parental rights

Jan 23 2026

Activist Erin Friday on Protecting Kids and Fighting ‘Gender’ Ideology

Read part one of the Daily Citizen‘s interview with pro-child activist Erin Friday here.

Child Protective Services knocked on Erin Friday’s door in 2020 after she refused to treat her 13-year-old daughter as a boy. Now, the attorney and activist fights every day to protect the rights of parents who affirm their children’s biological sex.

Not everyone can draft legislation or lobby America’s most powerful leaders, as Friday does. But everyone can contribute to the fight to protect kids and parents from gender ideology.

First and foremost, Friday tells the Daily Citizen, parents must talk to their kids about sex and biology before LGBT activists do.

“Gender ideologues are getting to our kids in preschool, before we think we even have to talk about this,” Friday warns. “We just really need to get out in front of it.”

She suggests parents start teaching their children about their bodies as young as two years old, emphasizing:

Everyone’s body is beautiful.
No one can their change sex.
No one is born in the wrong body.
There can’t be a mismatch between your brain and body.

Parents can teach these foundational concepts using Focus on the Family-approved children’s books like I Don’t Have to Choose, Elephants are Not Birds and She is She.

You can access the full list of age-appropriate books here.

Parents should also teach their kids to distrust people who encourage them to hide something from their parents, Friday recommends. LGBT activists in schools frequently coach children to hide their sexual identity confusion from their parents.

“If parents don’t think it’s happening at their school, they’re wrong,” she emphasizes. “It’s happening at every school, including Catholic schools [and] private schools.”

Learning about gender ideology and its impact on kids and parental rights can feel overwhelming — but it’s not an impossible task. Friday recommends parents read Miriam Grossman’s Lost in Trans Nation and Erin Brewer’s Parenting in a Transgender World to get the lay of the land.

Focus on the Family offers a wide range of resources to help parents understand and combat gender ideology in their homes, classrooms, churches and communities. You can view the resource list here.

Education is just the first step toward joining Friday in the fight against gender ideology. Change simply does not occur without the courage and sacrifice of ordinary people.

“We need people showing up,” Friday says frankly. “It does us no good if people just complain about this and stay at their kitchen table.”

The easiest way to get involved, says Friday, is to write, call and email your political representatives to show you care about parents’ rights and want to see them protected.

Friday also recommends donating to nonprofits supporting parents and families — particularly those which help parents who do not affirm sexual identity confusion to fight for custody of their children.

If parents run out of ideas, Friday says her organization, Our Duty USA, will put them to work or connect them to local efforts to promoting parents’ rights.

To learn about parental rights issues affecting your state and find ways to get involved, Focus on the Family recommends contacting your local Family Policy Council.

The Daily Citizen appreciates Friday’s courage and clarity in protecting kids from sex-rejecting interventions. We encourage parents and citizens to use the resources above to get involved in the fight.

To speak with a family help specialist or request resources, please call us at 1-800-A-FAMILY (232-6459).

Additional Articles and Resources

Counseling Services

Transgender Resources

Erin Friday on Family Courts, ‘Transgender’ Sanctuary States and Fighting to Protect Parental Rights

Proposed Executive Order Would Protect Parental Rights

Athletes Rally at Supreme Court to Keep Boys Out of Girls Sports

Indiana Family Loses Custody of Son Over Religious Beliefs; Supreme Court Won’t Hear Case

‘Art Club’ Documentary—One Family’s Escape from Gender Ideology, and the Bigger Trend Sweeping the Nation

HHS Finalizes Report Finding Sex-Rejecting Procedures Harm Minors

HHS Releases Report on Harms of ‘Transgender’ Medical Interventions for Minors

Jan 22 2026

Erin Friday on Family Courts, ‘Transgender’ Sanctuary States and Fighting to Protect Parental Rights

Erin Friday champions parental rights at the highest levels of government.

The attorney and mother spent last week on Capitol Hill, rallying to keep boys out of girls sports and urging members of congress to protect parents who do not affirm their children’s sexual identity confusion.

