Featured Image
 Amparo Garcia/Getty Images

This article was originally published by the WND News Center.

(WND News Center) — An expert on the law who multiple times has testified before Congress on various legal disputes says the United Kingdom is going to extremes now, making it abuse NOT to abuse a child.

It is Jonathan Turley, of George Washington University, who has written a column about what the government there is demanding of parents when their children say they are transgender.

He said there’s an interpretation put forward by police in the U.K. which provides that “parents who refuse to use the alternative pronouns for their children or refuse to pay for their transitioning could be criminally prosecuted.”

READ: Bank refuses to open account for parental rights group opposing ‘trans’ surgeries for kids: report

Those transitioning “treatments” would include the administration of chemicals to sterilize a child for life and even surgical body mutilations.

“As the debate rages in the United States over parental notification and authority in cases involving transgender children, the United Kingdom is embroiled in a controversy over a law that would not only limit parental authority in such cases but affirmatively require parents to pay for such transitioning,” he explained.

He noted, “According to the U.K.’s Code for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), abusive conduct now includes ‘withholding money for transitioning [and] refusing to use their preferred name or pronoun.’ So a parent with familial or religious objections to the transitioning of a child would be required under the law to fund operations or treatments.”

READ: UK COVID Inquiry reveals just how vast international Communist conspiracy may be

He explained, “To potentially prosecute a parent for refusing to use an adopted pronoun of their child is chilling and wrong. Nevertheless, a CPS spokesperson doubled down with a comment to Fox News that ‘domestic abuse is a severe crime and leaves victims with a lasting impact. … This assists prosecutors to ensure that any victim, regardless of who they are, can get justice for the abuse they have faced.’”

Turley said, “It was Sir Edward Coke in ‘The Institutes of the Laws of England,’ 1628 who declared ‘For a man’s house is his castle, et domus sua cuique est tutissimum refugium [and each man’s home is his safest refuge].’ William Pitt, the first Earl of Chatham later added: ‘The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the crown. It may be frail – its roof may shake – the wind may blow through it – the storm may enter – the rain may enter – but the King of England cannot enter.”

The idea, actually, isn’t new there.

READ: Psychological conditioning will make future lockdowns acceptable to public, UK expert says

That would make a parent who declines to affirm transgender ideology adopted by his or her child guilty of abuse.

Lawmakers in the state have adopted AB 957. Originally, it demanded courts consider whether a child’s parents were “gender-affirming” in custody cases.

But that was amended to re-invent the state’s entire standard for child care.

It was written to make sure that every parent of a transgender child affirm that lifestyle choice.

The Daily Caller News Foundation reported, “California courts would be given complete authority under Section 3011 of California’s Family Code to remove a child from his or her parents’ home if parents disapprove of LGBTQ+ ideology.”

Leftist pursuing that ideology in California simply decided to change the definition of what makes up the “health, safety, and welfare of [a] child.”

The report said, “In essence, a boy could report his parents to his local school’s Gay-Straight Alliance club or other LGBTQ+ organization, who could then report the boy’s parents for child abuse.

Reprinted with permission from the WND News Center.