A bill making its way through the Colorado General Assembly, House Bill 25-1312, is generating significant discussion, particularly concerning its potential impact on parental rights in child custody disputes. The legislation aims to establish several new legal safeguards for transgender individuals in Colorado.
As reported by Deseret News on April 9, the bill, also known as the “Kelly Loving Act” after a transgender man killed in the 2022 Club Q shooting, proposes significant changes to how Colorado courts consider certain actions in child custody decisions. Specifically, Section 2 of the bill states that “deadnaming, misgendering, or threatening to publish material related to an individual’s gender-affirming health-care services” will be legally considered “coercive control.”
According to the bill’s text, this determination of coercive control will influence the court “when making child custody decisions and determining the best interests of a child for purposes of parenting time.” This has raised concerns, as highlighted by Deseret News, that parents who do not use their child’s preferred name and pronouns could be deemed to be engaging in coercive control, potentially impacting their parental rights.
Furthermore, Section 3 of the bill addresses situations where parents are involved in custody disputes across state lines. It stipulates that Colorado courts shall not apply or enforce laws from other states that would authorize a state agency to remove a child from a parent or guardian solely because that parent or guardian has allowed the child to receive gender-affirming health-care services. Deseret News’ interpretation of this section suggests that if parents are split between Colorado and another state with differing views on gender-affirming care, Colorado courts would prioritize the parent supporting such care.
Critics of the bill express alarm over the potential for the state to intervene in parental decisions regarding a child’s gender identity. Joe Carter, in an April 16th article for The Gospel Coalition argued, “At its core, this legislation attacks the biblical understanding that humans are created male and female in God’s image (Gen. 1:27). It seeks to replace parental authority—established by God—with state authority that enforces a worldview fundamentally at odds with Christian anthropology.”
Beyond child custody, the bill also includes provisions impacting education and public interactions. Sections 4, 5, and 6 address chosen names and dress codes in schools, aiming for greater inclusivity. Section 7 mandates the inclusion of chosen names on public entity forms. Sections 8 and 9 seek to define deadnaming and misgendering as discriminatory acts under the “Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act” in places of public accommodation, while acknowledging exceptions for legal requirements.
However, the provisions concerning child custody, particularly the consideration of deadnaming and misgendering as coercive control, have become a central point of contention, with some fearing that it could lead to the state potentially removing children from parents who do not affirm their child’s gender identity. The bill is currently under legislative review, and its potential ramifications for families in Colorado continue to be debated.
