Parents Rights On Transgender Policy

[Debater Slayer]

In your opinion, which ignores what I stated and to that the extent is sufficient to the level of conversation.

What you've stated is also your opinion. Pointing out that I've posted an opinion doesn't provide any extra information or add anything to the arguments.

The rhetoric from both sides of the debate. I know its very convenient to reduce everything to "Republicans this" and "Democrats that". But neither party is the the totality of either side of the debate, they're just the largest opportunists using tactics to escalate issues for their own purposes. Neither is championing either side. The hysteria and radicalism is from the masses, egged on in part by either party, sure. But even without either parties chiming in, the divide would exist.

The vast majority of the efforts to ban and protect gender-affirming care have come from the GOP and the Democratic Party, respectively. This is why I mentioned the former. Even many of the people who support neither party vote for either in elections because they know that, realistically, their vote will only have a tangible effect if it goes to either party.

I don't know what you mean by "hysteria" and "radicalism," and given the arguments I've read in this thread, I'm not sure we would agree on what either was in relation to this subject. This is another thing I've noticed in some of the arguments attacking "both sides": detailed, thoughtful arguments are sometimes dismissed as "hysteria," "radicalism," or any other stigmatizing adjective that aims to attribute the arguments to emotion and fanaticism rather than genuine thought.

I don't find such emotionally charged dismissal conducive to good-faith discussion, nor am I interested in having to unpick exactly what a person means every time they label a position with which they disagree as "hysteria" or "radicalism." If an argument is unevidenced or logically incoherent, there should be no need to use a loaded term like "hysteria" to sideline it.

Which goes against federal laws as I noted in my original post and creates a bigger issue than the one it presumably intends to fix. It's a " fix" that is not new, the same thing popped up in the 1980s and 1990s with whether parents should be informed of schools intent to teach sex ed and make birth control available and extended to whether women's clinics should perform abortions for minors without parental consent.

I don't see this as equivalent to the other situations you listed. Sex ed is a part of a school curriculum, not something that telling a parent about could unnecessarily endanger a child if the parent is abusive. Birth control and abortion are physical and have tangible effects on the child's health. A claim from a child that they identify as another gender has no physical health effect by itself, is not part of the school's curriculum, and may or may not be temporary.

Also, I'm not appealing to federal law here. Federal law banned same-sex marriage just a decade ago, and it used to champion racial segregation. It changes according to people's evolving understanding and needs, not the other way around. I'm much more interested in whether a position is harmful or beneficial on its own merits.

They are already required to report things they are suspect or have found evidence gor, why would this be diffrrent?

I believe what I've said above addresses this.

And why not make sure the child is genuinely exhibiting likely dysphoria? That would reduce the risk of making something an issue.

I agree that the school should have the child see a professional to assess them for gender dysphoria, if that's what you mean, but how that could be done is a separate and complicated topic. There would also be the question of how much the parents should know and be involved in if that happened.

I don't recall reading that sentiment, remind me what post # that was?

It was post #17.

Also, I would be interested to know your thoughts on this post, because I believe it directly addresses most of the points we're discussing:

Hi. Trans person here. Imma just share my perspective then unwatch this thread im not in a good mental space to talk deeply about this issue. It's not always safe to talk to parents about being trans. It really ain't. I am not trying to say most parents wouldn't be supportive or would be horrible to their kids. But if they were obviously supportive likely the kid would have already told the parent. I mean thats what most kids would do if they trans they tell folk they trust. That way they can explore it comfortably without being ridiculed for it. I've seen lots of bad things happen from kids being outted as lgbt to unaccepting parents. Suicide, disownment, a classmate being placed into conversion therapy... All 3 I've had happen to fellow lgbt classmates growing up and in one disownment case the person was a lesbian that was kicked out her home for bringing another girl to a dance. In a more perfect world parents should know. Cuz it's normal for kids to experiment and explore themselves. But sadly we are not in that world. I wish I could say parents can be told. But I cannot in good conscience say telling a parent would be a good idea. If the child is not telling the parent there's a good reason.

 

[Koldo]

At least here, if there is any abuse by parents, schools are mandated to report it. That's not just in relation to gender and sexuality issues, but any abuse for any reason.

In instances where there has been a history of abuse, or at least red flags raised, my thoughts are different, but assuming that is NOT the case, it seems unusual to exclude parents from a major part of the child's life, but include school.