Earlier this month, Friday met with the White House Domestic Policy Council to propose an executive order she’d written to prevent family courts and child placement organizations from discriminating against parents who affirm their children’s sex.

Friday’s passionate defense of parents began in 2020, when her 13-year-old daughter declared herself “transgender.”

“Her school secretly socially transitioned her when she was starting ninth grade,” Friday told the Daily Citizen.

It was the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. Friday’s daughter had never set foot in her high school, yet her instructors saw fit to call her a boy.

“When I called the school to tell them to stop calling [my daughter] a boy and using male pronouns, they told me that they needed to be a ‘safe space’ for her,” Friday recalled, ruefully.

“I asked them to define ‘safe,’ which they couldn’t. Then I asked if I was unsafe because I treat her as a girl.”

A few days later, Child Protective Services (CPS) knocked on Friday’s door.

CPS did not take her daughter that day — in part, she thinks, because she emphasized she was an attorney. But Friday soon realized such happy outcomes are far from guaranteed.

“I learned about a women named Abigail Martinez, who lost custody of her 16-year-old daughter because she refused to socially transition her and treat her as a boy,” Friday remembered.

Martinez’ daughter committed suicide while in California state’s custody.

“I realized I had really dodged a bullet,” Friday told the Daily Citizen frankly. “I was really lucky.”

Friday successfully helped her daughter overcome sexual identity confusion — without wrong-sex hormones or mutilating surgeries. Now, she dedicates her time to helping other parents through the same desperate situations.

As co-leader of the American branch of Our Duty, an international parental advocacy non-profit, Friday fields calls from parents across the country who could lose custody of their child for affirming his or her biological sex.

This isn’t a natural phenomenon, Friday emphasizes. It’s the result of training courses which teach family court judges, child advocates and social workers to consider parents who do not affirm their child’s sexual identity confusion as abusive.

Whistleblower Jamie Reed taught some of these courses between 2018 and 2022. She writes for the Free Press:

We trained the other hospital departments, the schools and the staff in local family courts on how to treat children we called trans: Affirm a new identity without regard for biology or the underlying causes of gender distress.

Courses like these don’t just taint custody rulings in cases where the government takes a transgender-identified child from their home. They also affect custody agreements between parents.

“It’s the same set of judges adjudicating both the child protective services cases and … run-of-the-mill divorces or breakup cases.” Friday explains.

“When there’s a dispute among parents over custody, and one parent [affirms] the delusion and the other one [loves their child as their sex], the parent who loves their child as their sex never gets custody.”

The executive order Friday drafted and proposed earlier this month would prevent federal money from paying to create or teach these biased courses. Instead, federal dollars could be used to fund counter courses reminding family court staff that affirming a child’s sex is in the child’s best interest.

The proposed order would also invalidate “transgender” sanctuary state laws, which allow states that support sex-rejecting procedures to take custody of transgender-identified children who run away from their parents.

Once in state custody, children can choose to begin sex-rejecting interventions without parental consent.

Friday used an example to illustrate how dire these cases can be for parents.

“Normally, when a child runs away into another state, that state says, ‘No, no, no. We’re going to send you back home where your parents are,’” she explains.

“The trans-sanctuary state laws change it so if a kid from Oklahoma runs to my state [California] because they are seeking sex-rejecting interventions, my state says, ‘You can stay here and we’re … going to figure out where you’re going to live, who gets custody and if your parents are bad or not.’”

At this point, Friday says it’s “game over” for parents:

The Oklahoma parents then have to litigate their case in California, a very trans-friendly state, and they’re going to go bankrupt. They are going to be flying back and forth, getting hotels. They’ll be lucky if they find an attorney to take their case. It’s game over as soon as their child gets to California.

California, Colorado, New Mexico, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Illinois, New York, Vermont, Maryland, Massachusetts, Maine, Maryland, Connecticut, Rhode Island and the District of Columbia are all “transgender” sanctuary states.

