare program). AB 665 aims to amend this, Carrillo said in a statement to AFP.

"Medi-Cal insured youth were left out (of the 2010 law), creating inequity compared to their peers with private insurance. This bill does not change existing law but seeks to address this disparity," Carrillo explained.

And under existing law (archived here and here), California already authorizes minors 12 and older to independently consent to outpatient mental health counseling or therapy, under some circumstances.

There are a host of "treatment-specific exceptions” to the general requirement of parental consent, explained Lois Weithorn, professor of law at UC Law San Francisco. "This includes diagnosis and treatment of sexually transmitted diseases, sexual assault services, outpatient services for substance abuse, outpatient services for mental health, services for contraception, and in those states where abortion remains legal, abortion," she said.

Parental rights

Additionally, AB 665 makes no change to custodial rights.

"The bill does not modify child welfare processes or allow school mental health professionals to remove children from their parents," nor does it "authorize minor consent to inpatient mental health services or placement in residential facilities without reason," said Carrillo.

Parents retain the right to make all other health care decisions for their minor children, Weithorn explained, and "in no way limits parental authority to make decisions about other types of health care, such as consent to various forms of gender-affirming care."

She notes that although no current California laws nor AB 665 specifically address gender-affirming care, a minor seeking mental health counseling or therapy to deal with gender identity issues can seek a provider who provides gender-affirming services.

The authority to seek such mental health services already exists under current law and would remain the same. It does not, however, authorize any gender-affirming surgeries without parental consent.

"Under this bill, parental consent remains necessary for any medical procedure, including hormonal therapy or medication for transitioning, which is prescribed by a medical doctor rather than a mental health therapist,” explained Carrillo.