Posted on 02/15/2018 10:34:07 AM PST by SeekAndFind
An Ohio court is set to determine Friday if the parents of a teen girl, who identifies as a boy, should lose custody because they object to hormone treatments and a "gender transition" process on medical and religious grounds.
CNN reported Tuesday on a Hamilton County court's ongoing proceedings involving the parents of a 17-year-old girl — neither of which can be named per court instructions — who want the court to intervene in order to stop her from receiving hormones and therapy. The treatment was recommended by a "medical team" working with the teen and who considers such treatment a "life-or-death situation."
The unnamed teenager, who is currently in temporary legal custody of Hamilton County Job and Family Services and living with her maternal grandparents, was reportedly hospitalized in 2016 and was diagnosed with gender dysphoria, depression, and an anxiety disorder. The teen's court-appointed guardians think the grandparents should be given custody.
The parents, however, want custody of their child because they believe that by allowing the grandparents to have custody "it would simply be a way for the child to circumvent the necessity of parents' consent," said Karen Brinkman, their attorney, according to court transcripts. Brinkman contended that given the mental state of the teenager, she is in no position to make such a life-altering decision.
The parents, she continued, "have done their due diligence contacting medical professionals, collecting thousands of hours of research," and believe that the administration of hormones are not a "medically necessary form of treatment" and that it "would do more harm than good."
Not all of the details surrounding the case have been made public.
"If the judge rules in favor of the ideologically driven gender clinic, the ability of all parents to protect their children of any age from all aspects of this social and medical experiment will take a tremendous hit," said Michelle Cretella, president of the American College of Pediatricians in an interview with The Christian Post Wednesday.
The CNN report presumes the maleness of the girl and employs the pronoun "he" throughout the entirety of the piece. Medical experts from Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, which has been working with the teenager, testified in court that the father's refusal to call the child by her chosen name and the parents' rejection of his daughter's gender identity have caused her to have suicidal feelings. CNN also featured the words of Dr. Michelle Forcier for supporting commentary, who is a professor at Brown University and longtime LGBT activist pediatrician who works with children as young as four who think they are transgender, though she is not involved in this specific case.
"If your child had asthma and was turning blue, you wouldn't deny them their albuterol inhaler or say 'let's wait,' " Forcier said. "If this were cancer or diabetes, we wouldn't be having this conversation, but people get funny when it comes to medical care when gender is involved, and that's harmful."
Cretella made a point to tell CP that Forcier's remarks are "unscientific."
"A child suffering from gender dysphoria has a fixed belief contrary to physical reality. This is a delusion," she said, and "a delusion is not any person's 'authentic self.'"
She noted that such a delusion is a disorder of the mind; that gender dysphoria is distinctly unlike a disease of the body like diabetes, asthma, or cancer; and that no long term evidence exists showing that encouraging a child's delusion prevents suicide.
Furthermore, she stressed, "there is no evidence that any gender dysphoric child's suicidality is due to parents' refusing to go along with the delusion. It is more likely that whatever has caused the child's depression and suicidal thoughts is also triggering the gender dysphoria."
"Since there are no long term studies regarding the use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones in young children and teens, this entire enterprise is, by definition, an experiment upon a minor — and a dangerous one at that given the life-long permanent side effects."
In November of 2016 the teen contacted a crisis chat service to say she did not feel safe in her parents' home and alleged that her father told her to commit suicide because she was "going to hell anyway." Her lawyer said in court that her parents' decision to enroll her in Catholic school where she had to wear dresses and go by her birth name contributed to her trauma and increased suicidal ideation.
The teen also said she was forced to sit in a room and listen to Bible readings for over six hours at a time, according to the complaint; the parents had reportedly stopped the mental health counseling she was receiving and opted for a Christian alternative.
Peter Sprigg, senior research fellow at the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C., commented in an email to The Christian Post Wednesday that refusing to support gender transition for a minor child should never be grounds for removing that child from a parent's custody and represents a "shocking invasion of fundamental parental rights to direct the upbringing of their children."
"The threat of suicide by the child should be taken as evidence of a major mental health crisis requiring psychological intervention, and as a warning against making other major life changes at this time, not in favor of it," he said.
That the religious views of the parents are being referenced as a further reason why custody should be removed is alarming, he went on to say, noting that this case portends threats to religious freedom in addition to parental rights.
"In recent years, the free exercise of religion outside the walls of a home or church has been repeatedly threatened; but in this case, even such freedom within the home is at risk."
Sounds like there are issues with this family beyond the gender confusion.
Move to Texas or Oklahoma …Today!
[[That the religious views of the parents are being referenced as a further reason why custody should be removed is alarming, he went on to say, noting that this case portends threats to religious freedom in addition to parental rights.]]
Well put- this case stands to be one where religious freedoms (AND parental rights) are overshadowed by court decision- Keep an eye on this case- Places like sweden and norway ARE removing children from homes where parents are religious, and or want to home school, or where parents discipline their children (not abusively,) already- We’re soon to follow if cases like this rule agaisnt the parents
By 17 it is too late. You have failed as a parent.
