Home>Articles>Why Sacramento Supervisor Sue Frost Voted Against ‘Trans Awareness’ Resolution

The Gold Bridge, downtown Sacramento, CA. (Photo: Alexandre Olive, Shutterstock)

Why Sacramento Supervisor Sue Frost Voted Against ‘Trans Awareness’ Resolution

You aren’t free to impose your choices on others

By Sue Frost, April 19, 2023 6:49 am

You are free to live however you want. You aren’t free to impose your choices on others.

Last week I was the lone no vote on a Sacramento County Board Resolution recognizing “Transgender Visibility Week.” The resolution describes how the transgender community has suffered disproportionately with rejection and discrimination.  It acknowledges the transgender, gender nonconforming and gender diverse residents’ contributions to society and the importance of them living authentically and visibly.  

I unequivocally oppose discrimination and I fully recognize and appreciate the human and societal value of those who identify as transgender. But I opposed the resolution because it contributes to a political movement that is forcing gender politics on the rest of society, advocates separating children from their families, and encourages experimental medical procedures on children who are suffering from psychological problems. 

I have some experience with transgender and gender dysphoria during my work as a Registered Nurse. Gender Identity Disorder (GID) is a psychiatric disorder where a person experiences distress related to their gender and/or sex characteristics at birth. The diagnosis was created to help people with gender dysphoria gain access to necessary health care and effective treatment. This diagnosis is included in the American Psychiatric Association’s published Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) and it focuses on Gender Dysphoria discomfort as the problem, rather than identity.

The American College of Physicians describes Gender Dysphoria as a psychological concept and sociological term, not a biological one. Their website states, “GD resolves in the vast majority of patients by late adolescence.” Studies show that many children express some level of gender-dysphoria, but 80% grow out of it before they are 25.  Subjecting these children to permanent changes due to adolescent confusion isn’t supporting adolescents suffering from depression or other psychological disorders – it’s pushing an agenda that actually harms children.

In September 2022, SB107 made California a sanctuary state for children seeking gender transition therapies.  This violates the parent’s fundamental rights to direct their child’s mental and physical health care.  It mandates that Doctors conceal a child’s medical information from parents if it is related to “gender identity” drugs and procedures, even if that information is sought under a court-issued subpoena.  This bill removed parents from their child’s healthcare conversation while they are still responsible for the costs and care of the child. 

On April 10, 2023. AB665 passed the Assembly (and will go to Senate) in California. This law would allow a minor 12 years or older to obtain “gender-affirming” interventions without parental knowledge or consent. And, since California is already a “gender-affirming sanctuary state,” if a child runs away from home to obtain gender-affirming care, parents will not be notified and could be barred from taking custody of their own children.

Puberty is a difficult time when children experience social and hormonal changes, grapple with self-identity, and struggle with peer acceptance. Rather than encouraging supportive families and guiding children through this struggle, activists are taking advantage of children to promote their political agenda.

We have seen a wave of lawsuits from families and from children who felt pressured by school and public officials into gender transition, leading to permanent, life-altering decisions including radical surgery, often without even notifying parents. 

For example, 18-year-old Chloe Cole filed a lawsuit against Kaiser Permanente for a transgender surgery performed on her when she was just 13. Similarly, Layla Jane is suing Kaiser for pressuring her to transition when she was barely a teenager.  Both girls were treated chemically with puberty blockers and endured complete mastectomies while still in puberty. Both girls are now trying to de-transition and state that they felt pressured to undergo transition while their contributing mental health problems were ignored.

Even more alarming, we’re now seeing activists, school employees, and counselors encouraging pre-teens, who aren’t even in puberty yet, to undergo similar radical and often irreversible gender-changing procedures.

In Salinas, CA two middle school teachers who ran the school’s Equality Club were caught pressuring students to secretly transition while hiding their problems from their families. In a leaked recording the teachers were quoted discussing how they kept meetings private and “stalked” students online for recruits. One of the teachers confirmed to the San Francisco Chronicle that the quotes were accurate but claimed the stalking comment was a joke.

Two examples came to light recently. In the first, a school district employee secretly counseled an 11-year-old child through a gender transition, prompting the mother to file a lawsuit. In another district, a family has filed a lawsuit against school officials who were actively transitioning their 11-year-old daughter and 12-year-old son.

All people have a right to medical freedom and access to care, including children who are struggling with depression or gender dysphoria, however, it is dangerous to politicize a psychological condition and encourage children to undergo irreversible medical procedures. 

It’s even more dangerous to tear down parental rights and the family unit that has proven to be the most significant source of support for struggling children and young adults. Long after the activists have moved on, the family is there to help pick up the pieces.

In keeping with my oath, I’ll continue to try to protect and uphold the rights of all people in my service to the community.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Spread the news:


10 thoughts on “Why Sacramento Supervisor Sue Frost Voted Against ‘Trans Awareness’ Resolution

  1. I wonder if the commie pinko Sacramento Bee will print this?
    I’ll keep look for pigs flying overhead. In formation!
    BTW, I am proud to be in your district.

  2. This is so great! —– from Sacramento Supervisor Sue Frost, who NAILS it all. Such truth and forthrightness and plain-spokenness about an important topic is always inspiring, and even more so when it comes from a modern politician. A rare being in California.
    Also great that she mentioned in her piece AB 665, an extremely important bill that MUST be defeated. 12 year olds able to get “gender-affirming care” without parental knowledge or permission? Uh, I don’t THINK so! We need to pound again on our legislators about this one.
    Thank you, Supervisor Frost.

  3. BRAVO!
    Thank You Supervisor Frost for recognizing the political intent of this movement.
    It is another weapon to destroy our once highly regarded societal norms and upholding the value of the nuclear family. It is the new cudgel to divide us.

    Trans Awareness is EVERYWHERE at the moment, Disneyland, TV commercials, schools, Nike, Budweiser, music videos….
    How much awareness is warranted? I guess until we are all so confused not one of us can answer, what is a woman?

  4. Thank you Sue Frost for this great article! You pointed out many important facts including “Studies show that many children express some level of gender-dysphoria, but 80% grow out of it before they are 25.” You are spot on SB107 that made CA a sanctuary state for transgender care. I do worry about our youth. Public schools are giving children as young as 7th grade California Healthy Kids Survey. In that survey there are questions like “are you a transgender?” “Are you male, female, non-binary?” I don’t see any merit of asking young children such questions..I can see just making children even more confused. Thank you Sue for this article and for voting no on the Resolution. As a parent and a Legislative Director for California Parents Union, I really appreciate all your hard work!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *