In a recent federal lawsuit, two families in Carlsbad, California are challenging a public school’s decision to task their fifth-grade sons with teaching gender ideology to kindergarteners without notifying them beforehand or giving them a chance to opt out. This situation has brought to light the growing tension between parental rights and the role of public schools in shaping young minds, especially on topics as sensitive as gender identity and sexual orientation. The case is being handed by two legal organizations, First Liberty and the National Center for Law and Policy, both experts in protecting the religious liberty of parents across the state who demand accountability and transparency from school systems.
“Kinderbuddy” Program: From Mentorship to Controversy
The incident which occurred at the La Costa Heights Elementary School in the Encinitas Union School District, unfolded as part of the school’s “Kinderbuddy” program, designed to help older elementary students build friendships with kindergarteners and encourage leadership and empathy. However, this typical mentorship setup took a controversial turn when fifth-grade students, including the plaintiffs’ sons, were, without warning, forced to teach gender identity and sexual orientation topics to their kindergarten buddies, based on a book chosen by the school promoting controversial ideas about gender ideology.
According to the official complaint filed by First Liberty Institute and the National Center for Law & Policy (NCLP), both families are Christians who believe that “all humans are created in God’s image as either male or female.” Both families had recently been notified about gender identity and sexual orientation lessons in a health class, and opted their sons out of those lessons. However, when nearly identical instruction about gender ideology was included in the mentoring program, these parents were left in the dark. They only found out after their sons had already been immersed in the instruction and tasked with personally delivering the government’s viewpoints about gender and sexuality to younger students.
After the families requested parental notice and consent for all future discussions of gender ideology, the Encinitas Union School District took the position that its teachers were legally forbidden to notify parents or obtain their consent—simply because the same information was not communicated in health class. In other words, the school promised to continue to inculcate its controversial gender ideology at will, without any notice or consent.
The Controversial Book: Promoting Gender Ideology to Young Children
At the heart of the lawsuit is the book chosen by the school titled “My Shadow is Pink,” which explores themes of transgender identity and gender fluidity, introducing concepts that challenge the notion of gender as a biological constant. According to the complaint, the book presents gender identity as an internal and self-determined aspect of an individual, regardless of biological sex. For the parents, who are practicing Christians, these ideas directly conflict with their beliefs that gender is a fixed God-given trait, determined by biological sex.
The parents argue that the content was age-inappropriate for both their fifth-grade son and his kindergarten buddy. The book not only encourages readers to question their natural sex but also advocates a worldview that dismisses traditional perspectives on gender and sexuality as outdated. These ideas are viewed by many faith-based families as undermining biblical values and the foundational principles they teach at home.
Lack of Notification and Parental Rights Violations
The school’s lack of notification is one of the lawsuit’s core issues. The parents claim that their requests to review the book in advance and opt out of ideologically charged lessons about human sexuality were completely disregarded. Instead, the school placed their son in a position that forced him to affirm and advocate ideas that contradicted his family’s faith—a situation that has deeply troubled the parents and their sons and has ignited a larger debate regarding the respect and deference schools should afford parents in guiding their children’s education.
Dean Broyles, President of the NCLP, expressed his concern over the school’s actions, saying, “Parents, not school officials, have the right to direct the upbringing and education of their children, especially in matters of faith and values. Schools should not presume to introduce such complex and controversial topics without involving parents.” His remarks resonate with many other parents who see this lawsuit as a critical stand for parental rights.
California Family Council’s Stand on Parental Rights
Greg Burt, Vice President of the California Family Council, voiced his dismay over the school’s actions. “It is shocking and dismaying that a school would ask a child to teach a subject as sensitive as gender ideology to young, impressionable kindergarteners, especially when that subject conflicts with the child’s own faith and family values,” Burt said. His concerns reflect a broader sentiment within many faith-based communities in California, where parents feel increasingly marginalized by a school system that prioritizes promoting LGBTQ ideology over parental rights.
The Role of the “Kinderbuddy” Program in Promoting Agenda-Driven Content
The complaint states that while the “Kinderbuddy” program is ostensibly a way to foster positive interactions, it should never be used to impose sensitive ideological concepts on young students. Rather than focusing on social skills or mentorship, this program pushed a divisive agenda that neither the fifth grader nor his parents support. It placed an unfair burden on a young child, asking him to affirm and advocate for views he and his family find contradictory to their faith and sense of reality.
The complaint underscores the traumatic impact on the child, who reportedly felt confused and distressed after being placed in a role where he was forced to teach ideas that fundamentally conflicted with what he had been taught at home. For his parents, the experience represented a betrayal of trust, as they had assumed the school would respect their wishes in handling topics that required sensitive, faith-aligned instruction.
A Larger Issue for Parental Rights in California
The Encinas family’s lawsuit highlights a broader trend in California and other states where parental authority in education is being tested. Advocates for parental rights argue that public schools have increasingly pushed ideologically charged material without sufficient transparency or opportunity for parents to review and opt-out. This trend has led to growing calls for policies that protect families’ rights to be informed and involved about their children’s education on matters as sensitive and controversial as gender and sexuality.
Notably, California’s public-school system has seen other instances where schools introduce sensitive content about gender and sexuality through wellness programs, school counseling, and classroom activities, often without parents’ prior knowledge. This leaves many parents feeling that their role as primary educators on such important issues is being overridden, creating a climate of distrust between families and public institutions.
The familys’ legal action, spearheaded by First Liberty Institute and NCLP, is part of a larger movement aiming to restore respect for family values within public education. The lawsuit seeks damages, a formal apology, and an agreement to ensure parents’ rights are upheld in future instances. For parents who feel their voices are increasingly ignored, this case serves as a powerful call to action in safeguarding their role in guiding their children’s moral and ideological development.