Parents play key supportive roles in child's lives...or should. Just as schools do...or should. Both obviously have a varied track record writ large. But I don't see anything healthy coming from excluding parents from knowing about conversations occurring (where they have become somewhat formal, etc)

The issue is that we can't presume to know better about each family's dynamics than the children themselves. If the child in question hasn't bothered to let their parents know what is going on, there is probably a very good reason.

 

[Debater Slayer]

At least here, if there is any abuse by parents, schools are mandated to report it. That's not just in relation to gender and sexuality issues, but any abuse for any reason.

In instances where there has been a history of abuse, or at least red flags raised, my thoughts are different, but assuming that is NOT the case, it seems unusual to exclude parents from a major part of the child's life, but include school.

Parents play key supportive roles in child's lives...or should. Just as schools do...or should. Both obviously have a varied track record writ large. But I don't see anything healthy coming from excluding parents from knowing about conversations occurring (where they have become somewhat formal, etc)

I can see your point, hence my prefacing the post you responded to with, "In an accepting society."

Currently, I think the US has significant segments of society (even if they may not be a majority on a country-wide level) that are neither accepting (at least in this regard) nor likely to deal with such an issue in a healthy manner. I believe this applies to my own country and many other countries too. If the discussion were about, say, Australia, Sweden, or the Netherlands, I would fully agree with you.

 

[Brickjectivity]

What rights do you think parents have in this manner??

I have to vote no, because it isn't a right. The parents should always be informed, but it is not a right. When we debate rights we discuss why we have certain natural rights. These are called 'Negative rights' and are the right not to be interfered with in same way. We have the right to breath. Parents don't have a negative right in this situation, because the teacher is by law the local parent. The birth parents have already given permission to the teacher to act as parent. It is not a matter of rights.

Nevertheless it is improper for the school not to inform parents. They ought to be informed and consulted, and they may have the authority to say no to any procedure.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Exactly, these "parental rights" are slanted one way. They're only for the parents of non-LGBTQ teens and to not only deny those teens help but their parents say so in the matter.

Hmm...nope. at least, that's in no way what I mean.

I have a 15 year old daughter who is COMPLETELY confused about her sexuality, and finds opening up, sharing feelings, and general life at times quite challenging.

My wife and I constantly let her know we could give a crap what her sexuality is, and what the sexuality of her friends and partners are. Good people are good people. We also told her it's normal and fine to be confused, or fluid, etc, particularly at her age.

I could totally envisage a situation where she opens up in the moment to someone about literally anything, and then struggles to continue sharing, direct a conversation, or contribute.

Were the school to give me a heads up that she was suffering from gender dysmorphia, or any other particular consideration, it would allow us to better support her.

I really don't want my ability to support my daughter truncated because some people are bigoted ********.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

The issue is that we can't presume to know better about each family's dynamics than the children themselves. If the child in question hasn't bothered to let their parents know what is going on, there is probably a very good reason.

Which we are presuming to know.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I can see your point, hence my prefacing the post you responded to with, "In an accepting society."

Currently, I think the US has significant segments of society (even if they may not be a majority on a country-wide level) that are neither accepting (at least in this regard) nor likely to deal with such an issue in a healthy manner. I believe this applies to my own country and many other countries too. If the discussion were about, say, Australia, Sweden, or the Netherlands, I would fully agree with you.

My discussion is about Australia.

We have bigots here too, but I really don't want to be judged based on the worst members of our society just because we both belong to a group called 'parent'.
I was a male primary teacher, and coach girls basketball. There are hoops to jump through with that to try and protect kids, because some teachers and coaches are pedophiles. So, fine...I jump through those as second nature.

But assuming/acting like a party is guilty of buses without evidence or cause is a little next level.

 

[Debater Slayer]

My discussion is about Australia.

We have bigots here too, but I really don't want to be judged based on the worst members of our society just because we both belong to a group called 'parent'.
I was a male primary teacher, and coach girls basketball. There are hoops to jump through with that to try and protect kids, because some teachers and coaches are pedophiles. So, fine...I jump through those as second nature.

But assuming/acting like a party is guilty of buses without evidence or cause is a little next level.

Then I don't disagree with you, since you're talking about Australia.

