In Tennessee, we value the fundamental rights of parents to guide their children’s upbringing, education, and welfare. However, not every candidate running for office shares this commitment. One candidate, in particular, has shown through their actions that they don’t genuinely support parental rights.
While Hazlewood claims to protect parental rights, her actions suggest otherwise. Here’s why:
1. Allowing CPS to Intervene Too Much
Child Protective Services should protect children in danger, but Hazlewood's answers to the Church Voter Guide show that she wants to give CPS too much power. She supports removing children from their parents quickly, even without enough proof, which risks separating families unnecessarily. Parents need protection against too much state interference.
2. Expanding Safe Baby Courts
Hazlewood states she wants to expand Safe Baby Courts across the state in her answers to the Church Voter Guide. While these courts aim to help, they often result in children being taken from their parents, even when it might not be necessary. This shows a lack of trust in parents’ ability to resolve their issues without state interference.
3. Insufficient Due Process Protections
Hazlewood claims to support fair legal processes when children are removed in emergencies, but her answers show that her policies don't provide enough measures to ensure quick and fair hearings. This could result in long legal battles for parents trying to get their children back, causing emotional and financial stress.
4. Overemphasis on State Intervention
Hazlewood frequently emphasizes the need for state intervention to protect children’s health and safety. While child safety is crucial, this approach suggests a distrust of parents and a preference for state solutions over empowering parents to address their problems.
5. Lack of Transparency in School Board Elections
Hazlewood voted against HB9072, a bill that would let voters know if school board candidates are Republicans or Democrats. She doesn’t see a problem with children being forced to wear masks, stay home from school, or learn controversial topics like critical race theory. This shows she doesn’t care about transparency or parents' concerns in education.
6. Opposition to Firearm Safety Education
Hazlewood voted against HB2882, a bill that would require age-appropriate firearm safety courses in public schools. This vote indicates that she does not prioritize teaching children about gun safety, which is an important concern for many parents.
7. Blocking Access to Autopsy Reports
Hazlewood voted in favor of HB1695, which blocks access to autopsy reports of children who are victims of violent crime. This decision can leave cases unsolved and families without justice or closure.
8. Making It Easier to Remove Foster Kids
Hazlewood voted for HB1808, which makes it easier to remove foster kids from their homes and return them to the system. This undermines the stability and well-being of foster children.
9. Weakening Protections Against Child Trafficking
Hazlewood proposed an amendment to HB2310, which aimed to penalize those who traffic minors for gender-altering medical procedures. Her amendment weakened the bill by providing loopholes, diminishing its effectiveness.
10. Weakening Legislation on Abortion Trafficking
Hazlewood also proposed an amendment to HB1895, which sought to criminalize abortion trafficking of minors. Her amendment created more loopholes, weakening the legislation and compromising the safety of minors.
Conclusion: A Candidate Who Doesn’t Support Parental Rights
Hazlewood claims to support parental rights, but her actions reveal a tendency to undermine those rights through excessive state intervention, insufficient due process protections, a lack of transparency in education, and votes that compromise child safety.
When parental rights are ignored in favor of the state, where does that lead us? Tennessee should learn from other states where parental rights are in jeopardy. California, for example, recognizes gender-affirming care to the extent that if a parent does not support this view, that parent may be investigated for abuse. This could lead to the involvement of child protective services or loss in a custody battle. California allows over-enthusiastic counselors and medical providers in schools, such as Planned Parenthood, to enable children as young as 12 to make medical decisions for themselves regarding birth control, abortion, substance abuse, alcoholism, and gender-affirming care.
If you believe that such policies are a bridge too far for the great state of Tennessee and think it will never happen here, you should know that the Hamilton County School Board has awarded a school-based health system called Centerstone an expanded no-bid contract that includes all Hamilton County schools.
Centerstone's description on their website states they are "a nonprofit health system specializing in mental health and substance use disorder treatments for people of all ages." You can visit their website and see the services offered to teens. Centerstone operates on a quota system and have been given free rein to roam the classrooms of Hamilton County looking for patients. They will be in your child's classroom. This vote occurred on July 18, even while voting was underway for a new School Board and parents and children were on summer vacation.
Where are the reports that prove the efficacy of having private non-profit school-based health systems in classrooms? Does having mental health professionals in the classroom improve educational outcomes or mental health outcomes? Shouldn't we know the answers before continuing and expanding this contract?
