Gender confusion

[Ken]

You actually wrote the following:

"I don't see any evidence that...hospitals are doing it for 12 year olds as you claimed."

You may not be a fan of the idea and I didn't mean to imply that you were for hormone therapy and chest surgeries, but just because you don't see the evidence, does not mean it isn't happening. There's plenty of evidence around the internet and anecdotally e.g. conversations with medical professionals and teachers. Nellie Bowles highlights once example at Boston Children's Hospital in her newsletter that came out this morning:

One of our country’s most prestigious hospitals for children recently released a series of slick, beautifully produced videos advertising their services for gender non-conforming patients.

The services include “gender affirming hysterectomies,” “chest reconstruction surgery” (aka double mastectomies)—all the classics of the modern pediatrician’s office. They put out videos with doctors saying things like “a good portion of children do know as early as from the womb” and “we see a variety of young children all the way down to ages 2 and 3.” Another video says that “playing with the opposite gender toys” is an indication of transness.

The media is now pretending that this is all overblown. None of this happens to anyone under 18. But the hospital’s own website and research betrays this. The hospital’s website said it would perform vaginoplasties on children beginning at 17-years-old (that’s since been deleted). And there’s this study produced by the hospital staff on the 65 double-mastectomy surgeries they performed on minors, the youngest being 15.

All of this is well within the new recommended practices: The World Professional Association for Transgender Health, the leading advocacy group for transgender surgeries, lowered the recommended age for “gender-affirming” castrations and hysterectomies to 17.

So it is actually age 17 and not age 12 and under without the parent's consent as you and Josh claimed? That is a pretty big difference and It appears I was right.

You also actually said that you think that: "We already have a legal process under which minors can emancipate themselves from control of their parents. Generally it starts at age 16. I think that same standard and process should be applied to medical decisions." Implying that a 16 year old that wants to undergo medical procedures, hormonal or otherwise, to transition; should be able to do so irrespective of their parents' wishes. I am not tilting at imaginary dragons - you actually wrote that and I find such a prospect horrifying.

Whether you find it "horrifying" is frankly irrelevant. The actual question is families and individuals are entitled to make their own medical decisions, or whether the state is entitled to overrule them. And at what age individuals are entitled to make their own life decisions.

I find it "horrifying" that many parents refuse to vaccinate their children against deadly childhood diseases. Does that mean the state should mandate childhood vaccinations and remove children from such families for the purpose of mandatory vaccinations?

Some find it "horrifying" that many parents use corporal punishment and beat their children. Should the state prohibit corporal punishment and jail parents who disobey?

I find it horrifying that many parents feed their children a steady stream of junk calories and produce morbidly obese children. Should we ban fast food and junk food and mandate healthy diets and exercise?

Some people find it horrifying that young children are able to operate dangerous heavy machinery on farms. Should the state intervene and ban children from using farm equipment on their family farms?

Some people find it horrifying that children are able to use deadly firearms. Should the state restrict firearm use to people over age 18?

We live in a free society and parents are entitled to do all of those things whether we like it or not. You might be horrified at the existence of LGBT children but they do, in fact, exist. And their parents and families are entitled to expect that their children are welcomed and treated fairly and with respect in the classroom just like every other child.

[RZehr]

Hey now. I just left my 14 year old alone operating a 50,000 pound Deere 210G excavator. The only thing horrifying was how hard the rocks are there.
Yes, okay, I’m sort of proud of him.

[Ken]

Hey now. I just left my 14 year old alone operating a 50,000 pound Deere 210G excavator. The only thing horrifying was how hard the rocks are there.
Yes, okay, I’m sort of proud of him.

According to national statistics, one child dies in a farm accident every three days in this country and an average of 33 children per day are seriously injured in farm accidents. https://www.marshfieldresearch.org/nccrahs In fact, in Lancaster County alone, there were 41 farm accident deaths in the past decade, many of them children.

That is a far more horrifying pattern of carnage than hormone therapy for LGBT children.

The point is that we live in a free society and parents are free to put their teenagers on tractors or seek the medical care that THEY believe appropriate for their children and it isn't generally the role of the state to intervene. Even though there are always going to be "busybodies" who disagree.

[RZehr]

Hey now. I just left my 14 year old alone operating a 50,000 pound Deere 210G excavator. The only thing horrifying was how hard the rocks are there.
Yes, okay, I’m sort of proud of him.

According to national statistics, one child dies in a farm accident every three days in this country and an average of 33 children per day are seriously injured in farm accidents. https://www.marshfieldresearch.org/nccrahs In fact, in Lancaster County alone, there were 41 farm accident deaths in the past decade, many of them children.

That is a far more horrifying pattern of carnage than hormone therapy for LGBT children.

The point is that we live in a free society and parents are free to put their teenagers on tractors or seek the medical care that THEY believe appropriate for their children and it isn't generally the role of the state to intervene. Even though there are always going to be "busybodies" who disagree.

It’s about the rate though. 100% of children on hormone abuse (it’s not “therapy”) are suffering biological carnage. Which is a much higher percentage than children operating farm accidents.
Additionally, things in life have a risk/reward calculation. Farm equipment has a high, worthwhile, upside that is weighed against the risk. Hormone abuse is 100% downside.

