Transing ChildrenUnidentified Australian gender clinic under review; teenagers require court approval to transition - Judges to oversee transgender teen treatment (The Australian)

submitted by reluctant_commenter from archive.is

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

The unidentified gender clinic appears to be the first in Australia to take the precaution of shifting responsibility from doctors back to judges when it comes to deciding if a minor is mature enough to give informed consent to treatment under the common law Gillick competency rule.

I’d have to go back to the Bell opinion but isn’t the relevant issue that clinicians who had ample opportunity to gather evidence could not provide sufficient evidence that children under 16 were capable of giving informed consent to pharmaceutical gender transition?

It seems that in all practicality, it’s much less about letting a judge decide if a child is capable of giving consent to medical transition but putting a cog in the wheel of the one-way gender train and involving the scrutiny of a hopefully more independent and less personally interested third party. So a judge isn’t going to have unique insights in assessing competence but including a judge in the process does put unscrupulous and more activist type practitioners on notice that they are being watched and they better be cautious, discerning, and meticulous, and not recklessly push kids to medical transition while ignoring obvious red flags in the children’s profile. Because that’s what was actually happening. They were ignoring signs of autism, sexual abuse, sexual orientation distress, etc.

I see this is as very different from the abortion comparison, which is basically the opposite. A minor who wants an abortion but is denied one will have her life more fundamentally and irreversibly changed by being denied the abortion. And then you have to address the tension of holding the position that a minor may not be competent enough to get an abortion but is competent enough to have a child. The abortion comparison is just disingenuous scare tactics as far as I’m concerned.

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

I don't work in medical negligence but if I did then I would be thinking this could be good for business. I can just see the government lawyers adding up potential damages and legal costs and then multiplying them out by the hundreds of kids who get processed through these places.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I have similar thoughts. This is not my area of law, but gender identity nonsense is definitely nesting within my area of law. I have to say though that I laugh when someone with pronouns in their signature still drafts documents saying things like “he or she” that makes it clear they are not true believers.

I’ve only had one incident where some woke recent college grad prepared me an analysis of meal break violations and she used “they” pronouns for everyone regardless of whether they were named Maria or Thomas. I fixed that shit lol.

Btw, are you talking about a circumstance where the government is being sued or is bringing the cases themselves?

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The government operates the hospital's as I understand so they would be the plaintiff. Unless the hospitals are a seperate body. Again not my area. I was only going to point out that there is a lawyer out there thinking that this could potentially make some money.

[–]usehername 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A minor who wants an abortion but is denied one will have her life more fundamentally and irreversibly changed by being denied the abortion.

Yep. They just use these flawed comparisons to other civil rights issues because their arguments don't hold up on their own.

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

I’d have to go back to the Bell opinion but isn’t the relevant issue that clinicians who had ample opportunity to gather evidence could not provide sufficient evidence that children under 16 were capable of giving informed consent to pharmaceutical gender transition?

It seems that in all practicality, it’s much less about letting a judge decide if a child is capable of giving consent to medical transition but putting a cog in the wheel of the one-way gender train and involving the scrutiny of a hopefully more independent and less personally interested third party.

Agreed. This is not the best-written article in regards to clarity. It's the only I've seen on this clinic in Australia, though. Hopefully more information will come out about it.

I see this is as very different from the abortion comparison, which is basically the opposite. A minor who wants an abortion but is denied one will have her life more fundamentally and irreversibly changed by being denied the abortion. And then you have to address the tension of holding the position that a minor may not be competent enough to get an abortion but is competent enough to have a child. The abortion comparison is just disingenuous scare tactics as far as I’m concerned.

Completely agree! I had not before considered the possibility that transgender transitioning might get compared to the abortion debate. The problem is that the two topics have just enough surface-level similarities that any loyal left-voter who doesn't have time or care enough to think it through, may just assume they're the the same.