It absolutely should be investigated. Honestly? The best solution here would be to have an independent guardian: Texas “investigating” mom turning 7 year old boy into a girl hotair.com/archives/jazz-…
The problem with these cases is two-fold:
1. We have no idea if the mother or doctor in question are competent. That hasn't really been determined.
2. This does a lot to damage the case of those adults who are truly transgendered, for good reasons of their own.
1. We have no idea if the mother or doctor in question are competent. That hasn't really been determined.
2. This does a lot to damage the case of those adults who are truly transgendered, for good reasons of their own.
On #2, I 100% support the rights of adults (and to some extent, minors that have reached sexual maturity) to make these decisions. These are very tough, personal decisions, and should be relegated to individuals.
The problem here is there really is no objective way to determine if a 3 year old (That is how hold the child was when the mother determined he was female!) is making any educated choice about their own self.
Furthermore, the risk of damage to the child at this age is FAR greater than the risk of waiting a few years before determining any course of action.
As a doctor, this entire case disturbs me greatly. The doctor in question has NO OBJECTIVE STANDARD to determine the sex of this child. None. Zero. It is all pseudoscience.
This is FAR different than an older child or adult saying, after sexual maturity or close to it, that they have issue with their gender. They then are making a personal choice, and a relatively educated choice. That takes the decision making out of the hands of doctors.
Conflating the two issues (the rights of a minor child, versus the rights of those adults who state they are transgendered) does a great disservice to both populations.
After watching this, anyone with a brain has to be concerned.
Also, this case doesn't even seem to support the world standards on transgedered; Standards of Care issued by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (Wpath) actually itself clearly states otherwise!
wpath.org/media/cms/Docu…
wpath.org/media/cms/Docu…
"An important difference between gender dysphoric children and adolescents is in the proportion for whom dysphoria persists into adulthood. Gender dysphoria during childhood does not inevitably continue into adulthood."
REPEAT: GENDER DYSPHORIA DURING CHILDHOOD DOES NOT INEVITABLY CONTINUE INTO ADULTHOOD.
"Rather, in follow-up studies of prepubertal children (mainly boys) who were referred to clinics for assessment of gender dysphoria, the dysphoria persisted into adulthood for only 6–23% of children."
"Boys in these studies were more likely to identify as gay in adulthood than as transgender. Newer studies, also including girls, showed a 12–27% persistence rate of gender dysphoria into adulthood."
My point about older children:
"In contrast, the persistence of gender dysphoria into adulthood appears to be much higher for adolescents."
"In contrast, the persistence of gender dysphoria into adulthood appears to be much higher for adolescents."
"Another difference between gender dysphoric children and adolescents is the sex ratios for each age group...gender dysphoric children under age 12, the male/female ratio ranges from 6:1 to 3:1....gender dysphoric adolescents older
than age 12, male/female ratio is close to 1:1."
than age 12, male/female ratio is close to 1:1."
KEY POINT: "In most children, gender dysphoria will disappear before, or early in, puberty. However, in some
children these feelings will intensify and body aversion will develop or increase as they become adolescents and their secondary sex characteristics develop."
children these feelings will intensify and body aversion will develop or increase as they become adolescents and their secondary sex characteristics develop."
Again, I think once a child reaches adolescence, this is a different debate. And we should separate that debate (which has its own data, science, and complications) from this one...where we have a child that is NO WHERE NEAR SEXUAL MATURITY.
Unalterably changing the course of this child's life, based on something that is SCIENTIFICALLY NOT MORE THAN AN EDUCATED GUESS is immoral, unethical, and medical malpractice.
Remember: "Some of these interventions are irreversible. People respond differently to cross-sex hormones, but changes in vocal pitch, body hair, and other physical characteristics, such as the development of breast tissue, can become permanent..."
"... Kids who go on puberty blockers and then on cross-sex hormones may not be able to have biological children. Surgical interventions can sometimes be reversed with further surgeries, but often with disappointing results."
These are major risks to this therapy.
These are major risks to this therapy.
In the end? We need to be very sympathetic to these parents and children. But we also shouldn't blindly support pro-active measures that have little to no supporting data, and have major side effect and risks that will follow the child for their entire lifetimes.