Friday understands executive orders rarely create lasting change. She hopes Congress will make her proposed protections law. After her meetings last week, Friday says she’s “very hopeful.”

The Daily Citizen is grateful for the strength and effort of mothers and activists like Friday, whose courage and clarity will save countless children from the devastation of irreversible, sex-rejecting medical interventions.

Read Friday’s advice on protecting kids and fighting for parental rights here.

You can read more about Friday’s proposed executive order here.

Additional Articles and Resources

Activist Erin Friday on Protecting Kids and Fighting Gender Ideology

Proposed Executive Order Would Protect Parental Rights

Athletes Rally at Supreme Court to Keep Boys Out of Girls Sports

Indiana Family Loses Custody of Son Over Religious Beliefs; Supreme Court Won’t Hear Case

‘Art Club’ Documentary—One Family’s Escape from Gender Ideology, and the Bigger Trend Sweeping the Nation

HHS Finalizes Report Finding Sex-Rejecting Procedures Harm Minors

HHS Releases Report on Harms of ‘Transgender’ Medical Interventions for Minors

Jan 16 2026

Colorado Bill Would Force Parents to Accept Child’s New ‘Gender Identity’

The Colorado General Assembly is threatening parent’s rights if they oppose “transitioning” their child to a new “identity.”

In cases where parents divorce or separate, Senate Bill 26-018 mandates that courts take into consideration whether or not a parent supports a child’s “identity as it relates to a protected class” when “determining parenting time and allocation of decision-making responsibility.”

The bill references a Colorado law that includes “gender identity” and “gender expression” as protected classes.

A parent in a custody dispute who refuses to embrace a child’s rejection of his or her sex would be penalized by the court, granting preference to the parent who favors “transitioning” their child.

This is already happening in Colorado — and across the nation — as courts and child protective service agencies are removing sexually confused children from parents, but SB 26-018 codifies this abuse of parental rights into law.

The bill, Legal Protections for the Dignity of a Minor, also suppresses court records of a minor’s name change, hiding the child’s original name and sex.

In Colorado, 14-year-olds can initiate a legal name change without parental consent, and one parent can petition to change a child’s name and identity, without the other parent’s permission, as long as a judge decides this is in the “best interests” of the child.

The parent pushing a child toward dangerous, experimental “transgender” medical procedures gains an advantage in custody cases over the parent who believes in biological reality.

This is the second year in a row Colorado’s state legislators have tried to force parents to agree with a child’s sexual identity confusion — or lose out in custody battles.

In 2025, as the Daily Citizen reported, the state passed House Bill 1312, Concerning Legal Protections for Transgender Individuals.

Governor Jared Polis signed the bill into law, despite vehement opposition from thousands of Colorado citizens who signed petitions, attended rallies at the Capitol, testified against the measure, and made phone calls and sent emails to the governor and legislators.

That bill originally had a provision which would have allowed the government to remove children struggling with sexual identity confusion from their parent’s custody if they “misgendered” or “deadnamed” their child — meaning they simply affirmed their child’s true sexual identity and given name.

Because of the backlash, that provision was finally dropped, but the final version of the bill still contained horrible provisions. HB 1312, now the law, allows a student to choose a different name and sexual identity while at school — and requires staff to lie by using the student’s “chosen name” and recognize his or her new identity.

HB 1312 also requires schools to allow “each student to choose from any of the options provided in the dress code policy.” So boys may wear girls clothing — and vice versa. The law is facing litigation from several parents’ rights groups.

Colorado is one of many states where courts and child protective service agencies are already attacking parents who do not support their child’s sexual identity confusion.

Erin Lee, founder and director of Protect Kids Colorado, recently stated in an interview:

I’ve now helped over a dozen families in Colorado who have lost custody of their children, even in two parent loving households, for not affirming their child’s gender confusion.

In a post on X, Lee pointed to families in Arizona, California, Indiana, Maryland, Montana and Texas where one or both parents lost custody of their children so they could be medically damaged by transgender interventions.

