BREAKING: Vancouver Judge orders surgeon to NOT remove breasts of transgender teen

submitted by purrvana from rebelnews.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

the comments mention BCs Infants Act which includes "Mature Minor Consent" which looks like it was made so children can vaccinate themselves.

A child under the age of 19 is called a “minor”. "Mature minor consent" is the consent a child gives to receive health care after the child has been assessed by a health care provider as having the necessary understanding to give the consent. A health care provider can accept consent from the child and provide the treatment without getting consent from the parent or guardian if the health care provider is sure that the child understands: The need for the treatment, What the treatment involves and, The benefits and risks of having the treatment

A child cannot understand the benefits and risks of transgender hormones and surgery. I don't know that a minor can truly understand what it would mean to induce male-patterned baldness or severe acne. Looking back, I don't think I would have. That's small compared to the unstudied long term effects of hormones and sterilization. There's a reason why doctors are extremely hesitant to sterilize young women even those who are over the age of consent. Even for women with severe endometriosis (aka a non-healthy body part) there are huge risks to consider.

If you get your parent's consent or wait till you're a day over the legal age and go nuts, that's your own problem. It's a medical ethics problem, but its your (or your parents, or a malpractice lawyer's) responsibility. But to let a minor do this and think that they are a "mature minor" who can consent to such severe treatment is abhorrent.

more: https://www.healthlinkbc.ca/healthlinkbc-files/infants-act-mature-minor-consent-and-immunization

[–]forwardback 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

There's a reason why doctors are extremely hesitant to sterilize young women even those who are over the age of consent.

Whoa, hold the phone! This is a Very Bad Not an analogy. You are focusing solely on "young women". Vasectomies on young men are a non-issue for you? You're not implying young women over the age of consent are particularly stupid concerning their reproductive choices, are you? That would be a very sexist thing to do. I submit women's current problems obtaining tubal ligation are a function of increasing misogyny. I had NO problem obtaining one in 1983. And women suffering from endometriosis deserve treatment with informed consent, they don't deserve the brush off that too many have experienced.

Edit format

Edit2. In the same comment you state:

If you get your parent's consent or wait till you're a day over the legal age and go nuts, that's your own problem. It's a medical ethics problem, but its your (or your parents, or a malpractice lawyer's) responsibility.

Your logic, as presented, seems inconsistent to me.

[–]MarkTwainiac 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You are focusing solely on "young women".

The thread is about a teenage girl scheduled to have a cosmetic bilateral mastectomy, so yeah the focus is on young female people.

Vasectomies on young men are a non-issue for you?

Verypeak mentioned sterilization of young women. You then made the leap that she was referring to tubal ligation, which you further jumped to link and equate to vasectomy.

Whilst on the surface these might appear to be analogous procedures, in fact they are not. The only reason a male might want to have vasectomy is to make it impossible to impregnate a female person. Males don't have vasectomies as a way to relieve recurrent or chronic pelvic pain, to deal with recurrent blood loss that has made them anemic, or to stave off a physical condition/experience that might kill them.

By contrast, girls or women might want or need a tubal ligation (or other method of sterilization) to prevent excruciating pain and regular extreme blood loss from heavy periods and ovulation AND to prevent becoming impregnated by a male person, which can lead to situations where the female person's survival is put at risk and her future life options become much narrowed.

Many males have fainted, vomited and experienced extreme anxiety when their female partners were in labor and giving birth. But no male has ever died from labor or childbirth, suffered severe tearing to the genitals or damage to the pelvic nerves, needed to have their vulvas or bellies split open, required a blood transfusion, or suffered a life-threatening infection from/after giving birth.

Similarly, many males have gained weight and gotten moody and broody when their female partners have gone through pregnancies. But as far as I know, as a result of pregnancy no males have experienced physically-caused nausea or vomiting (aka the misnomered "morning sickness"), allergies or hives, high blood pressure, piles, reflux/indigestion, excessive fatigue or insomnia, liver pain and other forms of physical discomfort, pre-eclampsia, gestational diabetes, etc. Nor do males experience the extreme hormonal fluctuations and states that can wreak havoc on women's mental health during pregnancy and in the months/years after giving birth. And after birth, males don't have to deal with issues like engorged breasts, mastitis or urinary incontinence, either.

