Ohio Governor's Transgender Decision

[Subduction Zone]

Yes, and you're implicitly claiming that it's rare for gay kids to experience GD. THAT is an extraordinary claim

I just did a search on: "how many gay kids experience gender dysphoria" and I got a LOT of hits. Here's another article that lists five more studies:

Research evidence: most gender dysphoric children grow up to be gay or lesbian

No, I am merely demanding that you support your claims properly. I know that the children that receive those treatments have been rather thoroughly checked out. Do you need that supported? I will do that if requested, but even you seem to know that is true

I haven't "forgotten" that, I've never discussed it. I wish that what you're saying is true, and I'm sure sometimes it is, but often it is not.

While this study was done in the UK it's probably similar to the situation in the US. There has been a huge surge in GD in recent years and medical expertise in this area is rare. So a lot of kids are NOT getting the kind of thorough help you and I wish they were:

Here's a recent, important report from the UK, I direct you to pages 16 and 17:

Interim report – Cass Review

Then why the argument that appears to be mostly a strawman argument?

And there may not have been a "huge surge in GD". That is inaccurate. What there has been is a huge surge in people diagnosed with gender dysphoria. The increase in people diagnosed with a GD or autism or even of certain physical diseases does not necessarily mean that there are more of them. It only means that now we are better able to detect them.

 

[icehorse]

No, I am merely demanding that you support your claims properly.

No you're doing more than that, you're making an implicit claim, and an extraordinary one at that.

know that the children that receive those treatments have been rather thoroughly checked out. Do you need that supported? I will do that if requested, but even you seem to know that is true

Please don't put words in my mouth. Did you read the two pages I suggested you read? They show quite the opposite of what you're claiming.

Then why the argument that appears to be mostly a strawman argument?

How so? The paper I linked to seems to be directly speaking to your claims of thoroughness, no?

And there may not have been a "huge surge in GD". That is inaccurate. What there has been is a huge surge in people diagnosed with gender dysphoria. The increase in people diagnosed with a GD or autism or even of certain physical diseases does not necessarily mean that there are more of them. It only means that now we are better able to detect them.

Sincerely, I think that's a distinction without a difference.

That said, I agree with you, but I think that strengthens my concern. 15 years ago basically no one was getting GAC and gay youth with GD just grew out of it. And that's what ought to happen, instead of pumping them full of irreversibly damaging drugs that will force them into a lifetime of unnecessary medical interventions.

BTW - I know these are charged topics and I appreciate you keeping your end of the discussion mostly civil.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No you're doing more than that, you're making an implicit claim, and an extraordinary one at that.


Please don't put words in my mouth. Did you read the two pages I suggested you read? They show quite the opposite of what you're claiming.



How so? The paper I linked to seems to be directly speaking to your claims of thoroughness, no?



Sincerely, I think that's a distinction without a difference.

That said, I agree with you, but I think that strengthens my concern. 15 years ago basically no one was getting GAC and gay youth with GD just grew out of it. And that's what ought to happen, instead of pumping them full of irreversibly damaging drugs that will force them into a lifetime of unnecessary medical interventions.

BTW - I know these are charged topics and I appreciate you keeping your end of the discussion mostly civil.

Yes, you have one contested paper. Yeehaw!

 

[icehorse]

Yes, you have one contested paper. Yeehaw!

No, I've given you six papers in the last few posts, sigh.

 

[Heyo]

No, I've given you six papers in the last few posts, sigh.

And none of those supports your position.
Even if I take the last one for granted it does support your claim that GD children may grow out of it, with about 2 out of 3. That is an important info for GD kids, parents and health professionals.
But it is not an argument for taking the option away from the 30% of GD kid who stay to be GD by a state law.

 

[Ponder This]

CNN —
Ohio’s Republican governor has vetoed legislation that would have barred transgender youth from receiving gender-affirming care, he said Friday.
Signing the bill would “be saying that the state, the government” knows what’s better for youth than their parents, Gov. Mike DeWine said... -- https://www.cnn.com/politics/ohio-dewine-transgender-house-bill-68/index.html

Thoughts?