The parental rights activist, who works to protect children from transgender harms, spotlighted SB 26-018 in a separate post on X, saying:

Once again, Colorado is passing laws to TAKE CHILDREN AWAY FROM PARENTS who will not trans them. If you won’t tell your child they’re born in the wrong body & sterilize them, the state will take them. (Her emphasis.)

Lee encouraged Coloradans to fight back against this destructive legislation — as does Focus on the Family.

Related articles and resources:

Colorado Legislature Passes Radical ‘Transgender’ Bill With Amendments

Colorado Law Mandates Health Insurance Coverage for ‘Transgender’ Mutilations

Focus on the Family Testifies Against Nightmare Bill, Colorado’s Radical ‘Trans’ Legislation Advances

Meet Three Heroes Working to Protect Colorado Children

Parents’ Rights Groups Sue Colorado Over Radical Trans Law

Protect Kids Colorado

Radical Colorado ‘Transgender’ Bill Threatens Parents’ Rights and Free Speech

Sign These Three Ballot Petitions to Protect Kids and Parental Rights in Colorado

Jan 16 2026

UPDATED: Pornography Age Verification Laws — What They Are and Which States Have Them

Half of all states — Louisiana, Arkansas, Virginia, Utah, Montana, Texas, North Carolina, Indiana, Idaho, Florida, Kentucky, Nebraska, Georgia, Alabama, Kansas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, South Carolina, South Dakota, Wyoming, North Dakota, Missouri, Arizona and Ohio — require pornography companies to verify the ages of their online consumers.

Ten more states hope to pass age verification legislation in 2026.

Described by Politico as “perhaps the most bipartisan laws in the country,” age verification laws help parents protect their kids by making it harder for minors to access adult content online.

Most age verification bills:

Require companies who publish a “substantial” amount of adult content — usually 1/3 or more of their total production — to check the age of every person accessing their website.
Create a way for parents to sue pornography companies if their kids access content they shouldn’t.

The Supreme Court found age verification requirements like these constitutional in June 2025, silencing critics who argue they infringe on free speech and privacy rights.

While most age verification laws contain the same basic components, few are identical.

Some states add age-verification requirements for social media companies. Minnesota’s House Filing 1875 would require social media companies to exclude children younger than 14 from their platforms.

Michigan’s Senate Bill 284 would require manufacturers like Apple to verify device users’ ages and communicate that information to other apps and websites.

Wyoming’s HB 43, now law, requires all online websites which publish or host adult content — no matter how little — to verify consumers’ ages.

States also employ different strategies to pass age verification bills.

Ohio rolled its age verification law into the bill establishing the state’s 2026-2027 budget. Missouri legislators introduced five bills this month to build on the state’s existing age verification regulations.

Hawaii separated its legislation into two bills — one establishing age verification requirements and another creating penalties for violators — so representatives could approve the requirements even if they disagreed with proposed penalties.

While not perfect, age verification laws greatly restrict the amount of porn young people can access. After Louisiana became the first state to pass such legislation in 2022, traffic to Pornhub.com from that state dropped by 80%, one spokesperson told the Institute for Family Studies.

Scroll down to see the status of age verification bills in different states. To find out more about age verification and parents’ rights legislation in your state, contact your local Focus on the Family-allied Family Policy Council.

Age Verification Laws

Louisiana
HB 142 became law on June 15, 2022.
Date effective: January 1, 2023

Arkansas
SB 66 became law on April 11, 2023.
Date effective: July 31, 2023

Virginia
SB 1515 became law on May 12, 2023.
Date effective: July 1, 2023

Utah
SB 0287 became law on May 4, 2023.
Date effective: May 3, 2023

Montana
SB 544 became law on May 19, 2023.
Date effective: January 1, 2024

Texas
HB 1181 became law on June 12, 2023.
Date effective: September 19, 2023

North Carolina
HB 8 became law on September 29, 2023.
Date effective: January 1, 2024

