Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
It's sick to allow minors to undergo permanent procedures that they may regret later on.
Minors are not typically noted for accurate long term decision making or having foresight.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
California AB 957 authorizes courts to take transgender kids away from parents.
- Thread starter Shaul
- Start date
Minors are not typically noted for accurate long term decision making or having foresight.
Friend of Mara
Active Member
Neither are republican lawmakers but here we are.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Yea. A huge mess whenever Democrats are in charge.
The people who are freaking are those who imagine themselves as righteous soldiers in "The Culture War" they are fighting. If their heads explode, they don't get a Purple Heart. Give them a purple fart.
"You’re suggesting that 'protecting children' means overriding the recommendations of the American Medical Association, The American Association of Pediatrics, the Endocrine Society..." -- Jon Stewart interview with Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge
Last edited:
I often see this claim being made. But puberty blockers aren’t permanent. Hormone therapy isn’t either.
Permanent surgery is typically performed on minors that have intersex conditions or are born with hermaphroditism though. At birth even. Has been for decades now.
Whether that is always medically necessary, I can’t say for sure. Not a doctor. But I’ve been seeing a few complaints against such practices from time to time
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Way I see it, if it isn't permanent and reversible, then there should be no issue with minors who wish it.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I didn't know that. My blood is boiling now.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Amd yet you're making a stink and fuss over it.
VoidCat
Use any and all pronouns including neo and it/it's
Look up Ashley X. No puberty blockers but estrogen and a hysterectomy and removal of breast tissues were done on a severely disabled 6 year old. To speed up puberty so she wouldn't be as tall as an adult. Im not saying the treatment to her was good or bad tho I do know most of the treatment did not treat a medical need rather it was done to make things easier for the parents and to hopefully make life easier for Ashley.
Agreed
Hmm. Just recently in my country there was some huge investigation into the disability services by the Royal Commission or whoever
Among the complaints were moves to impair, influence or otherwise severely interfere with fertility decisions of those in care. Perhaps even something like the removal of body parts of those severely disabled, which were not wholly consented to.
Not sure what’s going to happen in the future. But I suspect there are ongoing lawsuits, at the very least
I've known a few men who have had these drugs to treat prostate cancer. They would all tell you that these drugs are NOT overwhelming safe. Although I suppose we could dig in a little bit on what exactly "safe" might mean in this context. So you were a nurse, my major at university was molecular biology. If we zoom out a bit, and pretended we were new to the idea of puberty blockers, I hope you would agree that our intuition would NOT be that drugs that have such profound affects on biological development during puberty would be "safe and reversible". To me, THAT is an extraordinary claim. To me that claim of safety is the one that requires extraordinary evidence.
As for the idea of "guidance of a doctor". Ideas like this are common in these discussions. I would say a few things:
- OTOH, most posters acknowledge that the healthcare system is massively flawed. We need look no further than the recent, MASSIVE opioid crisis to see evidence of a heavily flawed, often advocate driven system.
- We must remember that the AMA is mostly a professional organization, not a medical one. Unlike many countries in Europe, the US does not have a central medical authority. Instead, small, specialized groups create healthcare standards and protocols for their area of speciality, and the AMA and doctors outside of that special area tend to rubber stamp what other specialty groups advise.
All this to say that the reality is that there are a few specialized groups driving healthcare standards for trans people. And these groups ARE advocate groups, not strictly medical groups. WPATH is a key example of such a group.
- Next, I think we all have to acknowledge that the number of kids with GD has exploded in recent years. It would be wonderful if the healthcare system was ready to handle this massive spike, but they are not. So another reality is that the kind of thoughtfulness, expertise, and care we all would agree would be great to have, frequently come up short. Often, kids are raced through a scant few talk therapy sessions and then put on these drugs.
So on the one hand many posters acknowledge the flaws in our healthcare system, but somehow on the new, complex, evolving topic of GD, somehow the doctors should be trusted without question???
I think the reality is that "trans" is a very political, hot-potato topic, not just another slam-dunk set of medical interventions.