[temporal1]

After such strenuous stretching workouts, i would want Ibuprofin and a nap. Maybe Aleve.

[Josh]

Ken,

The topic at hand is medical providers and schools doing things AGAINST parents’ wishes, down to as young as age 4. Did you read the article and pay attention to any of the sources?

[Ken]

Hey now. I just left my 14 year old alone operating a 50,000 pound Deere 210G excavator. The only thing horrifying was how hard the rocks are there.
Yes, okay, I’m sort of proud of him.

According to national statistics, one child dies in a farm accident every three days in this country and an average of 33 children per day are seriously injured in farm accidents. https://www.marshfieldresearch.org/nccrahs In fact, in Lancaster County alone, there were 41 farm accident deaths in the past decade, many of them children.

That is a far more horrifying pattern of carnage than hormone therapy for LGBT children.

The point is that we live in a free society and parents are free to put their teenagers on tractors or seek the medical care that THEY believe appropriate for their children and it isn't generally the role of the state to intervene. Even though there are always going to be "busybodies" who disagree.

It’s about the rate though. 100% of children on hormone abuse (it’s not “therapy”) are suffering biological carnage. Which is a much higher percentage than children operating farm accidents.
Additionally, things in life have a risk/reward calculation. Farm equipment has a high, worthwhile, upside that is weighed against the risk. Hormone abuse is 100% downside.

The question is, who gets to decide in both of these examples. Parents or the State? People here are talking about "slippery slopes" with respect to LGBT children. Who are a very tiny portion of the population.

The REAL slippery slope is letting the state intervene in medical or lifestyle decisions that in a free society would normally be left up to individuals and families. If you want the state to outlaw hormone therapy for children, don't complain when the state decides to take other medical, educational, or lifestyle decisions out of your hands.

Don't complain when the state comes after your private schools and homeschools to mandate minimum curriculum standards and imposes mandatory standardized testing requirements to ensure that they are being met. A lot of people advocate that very thing.

Don't complain when the State imposes vaccine mandates for children or adults with no exceptions. A lot of people also advocate that very thing.

Don't complain when the State bans children from working on or around heavy machinery on family farms. A lot of people advocate that very thing.

Don't complain when the State prohibits children from using firearms. A lot of people advocate that very thing.

Don't complain when the State prohibits the sale and consumption of red meat. There are people who advocate that very thing for various dietary and environmental reasons.

My point is that I try to have a consistent and coherent viewpoint about the role of the State in a free society. There is a role for state intervention when it comes to public safety, public health, and so forth. Just like there is a role for collective action to build infrastructure and provide public services. But I don't believe that the private medical decisions of LGBT individuals (or their families in the case of minors) meets the threshold for the state to intervene.

[Ken]

Ken,

The topic at hand is medical providers and schools doing things AGAINST parents’ wishes, down to as young as age 4. Did you read the article and pay attention to any of the sources?

I gave you my opinion on this topic. Apparently we share the same opinion that the existing legal process for emancipation of minors is what should be followed in instances when children and their parents are at odds with respect to medical care or any other aspect of their upbringing. Absent some life or death reason for the state to intervene such as parents who are refusing life-saving treatments of some kind. What part of that are you confused about? So yes, I would be opposed to the state providing hormone therapy to 4 year olds against with wishes of the parents if that is, in fact, happening.

[Josh]

Okay. That was the main thrust of the original article.

[Ken]

Okay. That was the main thrust of the original article.

There have been a LOT of articles and topics discussed in this thread. The ORIGINAL article was about prisoners not children.

To give a very broad summary of my views on this topic:

1. Should the state intervene in the private medical decisions of individuals and families in the case of minors? No they should not absent a very high bar for life and death or critical public health reasons and I don't think transgender medical care meets that bar. It seems, however that some states disagree because we are seeing a wave of states like Texas and other southern states that are intervening into this area and overruling the decisions of parents by prohibiting transgender care for minors and threatening felony arrests for parents who disagree. I think that is egregious overreach on the part of the state. And no different from if a state removed children from homes where parents refused vaccination, or investigated families for child abuse based on parental decisions about medical care, homeschooling, corporal punishment, or any other child-rearing subject with which people disagree.

2. On the flip side, should the state intervene to provide transgender medical care (or any type of medical care) to minors against the wishes of the parents? Which is apparently the article that you keep returning to? No they should not absent the formal legal process of emancipation by which older teens can legally become adults and make their own life decisions.

3. When it comes to schools and education. Should public schools provide a welcoming and supportive environment for EVERY student regardless of religion, ethnicity, race, language, disability, or sexual orientation? Yes, they should. Not just on principal but by law. All parents should be able to expect and demand that their child is welcomed and supported in the classroom and not bullied or made to feel unwelcome regardless of their faith, ethnicity, language, disability, etc. And yes this includes LGBT students.

4. And also on the subject of education, should schools or teachers seek to evangelize or convert children into beliefs or lifestyles that go beyond simple civics and respect for others? No they should not, whether it is a Muslim or Mormon teacher seeking to convert her students to Islam or Mormonism, or a LGBT activist teacher seeking to convert her students to become LGBT. Or a staunch Republican or Democratic teacher seeking to promote partisan political positions within the classroom.

Is there anything there that you disagree with?