A California bill, AB 957, would require family courts to interpret a child’s “health, safety, and welfare” to “include a parent’s affirmation of the child’s gender identity” for the purpose of custody disputes.

The bill, which has already passed the state assembly, was sponsored by Assemblymember Lori Wilson, who encouraged the transition of her own child, and who would like to see similar laws enacted in every state. It is of a piece with last year’s trans-tourism bill, encouraging out-of-state minors to travel to California to undergo transition treatments behind their parents’ backs, as well as a bill passed earlier this year requiring foster parents to agree to “best practices for providing care for LGBTQ+ youth,” including — of course — “gender-affirming care.”

Already we have seen the toxic effects of gender ideology infiltrating family law. Across the country, activist-minded judges are penalizing parents who don’t accept the claims of trans activists. Judges in California, Illinois, and Texas have denied custody rights to divorced parents opposed to, or even skeptical of, their child’s transition. In some cases, judges have received special “training” on these matters from transgender activists.

AB 957 goes even further than favoring one divorced parent over another for political reasons. In interpreting the refusal to affirm a gender identity as an affront to a child’s “health, safety and welfare,” the bill effectively defines non-affirmation as abuse, creating a precedent for much broader applications. If a parent can lose custody rights after a divorce for not affirming his or her child, what’s to stop the state from removing children from happily married or even single parents?