Showing posts with label Parental Rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Parental Rights. Show all posts

Saturday, January 21, 2023

State Sen. Cody Rogers files bill to strengthen Parents’ Bill of Rights


Sen. Rogers files measure to amend Parents’ Bill of Rights

OKLAHOMA CITY – Sen. Cody Rogers, R-Tulsa, has filed Senate Bill 131, which amends the Parents’ Bill of Rights. SB 131 authorizes parents to file a civil action against a person or governmental entity for a violation of the Parents’ Bill of Rights.

“Updating this measure furthers parents’ involvement in their child’s education and requires written consent for decisions related to physical or mental health decisions for the student,” Rogers said. “Clarifying this will ensure parents know their rights when it comes to their children’s health and can remain in control of what their child is being exposed to at school.”

Tuesday, December 13, 2022

Sen. Rogers pushes to protect parent-child discussions re: orientation, gender identity


Sen. Rogers pushes to protect parent-child discussions regarding orientation and gender identity

OKLAHOMA CITY (Dec. 9th) – Sen. Cody Rogers, R-Tulsa, is planning to file legislation that ensures parents remain in control of conversations and actions regarding their children’s gender identity and sexual orientation. The measure requires that district school boards put procedures in place notifying parents of any changes or issues their student is having related to their mental, emotional, or physical health or well-being.

Tuesday, October 11, 2022

Small: Parents’ rights are fundamental


Parents’ rights are fundamental
by Jonathan Small

We all have our “hot-button issue.” Among conservatives, it might be gun rights, or property rights, or religious liberty. Accounting nerds like me can even get worked up over tax policy. But whatever we care about, if we want to win, we had better protect parental rights.

This is especially true as elite culture becomes more hostile to conservative values and religious faith. If the next generation is taught our Constitution is fundamentally flawed, nothing in the Bill of Rights will be safe.

Thursday, March 17, 2022

Lankford calls on Senate to support school choice, stand up for parents


Lankford Calls on Senate to Support School Choice, Stand Up for Parents 

WASHINGTON, DC – Senator James Lankford (R-OK) today stood firmly for parental rights and school choice when he called for the Senate to immediately pass his resolution to support parents having the freedom to choose the best educational environment for their kids and remain in control of whether or not they want their children exposed to “woke” ideologies at school, including Critical Race Theory and others. Democrats blocked the Senate from unanimously standing up for American parents.

Lankford introduced the resolution to recognize the need to stand up for parents’ choices in their children’s education during National School Choice Week earlier this year. Lankford was joined by Senators Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Ron Johnson (R-WI), Mike Braun (R-IN), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Marco Rubio (R-FL), John Boozman (R-AR), Jim Inhofe (R-OK), Steve Daines (R-MT), and Roger Wicker (R-MS).

The following organizations support the resolution: Heritage Action, ParentalRights.org, Center for Urban Renewal and Education, American Conservative Union, Faith and Freedom Coalition, Family Policy Alliance, American Association of Christian Schools, Association of Christian Schools International, First Liberty Institute, Alliance Defending Freedom, American Center for Law and Justice, Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee, and Family Research Council.

Lankford continues to stand for parents’ rights and school choice for Oklahomans and students around the nation. Lankford introduced a resolution supporting parents’ rights after the Biden Administration politicized and weaponized the Justice Department by threatening to use federal law enforcement resources to intimidate and silence parents who speak out to protect their children from harmful curricula like critical race theory being pushed by Biden and the far left. Lankford joined his colleagues to send a letter demanding answers from US Department of Education Secretary Miguel Cardona on reports that he played a key role in orchestrating a letter from the National School Boards Association (NSBA) that called concerned parents “domestic terrorists.”

Transcript

I come today to the floor with a simple unanimous consent request. This is a resolution. It doesn't allocate any dollars, doesn’t change any policy. It’s just a statement of belief from the United States Senate. It's a statement to be able to say, ‘We hold certain things very important.’