I think it may be useful to give context on my position here. In my region, sharing such information with most parents would almost surely lead to a whole host of unevidenced "therapies," restrictions on the child, and possibly physical violence. In many cases, it would quite literally be a death sentence. This case of a Saudi trans woman is an example of what I mean, and she wasn't even a minor. She was an adult in another country and was still abused by her family to the point of suicide:

Saudi Arabian trans woman feared dead after family ‘forced her to detransition’

Eden Knight, 23, had been living in the US until late last year

www.independent.co.uk

This is the kind of thing I have in mind, and it is one of the primary backdrops against which I think about such issues. I know there are thankfully some countries where the vast majority of families can be relied on to be understanding, accepting, and loving when dealing with such topics with their children, but far too many countries are not like that.

 

[Koldo]

Which we are presuming to know.

Even if we don't, how about respecting the choice of that person?

 

[We Never Know]

For all the no voters.. Lets say its a boy that identifies as a girl.
If the parents aren't to be told, does he lives as a girl at school and as a boy at home?

 

[fantome profane]

As long as you don't conflate that with anyone disagreeing with you.
It's worth noting that for many parents this isn't about 'parental rights' but 'parental responsibilities'.

I recognize that it was a general statement, I had no one specific in mind, But I do believe there are many who have such a hypocritical stance.

And rights and responsibilities often go together.

 

[fantome profane]

For all the no voters.. Lets say its a boy that identifies as a girl.
If the parents aren't to be told, does he lives as a girl at school and as a boy at home?

It is complex and subtle. Don't try to oversimplify it. It could be nothing more than someone thinking about who they are, perhaps expressing a thought to a friend.

 

[We Never Know]

It is complex and subtle. Don't try to oversimplify it. It could be nothing more than someone thinking about who they are, perhaps expressing a thought to a friend.

Well the OP says...

"Do Parents Have The Right To Be Informed About Gender Change Identy" (identity)

And the article says...

"A New Jersy judge ruled that three schoold districts do not have to inform parents if their child changes their gender identity."

 

[Koldo]

For all the no voters.. Lets say its a boy that identifies as a girl.
If the parents aren't to be told, does he lives as a girl at school and as a boy at home?

Depends. Sometimes that might be the case, other times they live the same way, they are just not open about it in their homes.

 

[Soandso]

For all the no voters.. Lets say its a boy that identifies as a girl.
If the parents aren't to be told, does he lives as a girl at school and as a boy at home?

I actually saw this at work. We had someone who worked at the warehouse who identified as male, but he was forced into living with his parents since living alone and going to school is too expensive in this day and age. The parents told him that as long as he was living under their roof, they wouldn't respect the gender he identified as and demanded he dress feminine. Thankfully he's out of that situation and has since moved on, last I heard. Sucks for him while he was enduring it, though

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Then I don't disagree with you, since you're talking about Australia.

I think it may be useful to give context on my position here. In my region, sharing such information with most parents would almost surely lead to a whole host of unevidenced "therapies," restrictions on the child, and possibly physical violence. In many cases, it would quite literally be a death sentence. This case of a Saudi trans woman is an example of what I mean, and she wasn't even a minor. She was an adult in another country and was still abused by her family to the point of suicide:

Saudi Arabian trans woman feared dead after family ‘forced her to detransition’

Eden Knight, 23, had been living in the US until late last year

www.independent.co.uk

This is the kind of thing I have in mind, and it is one of the primary backdrops against which I think about such issues. I know there are thankfully some countries where the vast majority of families can be relied on to be understanding, accepting, and loving when dealing with such topics with their children, but far too many countries are not like that.

My assumption (rightly or wrongly) is that children in those areas would be poorly served by talking to their schools, and either have no good options (sadly) or would need to pursue assistance via medical professionals where there would be (theoretically) the benefit of patient-doctor privilege in at least some circumstances (perhaps based on age, for example).

That assumption may or may not be fair.

Whereas my daughters school literally flies the rainbow flag from the flagpole.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Even if we don't, how about respecting the choice of that person?

Which choice is that? Or are you suggesting we'd respect the rights of children to keep whatever secrets they want from any party they want at any age?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I recognize that it was a general statement, I had no one specific in mind, But I do believe there are many who have such a hypocritical stance.

There are. They are not people I like, respect, or base my parenting on, but they absolutely do exist. How commonly should we use the lowest common denominator to make decisions for all people?

And rights and responsibilities often go together.

Indeed, which was my point. Too many people get sidetracked by considering only 'rights'. It's a harmful and myopic way to view the world, imho.

 

[Koldo]

Which choice is that? Or are you suggesting we'd respect the rights of children to keep whatever secrets they want from any party they want at any age?

