When Ideology is Enforced by the State: Transgenderism vs Parental Rights
CPS must safeguard kids from abuse, but what if the definition of care and abuse is influenced by a divisive ideology, fracturing the nation? What if the state imposes this on your child?
Todd and Krista Kolstad are Montana residents who, up until recently, lived an everyday life with their 14-year-old daughter, “H” (the parents have requested their child's name be withheld and will hereby be referred to as H). As parents, they have often dealt with emotional issues with their daughter. Not only has H witnessed and received abuse from her birth mother (Krista Kolstad is H’s stepmother). but also has experienced bullying at her school. The Kolstads had ongoing meetings with their daughter's school as well as periodic counseling for H to assist in working out behavioral and emotional issues that the Kolstads say have led their daughter to a pattern of not telling the truth to garner attention.
On August 18, 2023, H texted a friend at school and claimed she was planning on killing herself. Montana police then received a call from the friend, who reported the text message. The police immediately called Krista and Todd to inform them of the report. Krista, while on the phone with the officer, spoke to H and relayed to the officer that she was not attempting suicide. She told the officer that H had behavioral issues and that she had a problem with telling the truth, having been known to lie in the past. She informed the officer that they would take H to the hospital if they felt the threat of suicide was legitimate. This event would later cause a visit from CPS, which in turn resulted in H's separation from Todd and Krista and H was subsequently placed in Canada with her birth mother.
CPS VISITS THE HOME
Hours after the initial call from Montana police, the Kolstads received a visit from CPS agent Baillargeon, who stated that the police contacted her office because the police officer who called the family said he"could not lay eyes on the child or speak to the child directly," which is something he never told the Kolstads when he first called. Krista gave a tour of their home, and CPS reported no issues with the home, remarking that it was clean and not lacking necessities such as food. Within the affidavit, CPS agent Baillargeon reports smelling alcohol on Todd. The affidavit outright claims that Krista was verbally abusive and that Todd was an alcoholic.
It is important to note that neither Todd nor Krista has a history of abuse and that other witnesses close to the Kolstads have denied these claims laid out in the affidavit. The CPS worker interviewed H alone, wherein she proceeded to tell CPS that she took 30 ibuprofen pills and drank toilet bowl cleaner mixed with juice. I spoke with Krista about H’s claim, and she stated that she and Todd did not believe this, as H had no signs of illness and had been in the kitchen the entire time her daughter claimed this occurred, where they kept both the ibuprofen and cleaning agents. Regardless, Todd and Krista immediately agreed to take H to the hospital. H also claims during this interview with CPS that her parents argue constantly; she specifically stated that her father drinks too much and that her stepmother is verbally abusive. Based upon the affidavit, much of what drove CSP's case against Krista and Todd are these unsubstantiated statements made by H, a fourteen-year-old girl with behavioral and emotional issues, while separated from either of her guardians.
THE HOSPITAL
The Kolstads arrived at Frances Mahon Deaconess Hospital (FMDH), where H began telling nurses she was a boy and wished to be called “Leo”. The hospital, without permission from her parents, followed H’s request. When the Kolstads expressed their disapproval of using male pronouns or the name “Leo” at the hospital, staff responded by explaining they would honor the patient’s wishes and that this would not change. Hospital staff also told the Kolstads they would need to speak with the hospital’s lawyer if they wanted to press the issue.
When Krista referenced Montana’s SB99 to hospital staff, which states that the hospital cannot provide gender-affirming care to a minor, the response was that the facility was not providing surgery or hormones to H and that because of this, they were in the "gray area" of the law. During their time at the hospital, the Kolstads were either completely ignored or disrespected by hospital staff. Krista recounted a time when a nurse could be overheard openly discussing the details of what is entailed in "top surgery." During lunch at the hospital, Krista told H to get a healthier meal, to which the nurse sitting with them replied in a loud, mocking tone, "Get this young man a banana split dessert!" and another aide told Krista that she should "be more respectful of H’s wishes to be referred to as male and be called Leo." Krista herself was referred to as "just the stepmother" by staff during their time at FMDH. When the Kolstads brought their concerns to Dr. Millard (the doctor assigned to their daughter), he told the Kolstads to not concern themselves with what the other nurses were saying. But Krista explained during our interview that she felt that the staff undermined them as parents and ignored their parental rights. Krista also felt that H's bad behavior had been encouraged by the actions of the hospital staff. It is also important to note that H's toxicology report came back negative for any signs of cleaning agents or drugs in her system.