Because of these factors, I think we need to step back, use a little of our common sense (and training when we have it), see which claims really are the extraordinary ones, and demand excellent evidence. (Along these lines, I've heard many posters echo the same phrase: "hormones and puberty blockers for youths, saves lives". More and more, the few studies that attempted to provide evidence for this extraordinary claim are not standing up to close scrutiny, and a growing number of countries with superior healthcare systems are stopping or sharply curtailing the use of these drugs for GD.)
This is all a very complex set of interleaving claims. I guess my summary thoughts are this:
- Sometimes youths grow out of GD naturally
- Sometimes the drugs in question cause irreversible harm and life time dependencies
- The evidence that these drugs "save lives" is far from rock solid.
- An over arching principle in medicine is "first, do no harm"
Given all this, I continue to think that minors should not be given these drugs.
@Friend of Mara - IMO we're having a really civil, thoughtful debate / discussion. Again, you have my thanks.
With that said, we're both sort of moving forward, and I'd say it's true we've both left a few points unsettled. I'm fine, but if you feel I haven't addressed all of your points well enough, there is no harm intended, and I'd be happy to go back and answer any of your points that you'd like me to!
We're largely agreed on the above.
I'm happy to hear your thoughts on separating the people from the politics, hooray!
From my persective, the dubious ideas usually seem politically motivated. Here are just a few ideas that I think are dubious, and that probably end up hurting trans people more than helping them:
- Allowing trans women in women's safe spaces.
- Allowing trans women to compete in women's sports.
- To demand that we all lie and agree that a "trans woman is a woman"
We need to find solutions that help trans people without infringing on the safety, rights, and privacy of women.
I don't think it's correct to say that "nobody bats an eye". These other conditions are fundamentally different that GD, so I think - to put it simply - you're making an apples to oranges comparison.
I bit of a strawman there. Please see my post #112. thanks
Friend of Mara
Active Member
My thoughts overall are yes I think we should have better healthcare and access to healthcare. For sure. However the lack of healthcare that we currently have feels like a poor excuse to further remove healthcare from those that do receive it. I haven't seen strong evidence that kids are just being thrown on puberty blockers. In fact the opposite seems to be true that it is becoming rather difficult in most states to get access to that care. Not to mention the vast majority of parents do not opt for that care in the first place. And fewer still of the willing ones have the financial stability in the states to move forward with it. All of the sources that say that we are racing to put kids on drugs are usually from slanted sites that are already anti-trans to begin with. I haven't seen many neutral sites state such things.
I am for talk therapy. I am for a set number of talk therapy. Two years is a bit much as some regulators have suggested. And not at all till 18 seems dumb because then its a not at all situation. We wouldn't need the puberty blockers at that point. The damage is done. And damage will be done.
To gatekeep all of the children is silly and overreactive at best. To have the kids best interest in mind and want a robust net to make sure that we have adequate medical attention and talk therapy involved prior to medication I am all for as should every reasonable person.
-Sometimes. Not all the time. I still stand by regret rates vs first touch to full transition tracking. Especially since that is what hormone blockers are meant to assist with.
-Only in extreme circumstances and usually only with preexisting medical conditions that are screened for by prior to authorization by doctors. Otherwise they do not have permanent effects.
-I disagree. Heartily. We have the suicide numbers.
-Agreed.
Given this I have come to the opposite conclusion.
I try not to be personal when I can. And it seems so have you so the debate is mostly about the evidence at hand. I enjoy that!
There haven't been any issues with allowing trans women in women's safe spaces. If by safe spaces you mean bathrooms. The danger is exponentially higher for trans women to be forced to use "male spaces". The data is just in on this and it simply doesn't support the argument that trans women are predators.
I'll be honest. I don't care about trans women in sports. Some do. I really don't. I won't even argue about it. Should they be allowed? I don't know. Probably in some sports but not others. The actual answer is probably messy. If a kid was on hormone blockers and never received a male puberty ever in her life and only ever was given estrogen then philologically they would have zero advantage over cis women. But those that have retain some aspects. But then so do cis women who naturally have high testosterone? What about big tall women? Who knows. ITs just a big old mess and I really do not give a flying carp about sports to begin with. Lets start with getting trans people treated like people in all 50 states first then we can tackle something unimportant like women's basketball.
Trans women are women. So when finding the safety, rights and privacy of women theirs is included in that.
It's not fully reversible. Certainly not hormone therapy and especially after having puberty blockers before that, for either sex. Whoever says that is misinformed.
