State - the "parent" with more power

Reading this, by Sheldon Richman, made me feel slightly ill. Several Californian parents objected to their children, pupils at a public school, being asked sexually explicit questions as part of a mental health survey. The children were 7 - 10 year-olds. Reading the questions I would have objected too.

After filing an unsuccessful complaint with the school district, several parents went into federal court for an injunction and damages, charging that the school violated their rights to privacy and “to control the upbringing of their children by introducing them to matters of and relating to sex.” The district and appellate courts rejected those claims. At this writing, the plaintiffs have not decided whether to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The judge decided that the parents "chose" to send their children there (if you can't afford any other option due to taxation it isn't choice) and they "they do not have a fundamental right generally to direct how a public school teaches their child."

Then Judge Reinhardt invoked parens patriae, or "father of the country".

"The questioning can also be justified on the basis of an alternative state interest — namely, parens patriae.... [The] School District’s interest in the mental health of its students falls well within the state’s authority as parens patriae. As such, the School District may legitimately play a role in the care and nurture of children entrusted to them for schooling."

Again, the writer asks, did the parents have any choice but to entrust their children to the state?