Southwest Montana News

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Congressman Matt Rosendale (MT-02) has strongly criticized Montana Child and Family Services (CFS) for their actions in a recent case where a Montana family lost custody of their 14-year-old child after opposing their desire to change genders.

The mother of the 14-year-old child, Krista Kolstad, expressed her frustration with CFS, stating, "We were very clear to the emergency room staff as well as [CFS] that this goes against our values, morals, and our religious beliefs." She further added, "We were told that letting [her] transition and live as a boy was in her 'therapeutic best interest' and because we aren't willing to follow that recommendation, the court gave CFS custody of [her] for six months."

Congressman Rosendale strongly supports the rights of parents in making decisions for their children. He stated, "Parents have control over what happens to their children. Full stop." He criticized CFS for overstepping their boundaries and called for a reevaluation of their childcare policies. According to Rosendale, it is not the state's responsibility to intervene and advocate for life-altering procedures if a loving family, like the Kolstads, disagrees.

The case has sparked a debate about the rights of parents and the role of the state in making decisions regarding children's healthcare. Some argue that parents should have the final say in matters concerning their children's well-being, while others believe that the state should step in to protect the best interests of the child.

Critics of CFS argue that the agency's policies need to be reexamined, particularly when it comes to cases involving minors with mental health issues. They express concerns about the potential for irreversible decisions being made at a young age and without the full consent of the child's parents.

In response to the criticism, CFS has defended its actions, stating that their priority is always the well-being and safety of the child. They assert that they follow established protocols and consult with medical professionals to make decisions in the best interest of the child.

As the debate continues, it remains to be seen whether there will be any changes to CFS policies regarding parental rights and the involvement of the state in cases like these. For now, the Kolstad family continues to fight for the return of their child and for the right to make decisions they believe are in their child's best interest.

In conclusion, Congressman Rosendale's strong criticism of Montana CFS highlights the ongoing debate surrounding parental rights and the role of the state in making decisions for children. The case of the Kolstad family has brought these issues to the forefront, raising questions about the extent to which the state should intervene in matters of healthcare and personal choices for minors.