Well, Cherry Hill is the latest hot spot in the battle over parental notification policies.

That's where a father of three high school students is suing the state to block a policy aimed at keeping schools from notifying parents of a change in their child's sexuality or gender identity.

As senior correspondent Joanna Gaga's reports, the federal lawsuit comes as more districts hold critical votes about parental rights.

It'd be weird for my son to go in school the first day as a freshman.

Talk to a guidance counselor.

Change his name.

Let's say hypothetically, Danny, from let's just say from Dennis to Danny and not me know it for four, four years.

So Rick Schwartz filed suit against the Cherry Hill School District and New Jersey's Department of Education over its guidance that school districts adopt policies to protect the gender identity or sexuality of a student who hasn't yet come out to their parents.

The legal constitutional basis is that this infringes upon the parent's 14th Amendment substantive due process rights to direct the medical care and health care decisions of their children.

We're contending here that the plaintiff, the parent in this instance, who has three children in Cherry Hill High School, this policy unconstitutionally interferes with his right to direct the care and the upbringing and the medical decisions of his kids.

Short has two older daughters and says his son, who's a freshman, has never indicated that he's transgendered or LGBTQ.

I would know because he would tell me even still, Schwartz concerned that in their early weeks of school, maybe a meeting with his guidance counselor, maybe she would want to change his name or something.

And you have not felt the same concern about your daughters?

No, because, well, never.

I was more or less thinking about it from my son.

I don't know why, I guess because he was a freshman.

Michael Gottesman from the New Jersey public Education Coalition says this case could mirror one recently brought in the Fourth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals in Maryland.

The court ruled that the parents who filed the complaint didn't have standing, and they dismissed the case because the parents didn't have any children who were members of the transgender community.

If the Cherry Hill case that's going before the Third Circuit does move forward, Gottesman points to case law that could be used to defend the state.

While the Supreme Court has established that parents rights are important.

There's an entirely different line of cases that deal specifically with child rights and with the duty of the state and the state's interest in safeguarding the physical and psychological well-being of a minor.

He says that's exactly what the policy that's being challenged policy five, seven, five six is intended to do.

They've also sustained legislation that's aimed at protecting the physical and emotional well-being of youth, even when it's in a sensitive area of constitutionally protected rights.

Tom Stavola intends to argue that children can be harmed psychologically when they live a, quote, double life whereby they conceal their gender identity from their parents.

That rarely leads to a positive psychological outcome, both in the near term and the long term.

But Garden State equality is Christian views, Guarino says.

It's all about timing for young people grappling with their identity.

This is about ensuring that all students have a safe and affirming environment at school.

These policies are to ensure that our young people can grow up in a healthy way and then share and reveal who they are, who they feel comfortable with when the time is right.

Both the state and Cherry Hill have about two weeks left to respond to the lawsuit in court.

I'm Joanna Gagis and Spotlight News.