These questions become more prominent as parental rights are chipped away. It's time for all of us to stand in the gap for children and families and realize what it means when the state has more rights than the citizens of the state, especially as it relates to our children. Tennessee families deserve leaders who genuinely respect and uphold parental rights.
It’s time to hold our candidates accountable and demand a real commitment to preserving parental rights in Tennessee.
Cindy Fain
* * *
Cindy, for those of us who understand what these new laws are really in place for, you made a terrific endorsement for Patsy Hazlewood. Her opponent is indeed a fine person and I’m sure she appreciates your support.
However, Patsy Hazlewood was not alone in her vote, as the majority voted the same way. Anyone who keeps up what is going on in our state and our country, knows that our children are being victimized on a daily bases. I know you are against that. An interesting and sad statistic is there are more children and women held in slavery (mostly as sex slaves) today than there were blacks held in slavery when the Civil War was fought.
If you have not read these new laws word for word, I understand your consternation. You are supporting a good person, but I believe Patsy Hazlewood has done the work and we need to keep her in place.
J. Pat Williams
* * *
Just for the sake of argument: We're told that "Patsy Hazlewood was not alone in her vote, as the majority voted the same way" on many issues.
The important thing here is that 'the majority' is not on the ballot next week; five-terms veteran Patsy Hazlewood and novice Michele Reneau are on the ballot next week. They may both be qualified for the job; we have a choice.
We're always told that 'Experience counts!' But does experience really make wiser legislators, or just more-deeply-entrenched politicians?
Since there are no term limits on members of the Tennessee General Assembly, it's left up to local voters to insure that nobody ever becomes another career politician.
We have that choice. We have that power. We have that obligation.
Just saying, for the sake of argument.
Larry Cloud
* * *
Parents make or break community. Children learn values from their parents that serve to preserve our civilization. Unfortunately, a few parents who are neglectful and abusive pass on ways of life that are antithetical to our shared values. Good parenting and parents are vitally important.
Abusive and neglectful parents produce children who are at a great risk of becoming abusive and neglectful parents themselves, that is if they survive their childhood. If only there were ways to short circuit the dysfunction. If only there was some system in place that could help families and children in crisis.
Parents have a fundamental, constitutionally-protected right to parent their children. Those rights can only be infringed upon in very limited situations that involve an immediate danger to a child. The U.S. and Tennessee Constitutions ensure due process in those limited circumstances.
More times than not, State involvement in a family crisis results in services being provided to the family as a whole. In the most severe cases, the State may petition a court for permission to take temporary custody of that child or place the child in the temporary custody of a relative until the situation is resolved and it is safe for the child to be in the parent’s home. In that event, parents are entitled to not only have a court hearing, but also have a court-appointed family law lawyer if they cannot afford to hire one on their own. In those situations, the law also requires courts to appoint an experienced family law attorney to represent the child’s best-interests during the process.
In all of those cases, reunification of the family is the goal. Just as soon as is practical and safe, the emergency temporary custody ends and the child is returned to the parent. In even more rare instances, often because of severe drug addiction, the parents either can’t or won’t effectively address their issues to make it safe to parent a child. Only then does the State, guardian ad litem, or someone else ask a court to take the extraordinary step of terminating parental rights so the child will not continue to linger in foster care and can even be adopted into a loving, appropriate home.
A new entity is available to plug the gap abusive and neglectful parents create. Safe Baby Courts exist to provide substantially more help, resources, and encouragement for parents to be able to regain custody of a child. The goal is family reunification once the pathologies the parents have created are remedied. Safe Baby Courts are a tool to help more parents rise to the expectations we have for them.
When families fail, my office is usually called upon to defend parents and children who are accused of committing the unthinkable. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. No one wins when prosecutors and criminal defense lawyers are asked to get involved. I say all that to say directly that Rep. Patsy Hazlewood is not an anti-parental rights legislator. Patsy has taken the time to speak to folks like me intimately involved in the systems our government has created to deal with the effects of poor parenting. She understands the importance of parental rights and the safety of children. And she has worked and succeeded in improving how we deal with parental dysfunction. Let’s keep her on I-24 back and forth to Nashville. We need her up there.
Steve Smith