SEEKING HELP FOR A TROUBLED CHILD
The Kolstads received a call that H would need psychiatric care. Krista, during our interview, stated that she and her husband agreed and that they felt like their daughter was going through a mental health crisis. CPS agent Baillargeon told the Kolstads that there were six facilities open in Montana and that the Kolstads should apply to all of them, including a facility in Wyoming. Perplexed by this, the Kolstads looked up the laws in Wyoming regarding gender care for those under the age of 18. They could not find any regulations that mirror Bill 99 in Montana, which prohibits any form of gender transitioning for minors. The Kolstads expressed that they would rather their daughter not go to Wyoming for care and wanted to know why they wanted H there and not in any closer facilities in Montana. According to the affidavit, on August 22, CPS agent Baillargeon in a conversation with FMDH doctors, claimed that H was still on a waiting list with all Montana facilities and that the Wyoming facility had the only open beds available at that time. CPS agent Baillargeon then accepted the available bed at the Wyoming Behavioral Institute for H.
The Kolstads received a call from FMDH notifying her of openings in a facility within Montana, then received another call from the hospital stating that a bed in Wyoming was open and that H had to go there instead. Krista and her husband asked for any information about the Wyoming facility and the reason for the change, however, the hospital did not provide them with any information. She remarked that just ten minutes after the call with the hospital, CPS agent Baillargeon showed up at their door with a police officer and served them with papers that stated that they were medically neglecting their child. CPS agent Baillargeon notified the Kolstads of H's transfer to a facility in Wyoming and that CPS would be assisting in the move. All contact between the Kolstads and their daughter at that time was prohibited. The next day, on August 23, H was discharged from the hospital by CPS and taken to Wyoming.
THE SOCIAL TRANSITION OF A MINOR
When asked about losing custody of H, Krista explained, "We wanted questions answered before we were willing to say, Oh yeah, take our kid eight hours away." I asked what CPS meant precisely by "medical care," referencing the papers CPS served to them, and if she felt that this was more about not affirming their child's wish to change her gender. I also asked if that is what the accusation of medically neglecting H had been based on. Krista explained to me that she felt it was the underlying issue that they disagreed with their daughter transitioning into a boy. The Kolstads' suspicion about their daughter transferring to the Wyoming Behavioral Institute proved correct. Krista explained during our interview that while in the youth home, she was being "socially transitioned," where she is called Leo and treated as a boy." She (H) was allowed to buy chest binders; she was allowed to cut her hair to a real masculine haircut." Krista continued, "She's (H) allowed to wear all boys' clothes, including boxers." When sharing their concerns with the group home, Krista noted that the staff told her that this was therapeutic for H and that they would follow their patients' requests. On September 25, the staff at the Wyoming facility told the Kolstads that they would be sending H to Canada to live with her birth mother.
AFTERMATH: THE UNFOLDING LEGAL FIGHT
On January 19, a judge severed the Kolstads’ custody rights and the Kolstads now found themselves in a perilous situation, facing litigation with the state as their daughter remains with her birth mother in Canada. The more significant concern that the Kolstads had was the history of documented child abuse at the hands of H’s birth mother. When the Kolstads expressed concerns over H’s birth mother and even presented a letter from a licensed counselor who worked with the family detailing the abuse, CPS chose not to intervene. H is still in Canada with her birth mother at the time of writing this article. A review hearing is scheduled in the matter for April 15th, 2024 at 11:00 am.
Krista explained to me that they had records of previous visits to counselors and talked to their daughter about why she wanted to be a boy and why she felt that she "wasn't enough." She also explained how they felt unfairly characterized by CPS, who called her husband an alcoholic, stating"We've never had any DUI. They (CPS) are taking the stories that our fourteen-year-old daughter spins and selecting what they want." Krista also responded to the claim of her being verbally abusive, saying, "Where's your proof? Help me understand where this is coming from?" She continued, stating, “Just because you tell a fourteen-year-old no doesn't mean you're verbally abusive." Lending credence to the suspicion that this entire case revolves around not wanting to transition their child, Krista stated that in court, the judge told them that they needed to accept the fact that reunification would not look how they wanted and that H would never live with them because they refuse to acknowledge her new gender identity. I asked what their next move was, and Krista stated that they would go to the Supreme Court if necessary. However, she expressed concerns that by the time they get to that level, H will have received surgeries and hormone blockers, forever changing their daughter.