By the time this goes to judgement the kid will be 18 and it will be moot.
It is the medical profession that has allowed this significant mental illness to be treated like a mild cold.
Nothing has changed in the number of trannies who attempt to commit suicide: 42%.
Giving in rather than treating is a death sentence.
I don’t know, but if your child thinks he is a cat, do you buy him a litter box?
Texas would be worse.
Nothing has changed in the number of trannies who attempt to commit suicide: 42%.
—
That’s terrible. 100% would be much better.
Destroying parent-child bonds is their goal. They hate the fact that parents impart their values to their kids. They already give girls an abortion without the parent’s knowledge or consent. (But the parents have to pay.) They already teach kids gay things, atheism and *slam in school, and they arrest the parents for protesting.
So now, they take the kids away from the parents because the parents are protecting the kid from an insane teacher who wants the kid’s dicque chopped off, or one grafted on.
There is still the illusion of freedom this country. We like to call it the land of the free. But it isn’t. You have no right to express yourself, unless it’s approved by the government, and you have no right to make certain decisions for your kids, but you still have to be the one who pays.
Mia Marie Pope (knew Obama in high school) said Barack Obama would dress up as the transvestite from The Rocky Horror Picture Show.
AND little Barack had a transvestite nanny in Indonesia. A man who would dress up as a woman to cruise the streets at night.
Just a little insight into the man that liberals hold up as a hero.
Since liberalism is a mental disorder ....
If he thinks he’s a cat, put his dinner on top of a cabinet about 10 feet off the ground and tell him if he can jump up and get it, he can eat it.
It’s too bad they’re not interested in not helping the mentally ill anymore. This child needs therapy, not medication and mutilation surgery.
That sounds like a win-win. As long as the parents don’t have to give another penny of support for their mentally ill child.
That explains a lot about Barky and Moose-chelle's relationship.
It’s rather obvious there’s a whole lot of weird stuff about those two. I’m sure we don’t want to know all of it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=448&v=gISByrEVWUI
(Yes it’s AJ but let the video roll for 30-45 seconds)
Well, the authorities are all over this one but can’t seem to follow through with Nikolas Cruz?
Hillary’s village at work...
Screw you parents! Who the hell do you think you are to do the right thing by your children?
The Left seems to want to ask, “Who died and made you parents?”
Well, you know what, that can be flipped around.
Who died and made these busy body non-related interlopers this kid’s guardians?
Stand down you fools.
Gender Ideology Harms Children
Updated September 2017
The American College of Pediatricians urges healthcare professionals, educators and legislators to reject all policies that condition children to accept as normal a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex. Facts – not ideology – determine reality.
1. Human sexuality is an objective biological binary trait: “XY” and “XX” are genetic markers of male and female, respectively – not genetic markers of a disorder. The norm for human design is to be conceived either male or female. Human sexuality is binary by design with the obvious purpose being the reproduction and flourishing of our species. This principle is self-evident. The exceedingly rare disorders of sex development (DSDs), including but not limited to testicular feminization and congenital adrenal hyperplasia, are all medically identifiable deviations from the sexual binary norm, and are rightly recognized as disorders of human design. Individuals with DSDs (also referred to as “intersex”) do not constitute a third sex.1
2. No one is born with a gender. Everyone is born with a biological sex. Gender (an awareness and sense of oneself as male or female) is a sociological and psychological concept; not an objective biological one. No one is born with an awareness of themselves as male or female; this awareness develops over time and, like all developmental processes, may be derailed by a child’s subjective perceptions, relationships, and adverse experiences from infancy forward. People who identify as “feeling like the opposite sex” or “somewhere in between” do not comprise a third sex. They remain biological men or biological women.2,3,4
3. A person’s belief that he or she is something they are not is, at best, a sign of confused thinking. When an otherwise healthy biological boy believes he is a girl, or an otherwise healthy biological girl believes she is a boy, an objective psychological problem exists that lies in the mind not the body, and it should be treated as such. These children suffer from gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria (GD), formerly listed as Gender Identity Disorder (GID), is a recognized mental disorder in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM-5).5 The psychodynamic and social learning theories of GD/GID have never been disproved.2,4,5
4. Puberty is not a disease and puberty-blocking hormones can be dangerous. Reversible or not, puberty- blocking hormones induce a state of disease – the absence of puberty – and inhibit growth and fertility in a previously biologically healthy child.6
5. According to the DSM-5, as many as 98% of gender confused boys and 88% of gender confused girls eventually accept their biological sex after naturally passing through puberty.5
6. Pre-pubertal children diagnosed with gender dysphoria may be given puberty blockers as young as eleven, and will require cross-sex hormones in later adolescence to continue impersonating the opposite sex. These children will never be able to conceive any genetically related children even via artificial reproductive technology. In addition, cross-sex hormones (testosterone and estrogen) are associated with dangerous health risks including but not limited to cardiac disease, high blood pressure, blood clots, stroke, diabetes, and cancer.7,8,9,10,11
7. Rates of suicide are nearly twenty times greater among adults who use cross-sex hormones and undergo sex reassignment surgery, even in Sweden which is among the most LGBTQ – affirming countries.12 What compassionate and reasonable person would condemn young children to this fate knowing that after puberty as many as 88% of girls and 98% of boys will eventually accept reality and achieve a state of mental and physical health?