The experience and consequences of impregnating for males and becoming impregnated for females are so vastly different that they are not even comparable. So you are right: drawing a parallel between vasectomies and procedures on women that can leave us sterile is a bad analogy.

[–]MezozoicGay 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Vasectomies on young men are a non-issue for you?

Let's men sort our own problems on our own, it is not feminism or women's duty to solve men's problems created by men for men.

[–]forwardback 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Like you, I found issue with a commenter's single sentence.

I hoped the commenter would clarify whether 's/he believed young (people over the age of consent) may make poor life-time decisions, or whether "young women over the age of consent" make poor decisions particularly. Women can display misogyny, also. I made no judgement about male choice. I brought up the male sterilization issue to suss out whether sexism was involved.

No thanks for the lecture. I don't need mansplaining.

Edit word

[–]MarkTwainiac 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Who are you accusing of mansplaining?

Real question. I can never figure out how the indenting works on here, LOL.

I brought up the male sterilization issue to suss out whether sexism was involved.

Huh? In response to another poster's comment about

why doctors are extremely hesitant to sterilize young women even those who are over the age of consent

you immediately jumped on her for not mentioning vasectomies on young men, not male sterilization more generally, in a thread about a young female person.

Then you went on to speak exclusively about tubal ligation for female people as if this is the only way of sterilizing females.

You also intimated tubal ligation is a/the treatment for endometriosis. But many sources for decades have said that tubal ligation exacerbates endo and makes it more severe, or often creates scarring and fistulas similar to or characteristic of endo.

Just as tubal ligation is not the only way of sterilizing females, vasectomy is not the only way of sterilizing males.

But the main point is, this a thread about the delay of a double mastectomy being done on a young female person. How on earth is it sexist to fail to mention, center or decry young males who get vasectomies on such a thread?

It's like saying those who post on forums about cystic fibrosis are exclusionary for not talking about lung cancer, diabetes or COPD.

If someone makes a point about air pollution in Mumbai, it doesn't mean they're saying what's happening to the Uyghurs in China is "a non-issue for them."

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

sigh.

Vasectomies on young men would also be an issue, but a different issue. I don't know of any health issues that it would alleviate and I understand it to be a less invasive and perhaps more reversible procedure. This thread is about surgery on females.

If a woman got a tubal litigation or a hysterectomy for whatever reason that is her choice. Notice there is no mention that this practice should be outlawed, that women should not do it, etc. No matter what the reason these are serious surgeries with serious risks. A doctor should not be required to perform a surgery they think will be more harmful than beneficial in the long run. It seems improbable to me that there would be no one willing to do it. If there are none, I hope a woman would go into that field to help other women out.

Whether it's transgender surgery or surgery for a medical issue, it's equally not my problem. Ultimately, I cannot control what someone does when they are a legal adult, even though the pre-frontal cortex isn't fully developed until around age 25. The medical ethics problem is not about endometriosis but refers to how any treatment that is not gender-affirming is considered conversion therapy, resulting in therapists unable to help patients find other potential causes for dysphoria such as sexual abuse, and whether or not a child can comprehend the long term effects of hormones.

[–]forwardback 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I've taken a couple days, and have turned to reread the post and this particular thread. I stll have issue with

There's a reason why doctors are extremely hesitant to sterilize young women even those who are over the age of consent. Even for women with severe endometriosis (aka a non-healthy body part) there are huge risks to consider.

The commenter brought these issues up (young women over the age of consent having their decisions questioned or denied, and endometriosis).

I do not find a possible (I was questioning, hence my comment, rather than assuming) midset of 'young women over the age of consent can't make good life affecting decisions' much better than the TRA's fallacy that transgender minors can and should make life altering decisions on their own.

If this is not the place for questioning, challenges, or debates, no problem.