The Alberta Legislature has reconvened for its fall sitting, and the United Conservative Party is expected to table new anti-2SLGBTQIA+ legislation that will restrict trans women and girls’ access to sports, curtail inclusive education and ban youth from accessing gender affirming care.
Some of the potential measures include banning puberty blockers for youth, and having parents opt-in for their children to be present for formal lessons on sexual health. In addition, trans women could be banned from competing in women’s sports.
In February, when Alberta Premier Danielle Smith first announced these policies, she was riding the wave of the “parental rights” movement. Smith framed these policies as the government protecting children from harm, telling the media that she was “sympathetic to parents who want to preserve the innocence of their kids for as long as they can.”
The parental rights movement has reintroduced homophobic and transphobic narratives from the 1970s that position 2SLGBTQIA+ people as pedophiles and “groomers” who “recruit” children. According to parental rights proponents, kids have to be protected from “gender indoctrination.” This hate movement has led to violent attacks against 2SLGBTQIA+ communities, such as bomb threats targeting drag performers at library storytimes.
Despite growing awareness that “parental rights” proponents are connected to a larger network of dangerous hate groups including the Proud Boys, The Patriot Front and the neo-Nazi group Blood Tribe, provincial conservative governments and parties in New Brunswick, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia have introduced anti-2SLGBTQIA+ policies inspired by this movement.
As concerned parents, we have been following how the “parental rights” movement is influencing provincial government policies. As researchers, we have been publishing our analysis about the rise in anti-2SLGBTQIA+ sentiments in Alberta for the past two years.
Our conversations with parents
As the parental rights movement and associated anti-2SLGBTQIA+ legislation are new, scholars and other organizations are just beginning to publish findings showing the harm they have created. For example, a recently published academic study from the United States found that in states where anti-transgender laws legislation has been enacted, suicide attempts among transgender and non-binary youth have increased by up to 72 per cent.
Academic scholarship about the impact of anti-2SLGBTQIA+ legislation in Canada does not yet exist. This gap in knowledge motivated us to undertake a research project that could capture the experiences of parents as this new “parental rights” legislation rolls out.
Set in Calgary, Alberta, our ongoing study involves 10 parents from 2SLGBTQIA+ families who have committed to bi-monthly focus groups over the period of a year. By facilitating conversations with parents, our aim is to track the short and long-term impacts of the anti-2SLGBTQIA+ climate in Alberta. The participants in our study are a mix of straight, cisgender, queer and trans parents. All of them are already experiencing the negative outcomes of Alberta’s move to legislate 2SLGBTQIA+ lives.
Below, we have used pseudonyms to protect their identities.
We held our first focus group in late September 2024 where we asked participants about their concerns related to the impending changes to education, health care and sports in the province. We also asked parents what they knew about the parental rights movement, and how the rhetoric of parental rights is affecting their families.
One of the overwhelming sentiments of the parents was that the parental rights movement excluded parents of 2SLGBTQIA+ kids. According to our participants, voices of 2SLGBTQIA+ parents and families are missing or silenced in the conversations around “protecting children.”
One participant, Maia, said: “There needs to be more representation of the parents especially because it’s a legislation that’s being fought on behalf of parents so we need to make our voices heard.”
Olivia similarly stated, “I feel like people keep talking for parents. I’m a parent and you’re not saying anything I think … so I just feel very unheard.”
When it came to parental rights, participants remarked that their parental choice to support their 2SLGBTQIA+ kids is not being protected. In fact, they felt their responsibility to protect their children from harm is being taken away by the provincial government that is making choices for their families.
Courtney stated: “It makes me really angry that our kid’s medical care can be adjusted based on the government. I work in health care. The thought that the government could step in and get a doctor to go against evidence-based medical care is … insanity.”
2SLGBTQIA+ youth express fear
According to the parents in our study, the impending legislation has stoked so much fear and anxiety in their children that their school experiences have already been negatively affected. Courtney’s trans child has missed a large chunk of school since the announcement of impending anti-2SLGBTQIA+ policies last February.
Another parent, Sophia, told us that her teenager’s overall well-being has “deteriorated” since the impending legislation was announced: “She has started self harming. She is missing school. She is terrified for what’s coming … even though she knows that for her she’s somewhat protected with her HRT [hormone replacement therapy], but it doesn’t mean that they’re not going to say something about bathrooms or that her friends are safe.”
Saskatchewan’s Conservative Premier Scott Moe recently promised to implement a new policy that would ban trans girls from school change rooms. In Alberta, the UCP’s policy resolutions for 2024 include a similar ban, but instead of focusing on schools, the party aims to remove trans women and girls from all “exclusively female spaces.”
Our research, while preliminary, demonstrates that harmful effects are already taking shape in Alberta, and parents in 2SLGBTQIA+ families are terrified of what is coming with the legislation dropping soon.
As we map the fallout of Alberta’s anti-2SLGBTQIA+ legislation over the next year, we expect to collect similar findings to that of our U.S. research counterparts who are publishing evidence that these policies are associated with adverse consequences to mental and physical well-being.
Corinne L. Mason receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Leah Hamilton receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