8. Conditioning children into believing a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal and healthful is child abuse. Endorsing gender discordance as normal via public education and legal policies will confuse children and parents, leading more children to present to “gender clinics” where they will be given puberty-blocking drugs. This, in turn, virtually ensures they will “choose” a lifetime of carcinogenic and otherwise toxic cross-sex hormones, and likely consider unnecessary surgical mutilation of their healthy body parts as young adults.
Michelle A. Cretella, M.D.
President of the American College of Pediatricians
Quentin Van Meter, M.D.
Vice President of the American College of Pediatricians
Pediatric Endocrinologist
Paul McHugh, M.D.
University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Medical School and the former psychiatrist in chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital
Originally published March 2016
Updated September 2017
CLARIFICATIONS in response to FAQs regarding points 3 & 5:
Regarding Point 3: “Where does the APA or DSM-5 indicate that Gender Dysphoria is a mental disorder?”
The APA (American Psychiatric Association) is the author of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition(DSM-5). The APA states that those distressed and impaired by their GD meet the definition of a disorder. The College is unaware of any medical literature that documents a gender dysphoric child seeking puberty blocking hormones who is not significantly distressed by the thought of passing through the normal and healthful process of puberty.
From the DSM-5 fact sheet:
“The critical element of gender dysphoria is the presence of clinically significant distress associated with the condition.”
“This condition causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.”
Regarding Point 5: “Where does the DSM-5 list rates of resolution for Gender Dysphoria?”
On page 455 of the DSM-5 under “Gender Dysphoria without a disorder of sex development” it states: “Rates of persistence of gender dysphoria from childhood into adolescence or adulthood vary. In natal males, persistence has ranged from 2.2% to 30%. In natal females, persistence has ranged from 12% to 50%.” Simple math allows one to calculate that for natal boys: resolution occurs in as many as 100% – 2.2% = 97.8% (approx. 98% of gender-confused boys). Similarly, for natal girls: resolution occurs in as many as 100% – 12% = 88% gender-confused girls.
The bottom line is this: Our opponents advocate a new scientifically baseless standard of care for children with a psychological condition (GD) that would otherwise resolve after puberty for the vast majority of patients concerned. Specifically, they advise: affirmation of children’s thoughts which are contrary to physical reality; the chemical castration of these children prior to puberty with GnRH agonists (puberty blockers which cause infertility, stunted growth, low bone density, and an unknown impact upon their brain development), and, finally, the permanent sterilization of these children prior to age 18 via cross-sex hormones. There is an obvious self-fulfilling nature to encouraging young GD children to impersonate the opposite sex and then institute pubertal suppression. If a boy who questions whether or not he is a boy (who is meant to grow into a man) is treated as a girl, then has his natural pubertal progression to manhood suppressed, have we not set in motion an inevitable outcome? All of his same sex peers develop into young men, his opposite sex friends develop into young women, but he remains a pre-pubertal boy. He will be left psychosocially isolated and alone. He will be left with the psychological impression that something is wrong. He will be less able to identify with his same sex peers and being male, and thus be more likely to self identify as “non-male” or female. Moreover, neuroscience reveals that the pre-frontal cortex of the brain which is responsible for judgment and risk assessment is not mature until the mid-twenties. Never has it been more scientifically clear that children and adolescents are incapable of making informed decisions regarding permanent, irreversible and life-altering medical interventions. For this reason, the College maintains it is abusive to promote this ideology, first and foremost for the well-being of the gender dysphoric children themselves, and secondly, for all of their non-gender-discordant peers, many of whom will subsequently question their own gender identity, and face violations of their right to bodily privacy and safety.
https://www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/position-statements/gender-ideology-harms-children
That's what makes the case diabolical. Make the judgment on the theoretical issue, then regardless of the outcome -- whether the young woman decides to follow through with the proposed mutilation or not -- a precedent is set. The court won't need to worry about all the messiness with enforcing it, and a child who is "old enough to choose to have sex" is surely "old enough to choose 'his' own sex". (*eyeroll*)
Evil is the only word to use. The same happened with Roe v. Wade where Norma McCorvey "won" her case, ensuring the "right" to abortion -- but she herself gave birth to her child and became a pro-life speaker and activist. She spent the rest of her life fighting against the existence of the "right" her case "won". In the eyes of the government and of progressives, it's "too late, precedent is made and the right is established".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.