The choice to keep a certain information from their parents. If the secret in question doesn't bring about any harm, what reason do we have to disrespect that choice? The same rationale is applicable to both adults and children.

 

[Callisto]

What you've stated is also your opinion. Pointing out that I've posted an opinion doesn't provide any extra information or add anything to the arguments.

I never suggested it wasn't opinion. My point still stands regarding your comment.

The vast majority of the efforts to ban and protect gender-affirming care have come from the GOP and the Democratic Party, respectively. This is why I mentioned the former. Even many of the people who support neither party vote for either in elections because they know that, realistically, their vote will only have a tangible effect if it goes to either party.

You're not saying anything salient. It's a two party system, it's a given political postering comes from both. People feeling forced to vote with one or another isn't the same as people taking their cues from either party. Many form their own opinion and, if at all, settle for voting with the party that comes closest to their position. Assuming, in this case, transgender rights are high enough on their personal concerns. Trans rights are simply not a priority for many voters. E.g. this Gallup poll indicates LGBT rights don't rank in the top 10 concerns of Americans. Which is why it's fools folly when people reduce the trans rights debate to being left vs right. Lots of people who vote Republican are pro-choice and pro-LGBTQ, lots who vote Democrat are not. They vote with the party that comes closest to representing issues that are their priority.

I don't know what you mean by "hysteria" and "radicalism," and given the arguments I've read in this thread, I'm not sure we would agree on what either was in relation to this subject.

Agreed.

This is another thing I've noticed in some of the arguments attacking "both sides": detailed, thoughtful arguments are sometimes dismissed as "hysteria," "radicalism," or any other stigmatizing adjective that aims to attribute the arguments to emotion and fanaticism rather than genuine thought.

Pointing out neither side is entirely correct is not an attack. The needle will not move as long as people can't or won't admit to the hyperbole and radicalism found in their own camp. Seeing any observation as an "attack" serves no useful purpose.

I don't find such emotionally charged dismissal conducive to good-faith discussion, nor am I interested in having to unpick exactly what a person means every time they label a position with which they disagree as "hysteria" or "radicalism." If an argument is unevidenced or logically incoherent, there should be no need to use a loaded term like "hysteria" to sideline it.

Well, that didn't happen here, so I don't know what you're on about.

I don't see this as equivalent to the other situations you listed.

If you're incapable of seeing it then there's no point in discussion.

Also, I'm not appealing to federal law here. Federal law banned same-sex marriage just a decade ago, and it used to champion racial segregation. It changes according to people's evolving understanding and needs, not the other way around. I'm much more interested in whether a position is harmful or beneficial on its own merits.

Federal law now recognizes same sex marriage and desegregation, so are you saying states should disregard it because some places don't agree with either one? Who cares whether federal laws change if people have your attitude of only acknowledging it IF it echoes your personal stance?

I agree that the school should have the child see a professional to assess them for gender dysphoria, if that's what you mean, but how that could be done is a separate and complicated topic. There would also be the question of how much the parents should know and be involved in if that happened.

Yes, they need to be evaluated, and not by someone who's "gender affirming" with a rubber stamp but a licensed professional who will objectively confirm whether the child has dysphoria.

Considering parents are entirely responsible for the well-being of their children, they need to be informed. Full stop. The overwhelming majority of parents are not abusive and IF there is evidence the parents are abusive then the emphasis should be on having the family monitored from the jump, as with a mandatory social worker and working with family/child protective services as the given situation may dictate. If abuse is a real possibility, then that's a situation that likely merits removing the child from their parents. Doing things behind parents' backs, especially if they're abusive, is playing with fire and will needlessly escalate a situation. Denying parents knowledge of their child's health and concerns impedes responsible parents.

It was post #17.

Also, I would be interested to know your thoughts on this post, because I believe it directly addresses most of the points we're discussing:

Ahh, ok. I didn't interpret @YmirGF's comment that way. I was looking at it solely in reference to you in the hypothetical. I do agree with their comment, "A parent simply saying they think their child is delusional could be construed as being abusive to the ideologically unhinged." Which isn't a stretch. As it is, anytime anyone doesn't agree 100% with trans activism, their comments are labeled as an "attack" and "transphobic" when its not the case at all.

Should any teacher be removed for having an opinion that differs from the parents? No. This is also a per case basis. I wouldn't want a teacher thinking it's ok to advance their religious, political or other beliefs & ideology, even if they're similar to my own. If the teacher is using their position for anything other than to teach the subject they were hired for, then yes, they're going to have a problem.