I’ll talk through some of the resolution part of it. The ‘resolved’ at the beginning of it, but it ends with a very simple statement. It ends with, ‘Resolved that the Senate recognizes and promotes the importance of parental involvement in their child's education and recognizes the necessity of school choice as a tool to empower all parents with the freedom to choose the best educational environment for their children and reject destructive ideologies promoted by many public schools such as Critical Race Theory.’

This comes from a very basic conversation that happens in my state. Quite frankly, it’s happening in states all around the country.

Parents should be the primary decision maker for their children. Not only on where they are educated, so that they don't live in a certain neighborhood, and they say, ‘I’m sorry. You live there and have to go here.’ So that parents have the maximum amount of flexibility of knowing one child may be a great fit for one school, and a younger child may be a better fit for a different school, whether that be a public school that allows flexibility within a district to be able to move place to place or it happens in my state where you can even change district to district within public schools. If a parent maybe works in one area, in one school district but lives in another, that parent can choose to be able to have their child go into a different district, though it’s a public school setting. But it gives them the flexibility and the choice to be able to do that. Why? Because not every kid is the same and not every educational environment is the same. And I would say in my state, and I would assume in other states as well,  not every school district is the same.

Now, it's important to us in our state that every school district is successful. There is no place that we don't want any child to be able to be successful. But we should all admit the facts: not every school district is thriving.

And as we invest dollars and time and encourage great teaching in that district, that child that’s in that district that is not being successful is trapped in a location that’s currently not successful. Maybe they can be successful in five years from now when they work through the different issues they have, but that child doesn't have a second shot, if that child has no other opportunity to be able to choose and their parents are locked into that spot. We basically say, ‘We'll fix everything at this district in a few years,’ and that child is just not allowed to get an option out.

I don’t think that's helpful for that child and that parent at that time.

Giving parents the ability to be able to make the choice between public schools, charter schools, private schools, whatever may work best for their school and for their state and the policies their state has created, seems like a smart thing to be able to do.  

Any kind of teaching that is within a school that actually promotes one kid as the oppressor and the other kid as the oppressed simply because of the color of their skin should not be taught in our schools.

Why don't we teach every child as equal? Why don't we teach every child should have opportunity? Why don't we teach every family has the opportunity in this great country of ours? And where we have weaknesses, we work on our weaknesses, but we don't label a child as an oppressor or as oppressed based on the color of their skin. At least we used to not in America. But that’s what’s rising up on with this Critical Race Theory as it rises up from place to place.

I’ve had many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle say, ‘That's not true. That's not actually being taught.’ Great. Let's make the resolution, and let’s say, ‘We as a Senate don't believe this should be taught.’

Let’s teach every child. Let’s love every child. And this resolution also affirms the rights of parent to be able to speak out—not in a violent way, not in a destructive way—but the parents to be able to speak out.

Why is it several months ago that our Department of Justice and our nation starts a whole investigation on parents to be able to say: are there parents that are actually maybe closet terrorists that are showing up at school board meetings complaining about what's being taught, complaining about a mask mandate in their school, complaining about a vaccine mandate, complaining about Critical Race Theory, or just saying I don't like this particular curriculum? That used to be the rights of parents to engage, and now we hear, ‘Really parents don't know enough about these difficult things. Parents need to just sit down over there. We'll take care of this as professionals.’

So again this resolution doesn't add additional funding, doesn't change the structure of our schools, but does say, ‘We as the Senate believe in the power of the parent to be able to make the right choice for their children.’

Friday, April 26, 2013

OKDHS Director responds to newborn death story



Two days ago, I posted an article by blogger/activist Steve Dickson about the death of a newborn in DHS custody. This evening, OKDHS Director Ed Lake issued a statement from detailing the story from OKDHS' perspective, which I am posting in full below.

 Ed Lake, OKDHS Director

"Recent outrageous blog posts circulating on social media are falsely and recklessly claiming that the Oklahoma Department of Human Services (OKDHS) removed a baby from life support against the mother's wishes. This is absolutely untrue and is an example of extremist bloggers not bothering to obtain factual information and twisting the misinformation for some political agenda. We have determined, in the interest of public faith and trust, to respond to these absurd claims in a manner that protects the identities of those involved."