A court motion to dismiss was recently issued by the county attorney. On February 16, Valley County Attorney Dylan Jensen put forth a motion that asked the judge to leave H with her mother in Canada and dismiss the case against the Kolstads entirely. This sudden motion also came only twelve days after H arrived in Canada and was deemed not suicidal. Governor Gianforte's office suggested that abuse was the sole reason for the state's involvement in the case against the Kolstads. This, however, conflicts with the original allegation of medical neglect made by CPS that led to the Kolstads losing custody. The governor's office issued this official statement regarding the case:
"Currently, as it stands, the Department is involved with a divided family, who disagree in how to address the Youth's statements about her gender identity. The Youth's gender identity has not, and is not, of any concern to the Department. The Department was only involved because the Youth was deemed to be acutely suicidal and in need of care she was not receiving."
A prevalent claim by some who have followed this case is that the state is targeting Todd Kolstad. The source of this claim stems from a current lawsuit that Todd has filed against the Glasgow Police Department over a violent arrest that left Todd with a head injury. One of the officers involved is now suspended, and Todd is not the only one with an ongoing lawsuit against the department. The Kolstads are still involved in a legal battle with the state, not only for their daughter's return but for their own freedom, as they still face charges that could lead to their arrest.
Cases like the Kolstads are becoming more common in what many call "transgender ideology," which continues to escalate, influencing kids, teachers, officials, and even some parents. As we navigate through the initial phases of this cultural transformation, numerous inquiries arise. What lies ahead for individuals, both young and old, who have undergone medical transitioning in the years to come? How will legislation and policies adapt to accommodate these transformations? What shifts will our societal norms and institutions undergo, particularly if there is a readiness to separate children from families who opt against transitioning?
From someone who's been there:
Never, ever, ever, EVER talk to CPS/CFS/DCF or allow them in your home without talking to a lawyer first.
They do not mean well. Once they decide you're the bad guy (and they decide that very early on before getting the whole story), they will do everything they can to take your kid, including lying to you, lying to the police and lying to the courts on their affidavits.
Hundreds of thousands of parents have learned this the hard way, including this poor couple. Don't be another one. They would still have their daughter today if they had only known.
If you see CPS coming, just don't answer the door.
If you don't realize it's them until after you've answered the door, immediately end the conversation and instruct them to contact your lawyer, even if you don't have one (yet).
Never believe a single word they say. They lie all. The. Time.
I strongly advise against trying to deal with it without a lawyer’s advice. They know all the tricks, and there are a lot of tricks that happen in this house of horrors.
As soon as you have a lawyer, notify CPS. They will treat you very, very differently knowing that you have legal representation, and that their usual tricks won't work.
Why do they do this? Because they are mostly young, inexperienced people with no training in investigation or enforcement, and they have convinced themselves that they are White Knights who are Always In The Right. The few that are more experienced are profoundly jaded, because they've seen firsthand the worst things that adults can possibly do to kids.
But there are relatively few with experience, because turnover is huge due to the low pay and awful nature of the work.
Why do they get away with it? Because police and prosecutors and courts prefer to err on the side of caution, where kids are concerned. Their absolute worst nightmare is having a kid seriously harmed under their watch. So they give CPS a LOT of line to run with.
In my state, nearly HALF of all negative findings by CPS that are appealed, are overturned. NEARLY HALF (yes, mine included). That should tell you something about the quality of their investigations.
It absolutely, totally sucks. But that's the way it is, and that's the way it's going to stay, because everyone with the power to change things knows that there are no easy solutions or clear answers, and that all pathways are fraught with the potential for career-ending bad PR.
That was such a crazy frightening story. I wonder if some of this can be traced to kids running the classroom where teachers become afraid lest a crazy parent complain. I knew of a longtime teacher who was placed on leave because an unstable girl claimed the teacher hit her. It was a crazy claim and 70 parents wrote in protest but it didn't matter. Luckily the teacher found another position but the kids lost a dedicated teacher. Mix this with the emphasis on the teachings by Paulo Freire where education must be activism and the Hegelian principles of continuous change to reach a utopia.