To be clear, I agree that the trans suicide rate is a huge problem. But the question at hand is whether extreme interventions actually reduce those numbers. That's a tough thing to prove. I would be happy to read any studies you know of that somehow "prove" that lives are saved. I mean how would you even go about proving that?
Here's where I have to strongly disagree. You're a nurse correct? Aren't there any number of medical situations for which understanding the biological sex of the patient is crucial?
And isn't it also the case that a woman ought to have the right to receive healthcare from a biological female if they want to?
And of course the most obvious, how are you trying to forcibly alter the english language to make "trans women are women" be a true statement?
There are more arguments, but we can start with those.
Again, not easy numbers to put together. But it seems to me that this IS a very political topic, so most any source we point to is going to be advocating on one side or another. So again I think we have to rely on evidence and common sense. Here's a link to one company that appears pretty up font about expediting drugs:
Plume – Gender-Affirming Hormone Therapy From Anywhere
Plume offers quality, accessible, and convenient gender-affirming hormone replacement therapy for the transgender community.
getplume.co
(There are many more like this)
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I was wondering about that. I regard you as an authority on the matter as you went through the process yourself.
Yup. It will be 10 years on testosterone next year. No going back from that. Hormones are extremely powerful things.
Friend of Mara
Active Member
I can provide any number of studies that show positive improvement in the mental health outcomes from trans youth yes. Extrapolate from that if it was life saving or not.
Sure. And they likely would have that right. Though I don't think I have ever come across a time where I thought a man was not capable of giving care as a woman would just because they were a man. You are either trained medically or not. I don't see how the existence of trans women stops them from seeking cis women providers. If anything making trans women more visible and accepted makes it easier since the alternative is that trans women will live in stealth and you won't ever know who is trans or not.
I would argue that it doesn't effectively change the English language at all. While I am no fan of her I recall a point Blair White once made in an interview with Ben Shapiro. If she was sitting in a restaurant and he needed to tell the waiter that he needed to sit with her how would he phrase it. Would he say "That man over there." Or would he say "That woman." Which actually makes sense linguistically? Even he relented that obviously he would have referred to her as a man in that instance.
Which comes back to the perception of trans people now. No one ever talks about trans men in this. Only ever in the instance of young girls transitioning and attempting to stop them before they "ruin" themselves. A thing that I have always found weirdly creepy and sexually charged in a way it shouldn't be since we are often talking about underage girls. I digress. But trans men pass incredibly well. The picture in many people's head is a Rocky Horror Picture Show esque parody of a woman on display rather than a genuine woman. The trans women that are beautiful and pass I would imagine most people have no problem using the correct pronouns. But to the "ugly" non-passing trans women there is nothing but scorn, hatred and suspicion. And again the trans men are completely left unthought of.
Look up Buck Angel. Do you want him in the bathroom with your daughter? Is that what will make you feel safe? It was a good few years back but a trans boy in high school wanted to wrestle with the boys but they said no wrestle with the girls. So he crushed it and went undefeated and broke records because he was essentially a man competing in the women's league un-challenged.
They are still beholden to the standards of care. I have no problems with adults who are sure of their identities getting access to medication as quickly as possible. For trans women did you know estrogen is not a controlled substance? You can just ....buy it. Online. No doctor note needed. Same with androgen blockers. However its dangerous if you don't get bloodwork done.Again, not easy numbers to put together. But it seems to me that this IS a very political topic, so most any source we point to is going to be advocating on one side or another. So again I think we have to rely on evidence and common sense. Here's a link to one company that appears pretty up font about expediting drugs:
Plume – Gender-Affirming Hormone Therapy From Anywhere
Plume offers quality, accessible, and convenient gender-affirming hormone replacement therapy for the transgender community.
(There are many more like this)
So right now physically there is nothing stopping you from going on amazon and buying everything you need to trans your kid at home. Well unless you wanted to trans your daughter to a son because Testosterone is a controlled substance but that isn't even because of trans people. Its because of sports medicine shenanigans.
IF they are rushing 12 year olds by giving them androgen blockers after 1 visit I will agree with you it should not be done. But I will not agree with you that after due diligence is put in that they should be barred till they are 18 no matter what.