Considering that Ohio House Bill 68 makes exceptions for people who actually do need gender affirming care under Section 1 Sec. 3129.04, and considering that Section 2 declares the findings and declarations supporting the legislation (including statements about the conclusions of scientific studies), I don't think the Governor of Ohio made a sufficient or accurate argument for his veto. He said he, "cannot sign this bill as currently written". That suggests that if the bill were written differently, then he would pass it. But then... what does he think ought to be written differently?

 

[metis]

But the professionals are under a LOT of political pressure, and mostly not from politicians, but from activists.

What a disingenuous and convenient excuse for you to have.

Some has to make a decision one way or the other: either the government(s) or the parents in consultation with medical personnel. I'll take the latter-- how about you? It really is this simple.

 

[icehorse]

And none of those supports your position.
Even if I take the last one for granted it does support your claim that GD children may grow out of it, with about 2 out of 3. That is an important info for GD kids, parents and health professionals.
But it is not an argument for taking the option away from the 30% of GD kid who stay to be GD by a state law.

I'm not arguing about the governor's actions, I'm criticizing GAC.

 

[icehorse]

What a disingenuous and convenient excuse for you to have.

Some has to make a decision one way or the other: either the government(s) or the parents in consultation with medical personnel. I'll take the latter-- how about you? It really is this simple.

I'm not arguing that the government should decide, I'm criticizing GAC.

 

[metis]

I'm not arguing that the government should decide, I'm criticizing GAC.

Then let parents and their doctors decide. Problem solved.

 

[icehorse]

What a disingenuous and convenient excuse for you to have.

Your ignorance on this topic leaves you in a poor position to call me disingenuous.

I guess you're a member of the "since I'm not aware of it, it's not happening" brigade.

 

[icehorse]

Then let parents and their doctors decide. Problem solved.

How about recognizing that the protocol is seriously flawed, and get a group of unbiased experts to establish a less dangerous one?

This protocol is being abandoned across Europe, and we all know Europe's healthcare tends to be far better than ours. The current protocol was HEAVILY influenced by trans activists, just do a little bit of research into WPATH.

 

[metis]

Your ignorance on this topic leaves you in a poor position to call me disingenuous.

I guess you're a member of the "since I'm not aware of it, it's not happening" brigade.

Well, at least I'm happy not to be a supposed know-it-all. If you got over yourself and let parents and their medical personnel make decisions, I think that would be quite fair.

BTW, there's been a fair number of articles dealing with sexuality in "Scientific American" over the last couple of years, so maybe you should consider reading some.

 

[icehorse]

Well, at least I'm happy not to be a supposed know-it-all. If you got over yourself and let parents and their medical personnel make decisions, I think that would be quite fair.

BTW, there's been a fair number of articles dealing with sexuality in "Scientific American" over the last couple of years, so maybe you should consider reading some.

Across several threads in the last weeks I've provided many links. As an example, I've provided two separate links to articles and videos by Dr. Kaltiala, from Finland. She has led Finland's GD healthcare team and she has been on the front lines of the explosion of kids seeking GD care. She used the Dutch protocol for years, found it to be ineffective, and has abandoned it, as has Finland.

The links have been there for you to read.

==

I find it interesting that you're being made aware that they might be unnecessarily sterilizing gay kids, and your concern is that I come across as a "know it all". Interesting set of priorities you seem to have

 

[Shadow Wolf]

And none of those supports your position.
Even if I take the last one for granted it does support your claim that GD children may grow out of it, with about 2 out of 3. That is an important info for GD kids, parents and health professionals.
But it is not an argument for taking the option away from the 30% of GD kid who stay to be GD by a state law.

Better reason to actually learn how gender affirming care works because you cannot go to a doctor and just get one. It takes time, and it takes time because it was decided decades ago that's the best way to go about it and not rush things and make sure.

 

[metis]

Across several threads in the last weeks I've provided many links. As an example, I've provided two separate links to articles and videos by Dr. Kaltiala, from Finland. She has led Finland's GD healthcare team and she has been on the front lines of the explosion of kids seeking GD care. She used the Dutch protocol for years, found it to be ineffective, and has abandoned it, as has Finland.