Indiana
SB 17 became law on March 13, 2024.
Date effective: August 16, 2024

Idaho
HB 498 became law on March 21, 2024.
Date effective: July 1, 2024

Florida
HB 3 became law on March 25, 2024.
Date effective: January 1, 2025

Kentucky
HB 278 became law on April 5, 2024.
Date effective: July 15, 2024

Nebraska
Online Age Verification Liability Act became law on April 16, 2024.
Date effective: July 18, 2024

Georgia
SB 351 became law on April 23, 2024.
Date effective: July 1, 2025

Alabama
HB 164 became law on April 24, 2024.
Date effective: October 1, 2024

Kansas
SB 394 became law without the Governor’s signature on April 25, 2024.
Date effective: July 1, 2024

Oklahoma
SB 1959 became law on April 26, 2024.
Date effective: November 1, 2024

Mississippi
HB 1126 became law without the Governor’s signature on April 30, 2024.
Date effective: July 1, 2024

South Carolina
HB 3424 became law on May 29, 2024.
Date effective: January 1, 2025

Tennessee
HB 1642/SB 1792 became law on June 3, 2024.
Date effective: January 13, 2025

South Dakota
HB 1053 became law on February 27, 2025.
Date effective: July 1, 2025

Wyoming
HB 43 became law on March 13, 2025.
Date effective: July 1, 2025

North Dakota
HB 1561 became law on April 11, 2025.
Date effective: August 1, 2025

Missouri
Rule 15 CSR 60-17.010 published on May 7, 2025.
Date effective: November 30, 2025

Arizona
HB 2112 became law on May 13, 2025.
Date effective: September 26, 2025

Ohio
HB 96 became law on June 30, 2025.
Date effective: September 30, 2025

Age Verification Bills

Hawaii
HB 1212: carried over to the 2026 session on December 8, 2025.
HB 1198: carried over to the 2026 session on December 8, 2025.

Iowa
HF 864 (formerly HF 62): placed on subcommittee calendar for the Senate Committee on Technology on January 13.
SF 443 (formerly SF 236): referred to Senate Committee on Technology on June 16, 2025.

Michigan
SB 901: referred to Senate General Laws Committee on January 8.
SB 284 (HB 4429): referred to the Senate Committee on Finance, Insurance and Consumer Protection on May 6, 2025.
HB 4429 (SB 284) : referred to House Committee on Regulatory Reform on September 18, 2025.

Minnesota
HF 1875: referred to House Committee on Commerce, Finance and Policy on March 5, 2025.
SF 2105 (HF 1434): referred to Senate Committee on Commerce and Consumer Protection on March 3, 2025.
HF 1434 (SF 2105): referred to House Committee on Commerce, Finance and Policy on February 24, 2025.

Missouri
HB 1878: referred to House Committee on General Laws on January 8.
HB 1839: referred to House Committee on Children and Families on January 15.
SB 901: referred to Senate General Laws Committee on January 8.
SB 1346: read in the senate on January 7.
SB 1412: read in the senate on January 7.

New Hampshire
SB 648: heard by Senate Judiciary Committee on January 8.

New Jersey
S 1826: referred to Senate Judiciary Committee on January 13.

New York
S 3591 (A 03946): referred to Senate Committee on Internet and Technology on January 7.
A 03946 (S 3591): referred to Assembly Consumer Affairs and Protection Committee on January 7.

Pennsylvania
HB 1513: referred to House Communications and Technology Committee on May 29, 2025.
SB 603: referred to Senate Judiciary Committee on April 9, 2025.

Washington
HB 2112: heard in the House Committee on Consumer Protection and Business on January 16.

Wisconsin
AB 105: second amendment proposed in the senate on January 7.

Nov 13 2025

Victory: CA School District Agrees to Notify Parents Before Teaching Gender Ideology

A California school district agreed Monday to notify parents before teaching gender ideology in school “buddy programs” and allow them to opt their children out.

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California issued a preliminary injunction against Encinitas Union School District in May, requiring it give parents at least three days to opt their children out of activities promoting gender ideology in school “buddy programs” — mandatory mentorship initiatives pairing older students up with younger ones.

