A New Jersey father is suing his daughter’s school for allegedly helping her “transition” to the opposite gender without his knowledge.
This case is similar to many that have cropped up over recent years after several school districts were exposed for having policies allowing teachers and school staff to keep parents in the dark about their children’s gender confusion.
Christin Heaps alleges in his lawsuit that the Delaware Valley Regional High School Board of Education socially transitioned his daughter. Social transitions involve changing one’s pronouns, names, and clothing to reflect that of the opposite gender.
These actions violated Heaps’ constitutional rights as a parent, the lawsuit argues.
The lawsuit alleges that school counselor Ashley Miranda began helping Heaps’ daughter socially transition after attending a meeting of the SAFE club, which is aimed at creating safe spaces for LGBTQ students. The daughter allegedly stated that she wished to be a boy.
It's insane that this isn't just common sense ...
— The🐰FOO (@PolitiBunny) July 11, 2025
Independent Women’s Law Center & a coalition of 38 other amici filed an amicus brief in Christin Heaps v. Delaware Valley Regional High School Board of Education, supporting a parent’s right to raise a child according to the… https://t.co/GdH9qv3eqp
“Miranda immediately affirmed Jane’s expressed identity and began to facilitate Jane’s social transition,” the lawsuit reads, referring to Heaps’ daughter as “Jane.” The complaint alleges that the counselor did this without consulting Jane’s medical history or asking whether she was receiving therapy. The father had placed her in therapeutic care after the death of her mother.
However, it didn’t stop there. The counselor allegedly informed school staff members that Jane had changed her name and pronouns and instructed them to keep this from her father. Heaps did not find out about his daughter’s issues until another parent referred to her by her new name.
“Only after Mr. Doe inquired of the parent why the parent was calling Jane by a boy’s name, the parent explained to Mr. Doe that Jane was being called by such name at school since she was being socially transitioned,” the lawsuit explains.
Jane had been diagnosed with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Unspecified Mental Disorder (UMD). She was receiving therapy for gender confusion, depression, and anxiety. The lawsuit noted that “such social transitioning was causing depression and anxiety in Mr. Doe’s daughter and otherwise was interfering with the therapy that pre-existed the daughter’s social transitioning in school.”
The lawsuit further noted that the counselor “indicated that she was not aware of Jane’s ADHD and UMD diagnoses or her past trauma when she facilitated Jane’s social transition.” Miranda also stated that she was unaware that Jane was receiving therapy for her other conditions.
The lawsuit argues that the school district and the State of New Jersey violated Heaps’ rights under the 14th Amendment. The government’s policy “constitute deliberate interference with Mr. Doe’s fundamental constitutional right to direct the upbringing of his child.”
Heaps is now homeschooling his daughter, who no longer wishes to transition to the opposite sex. The lawsuit aims to strike down the state policy requiring schools to conceal children’s issues with gender dysphoria from parents.
Predictably, the progressive crowd isn’t happy about the lawsuit. Aaran Potenza, a policy consultant for LGBTQ rights group Garden State Equality, told the New Jersey Monitor that this development is “deeply troubling.”
“You’re talking about kids who are vulnerable, coming out to a trusted adult about something very personal, telling that trusted adult, ‘I don’t feel safe around this issue with my family. I’m not ready to come out to my family,’” he said.
A lower court ruled against Heaps’ original lawsuit. But now, he is appealing the ruling with the help of Alliance Defending Freedom.
Progressives adhere to the notion that children belong to the state, not to their parents. This is why they have no problem using government-run schools to force their ideology on students without the knowledge and consent of parents. Hopefully, the appeals court will make the right ruling. Government-run schools have no business trying to usurp the role of parents to promote far-leftist ideas on sexuality and gender.