The links have been there for you to read.

==

I find it interesting that you're being made aware that they might be unnecessarily sterilizing gay kids, and your concern is that I come across as a "know it all". Interesting set of priorities you seem to have

Again, the simple question is "Who will make the medical/psychological decisions for the teen: a governmental body or the teen and his/her parents under advisement of medical personnel?". Yes, it really is that simple.

 

[icehorse]

Again, the simple question is "Who will make the medical/psychological decisions for the teen: a governmental body or the teen and his/her parents under advisement of medical personnel?". Yes, it really is that simple.

And again:

How about recognizing that the current GAC protocol is seriously flawed, and get a group of unbiased experts to establish a less dangerous one?

This protocol is being abandoned across Europe, and we all know Europe's healthcare tends to be far better than ours. The current protocol was HEAVILY influenced by trans activists, just do a little bit of research into WPATH.

 

[libre]

How about recognizing that the current GAC protocol is seriously flawed, and get a group of unbiased experts to establish a less dangerous one?

Do you expect the government to determine which scientists are unbiased on this subject?
If your claims are true (which I don't believe you or I have the requisite expertise to determine,) they should be argued in the medical field and in research, not strong handed in government.

Do you agree? or do you support the law mentioned in OP?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Oh the irony! You don't have any data showing that irreversible drugs and/or surgeries are any more effective than talk therapy, and you talk about not hurting kids????? Wow!

Why do you assume all gender affirming care must involve drugs and surgeries?


“First I’d just like to make sure that we clarify the different types of transitions. Because we’ve talked about, there’s no medical intervention. So, Avery socially transitioned at the age of four. So it was just name, pronouns, hair, saying daughter instead of son. Before we did that kind of affirmation, Avery was depressed, talked about death all the time, and actually tried to jump out of our car – at four. She just could not handle it. Doing that kind of social affirmation gave us a kid who smiled again, who said ‘mommy I love you’ all the time. We have a whole year, between three and four, where we don’t have a photo of Avery smiling. And that changed just through social affirmation. So when people call us child abusers and say it’s horrible to do this, they don’t understand the realities.”

“It was completely out of my realm of understanding. I was very conservative, evangelical, you know, Southern Baptist, GOP. But at the age of four, Avery said, ‘Mom you think that I am a boy, but I’m a girl. I’m a girl on the inside,’ and very directly told us. We had no idea what that meant. It was out of our thinking. We thought maybe we have a confused gay boy… We wanted to ask questions. We talked to doctors. We went to the endocrinologists just to check the XX, XYs, all the things. And we had to come to understand that our child knew who they were. And mind you they’re 15 now. This was more than a decade ago. They weren’t influenced by TikTok. They weren’t on Facebook.”

– Debi Jackson, PTEC Parent

• "Gender transition is a personal process that can include changing clothes, names, and hairstyles to fit a person’s gender identity.
  • Some people take medication, and some do not; some adults have surgeries, and others do not. How someone transitions is their choice, to be made with their family and their doctor.
  • Therapists, parents and health care providers work together to determine which changes to make at a given time are in the best interest of the child.
  • In most young children, this care can be entirely social. This means:
    • New name
    • New hairstyle
    • New clothing
    • None of this care is irreversible."

ICYMI: Watch Jon Stewart Debunk Anti-Trans Myths about Gender…

Watch Jon Stewart’s Take Down Here For Free

www.hrc.org

 

[icehorse]

Do you expect the government to determine which scientists are unbiased on this subject?
If your claims are true (which I don't believe you or I have the requisite expertise to determine,) they should be argued in the medical field and in research, not strong handed in government.

Do you agree? or do you support the law mentioned in OP?

That's a false dilemma. So setting that aside, it's a hard question. In general I'm skeptical of making government bigger. But I also think we ought to have a centralized medical authority that is not driven by business goals. Many countries in Europe have such central medical authorities and they seem to be advantageous.

As for my expertise - that's why I've provided so many links to experts