You may or may not agree with me and that is okay. I want everyone to have their own opinion and not take my word for it. I just wanted this out there as I will be conducting my own investigation into this matter. My children deserve to make sure that their need is met, but that does not mean that someone else will decide what is best for them. I want to be well informed and for me this might be a step in the right direction.
I just watched this movie Government Invasion of Parental Rights.
It talks about how we as parents do not have the right to have access to our children's medical records unless they consent. This is a FEDERAL Law! Here is an excerpt:
The notion that confidentiality is key to many teenagers' willingness to seek sensitive health services such as family planning is well established in law. At the federal level, both Medicaid and Title X of the Public Health Service Act guarantee confidentiality to teenagers seeking family planning services. Under numerous state laws, moreover, minors are entitled to consent on their own to a range of sensitive health services.
You can find more information on this here.
As far as school goes, your child can learn about anything that is deemed okay by the government. This means if they want to teach them about homosexuality, it is okay and you have no say in the matter.
There is also a Treaty called Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN CRC).
Here is the United States stance on the treaty:
The United States government played an active role in the drafting of the Convention and signed it on 16 February 1995, but has not ratified it. Along with Somalia, the United States is one of only two countries in the world which have not ratified the Convention. It has been claimed that opposition to the Convention stems primarily from political and religious conservatives. For example, the Heritage Foundation sees it as threatening national control over domestic policy and the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) argues that the CRC threatens homeschooling. President Barack Obama has described the failure to ratify the Convention as 'embarrassing' and had promised to review this.
Again Here is thoughts on Parental Rights according to how the United States views the treaty:
- "Parties shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child ... the child shall in particular be provided the opportunity to be heard in any judicial and administrative proceedings affecting the child..."
Smolin, otherwise a proponent who urges U.S. reservations to the convention, argues that Article 5, which includes a provision stating that parents "provide, in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child, appropriate direction and guidance in the exercise by the child of the rights recognized in the present Convention", "is couched in language which seems to reduce the parental role to that of giving advice"., pages 81 & 90 The Campaign for U.S. Ratification of the Convention on the Rights of the Child argues that the Convention protects parental responsibility from government interference.
David Smolin argues that Article 29 limits the fundamental right of parents and others to educate children in private school by requiring that all such schools support the principles contained in the United Nations Charter and a list of specific values and ideals. He argues that "Supreme Court case law has provided that a combination of parental rights and religious liberties provide a broader right of parents and private schools to control the values and curriculum of private education free from State interference.
The Campaign for the U.S. Ratification of the CRC provides information rebutting this and other proposed conflicts. The CRC does not outline any specific interference with school curriculums, nor would ratification prevent parents from homeschooling their children. In addition, it recognizes the family “as the fundamental group of society and the natural environment for the growth and well-being of all its members and particularly children…” (Preamble to the CRC) and repeatedly underscores the pivotal role parents play in their children’s lives. (Particularly with regard to Articles 3, 5, 7-10, 14, 18, 22, and 27.1) Under the Convention, parental responsibility is protected from government interference. Article 5 states that Governments should respect the rights, responsibilities, and duties of parents to raise their children. There is no language in the CRC that dictates the manner in which parents are to raise and instruct their children.
Professor Geraldine Van Bueren, the author of the principal textbook on the international rights of the child, and a participant in the drafting of the Convention, has described the ‘best interest of the child standard’ in the treaty as ‘provid[ing] decision and policy makers with the authority to substitute their own decisions for either the child’s or the parents’; 
Take what you will of this, but please make your own decisions. I know that I will be looking into my states laws and that of our government as to what my rights really are.