"The situation in which these blogs are referencing was that of an infant in OKDHS custody who was born with extremely serious physical abnormalities and who had surgery to try to correct the conditions. The child was subsequently placed on life support and doctors did not expect the child to survive. A conference was held with the presiding judge, the district attorney, the child's biological mother and her attorney, the child's foster mother, two physicians treating the child, and an OKDHS supervisor."

"The judge and the child's mother both agreed to a "Do Not Resuscitate Order" (DNR) for the child if the action was determined medically necessary. OKDHS remained silent during this conference and made no recommendation, following the agency's DNR policy. The Judge also authorized the physician treating the child to do whatever was medically necessary and in the best interest of the child. The actions of OKDHS employees and hospital staff in this case complied with Oklahoma and federal laws, as well as the judge's decisions and orders. All of these actions were recorded by a court reporter who was present at the hearing in the judge's chambers."

"The child's physician later determined the child needed to be taken off life support due to ongoing uncontrolled internal bleeding. The child's biological mother was taken to the hospital, signed the DNR order along with the attending physician, and personally consented to her child being taken off life support. The mother remained with her child until the child passed away."

"We were all extremely saddened by this child's death and worked to support the child's mother and foster mother throughout this emotional decision."

"The individual who posted the despicable blog should be ashamed of himself."

# # #

If there are any more updates to the story, I will post them.

Wednesday, April 24, 2013

Tragic: OKDHS takes custody of newborn, pulls life support


A Choice of Life or Death

This is a true story.

My wife has spent many years volunteering in various causes, most of them related to the Pro-Life movement. One of the organizations she volunteers for operates a group home for women in crisis pregnancy situations. This home specifically helps pregnant homeless women get through pregnancy in a stable and safe environment. They are able to have their babies, and given the time and resources to get back on their feet. This includes staying in the home for several months after their baby is born.

Yesterday, a tragedy beyond the comprehension of most parents occurred. One of the women my wife has been helping gave birth to a baby boy last week. He was full term, and was full size, but he had some heart issues. As a result, he needed surgery. After he had his surgery he made it through the weekend. His poor little body was battered by the trauma of such an event, but alive and improving. His mother was hopeful – until the state stepped in.

Previously the mother of this new boy had lost custody of her other child. In Oklahoma domestic violence can be grounds for removal of children, even from the custody of the victim. Since the mother in this case had not regained custody of her two year old – that is due to happen later this summer – someone with the Department of Human Services decided to take custody of the baby while he was in neonatal intensive care. This was done despite the child being in a secured environment both in the hospital and in the group home he where mother and child would recover. By doing so, medical decisions were removed from the mother and given to bureaucrats.

In the afternoon of April 22nd, a worker with DHS decided to intervene, consulted a “judge” and instigated an emergency hearing to decide the fate of this little baby boy. The mother was forced to plead her case in the administrative judges’ chambers, with the hospital on speaker phone. Upon his decision, and over her objections, the baby was taken off of life support, drugs, ventilator, and pacemaker. This began while the mother was away from the hospital, and before she could even hold her child. She arrived back at the hospital shortly before the end. Her baby died at 5:38 pm.

If this story does not rip at your heart, nothing will. This is someone who was relying on private charity, attempting to rebuild her life, and life and death decisions about her child were taken from her by the state. There was no trial. There was no chance of appeal. Our government has taken it upon itself to “protect” the children, even when that means stripping parents of their rights, and making decisions that may kill those very children. In this case, it did.

I don’t know the answer to all of this. I know a tragedy has occurred. I know the state should not have the power to strip parental rights without a jury being involved. I know people are victimized by their government in the name of safety and protection, all the way down to a newborn in the hospital.

I know my heart is heavy for this mother and her children, and I will hold my family close tonight and pray for her.

Steve Dickson is a conservative activist in the Oklahoma City area, and writes a blog at this link.


* UPDATE *

The Director of OKDHS has issued a statement about this incident, which is posted here.