On Monday, the district voluntarily dismissed its appeal of the injunction, effectively agreeing to abide by the order until the case against it concludes.

“This is a big win,” Carlos Encinas told the Daily Citizen. “We’ve had highs and lows, so right now, we’re just enjoying the moment.”

Carlos and his wife, Jenny, sued Encinitas Union School District in September 2024 for allegedly violating their parental rights and right to religious freedom. The district had repeatedly refused the couple’s request to opt their sons out of “buddy program” lessons promoting gender ideology, which conflicts with the family’s faith.

The district further violated their son’s right to free speech, the Encinas argue, by compelling him to promote gender ideology to a younger classmate.

The 11-year-old and his kindergarten buddy had been forced to listen to an audiobook about a little boy who discovers his shadow — his “innermost self”— is pink, not blue. The Encinas’ son, a devout Christian, was subsequently required to help the younger child identify the color shadow that “best represented him.”

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California issued a preliminary injunction in favor of the Encinas on May 12. First Liberty Attorney Kayla Toney, the couple’s lawyer, says the judge agreed Encinitas Union School District likely violated their son’s right to free speech.

“The judge basically found that, under Supreme Court case law, schools cannot force students to speak messages that go against their beliefs or their conscience,” she told the Daily Citizen.

Toney also believes the Supreme Court’s ruling in Mahmoud v. Taylor this summerinfluenced the school district’s decision to drop its appeal.

“In Mahmoud v. Taylor, the Supreme Court found that school districts are required to provide advance notice and opt-outs to parents when the material [the district] is teaching substantially interferes with their religious beliefs,” she told the Daily Citizen.

“I think there’s no way [Encinitas Union School District] could have won under Mahmoud,” she continued, noting Supreme Court precedent applies regardless of state law. “I think they saw the writing on the wall and decided to withdraw their appeal in light of [that].”

The Encinas weathered significant persecution to stand up for their rights. Carlos and Jenny removed their boys from the public school system entirely after facing vitriol from teachers, parents and students.

But, through it all, Carlos says God has remained faithful.

“There’s a certain awareness [about parental rights issues] within our community now that I think is really beneficial,” he reflected.

“[The district] really isn’t transparent about how it trains its teachers and the way content is distributed in the classroom,” he continued. “We’ve had a lot of parents reach out to us personally and thank us for being a voice on this.”

Carlos also praised God for making a way for his sons to attend a private, Catholic school.

“[My kids] are in a great place,” he told the Daily Citizen. “They’re thriving — and we’ve got a new community [and support system] we’ve been introduced to.”

While Carlos is grateful for God’s provision, he and Toney know most parents do not have the choice to leave public school.

“[The Encinas] never should have had to withdraw from the public school district,” Toney emphasized. “The fact that the hostility rose to that level is really appalling, because most families don’t have other options.”

“It’s an extraordinary effort to move your kids out of public school,” Carlos added. “I’m just so thankful to God for opening those doors.”

Toney and the Encinas don’t know when the case will conclude — but Carlos says the timeline doesn’t matter. He and his family intend to see it through.

“We know God’s got this battle won for us — we just need to be trusting and faithful,” he told the Daily Citizen.

“It’s definitely taken a bit longer than we expected, and it may take a bit longer [still], but we’re in it for the long haul, however long it takes.”

Additional Articles and Resources

Supreme Court Defends Religious Freedom, Parental Rights Over ‘LGBT’ Curriculum

California Family Wins Early Legal Victory for Parental Rights, Religious Freedom

California Family Harassed After Trying to Opt-Out of Activities Teaching Gender Ideology

Common Spirit Denied Teen Body Medical Care After Parents Objected to Doctor’s Bizarre Questions

Three Ways the Media Supports Sexually Explicit, Inappropriate Books for Children

Liberal Father Seeks to Disprove Concerns Over Sexually Explicit Books in Schools, Becomes Convinced These Books Are Not for Children

Sexualizing Schoolchildren: Classroom and Library Books