Author Topic: Judge Who Removed Trans Teen From Parents Highlights What’s At Stake  (Read 213 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online mountaineer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 79,949
Judge Who Removed Trans Teen From Parents Highlights What’s At Stake
The Ohio case is not a ‘slam dunk’ validation of adolescent transgender transition, or self-styled gender experts.
Mary Hasson
Feb. 21, 2018
The Federalist
Quote
“Transgender boy wins right to transition before college” read the headlines last week after Hamilton County (OH) Juvenile Court Judge Sylvia Hendon awarded custody of a 17-year-old female (identifying as a transgender boy) to her grandparents.

To understand what is at stake in this complicated case, some background is in order. (While the case proceedings are not fully available, the judge’s February 16, 2018 decision is available here and provides some factual context, although the timeline is not completely clear from the court’s order.)

In 2016, the teen apparently was suffering from anxiety and depression severe enough that her parents sought inpatient treatment for her at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center. Cincinnati Children’s, which boasts of its status as a leading center for the treatment of transgender youth, subsequently diagnosed the teen with gender dysphoria.

Up until the summer of 2016, the court noted, the child had “lived consistent with the assigned gender at birth” (female). After beginning care with Cincinnati Children’s, the child was diagnosed as transgender and within months the hospital recommended the teen begin hormone treatment. (Given that the teen was 16 at the time, the recommended hormones were likely cross-sex hormones, which would sterilize the child.)  ...

Despite expressing concern about the dearth of high-quality research supporting hormone treatments and other medical interventions, the judge supported their use anyway. She seemed loath to “intrude” on medical judgments pertaining to the child, even though they surely play a role in determing the “best interests of the child.”

The judge also expressed solid support for the “child’s right” to self-define, apart from the reality of biological sex—a clear indication that, in the end, the judge buys into gender activists’ propaganda.   ...
Read the entire excellent article at The Federalist

Mary Rice Hasson is an attorney and a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington DC.
Support Israel's emergency medical service. afmda.org