Journal of Medical Ethics suggests children could be taken away from their parents if they oppose se

[mountaineer]

Journal of Medical Ethics suggests children could be taken away from their parents if they oppose sex change surgeries and hormone therapy
By Jonathon Van Maren

By far the most terrifying aspect of the transgender phenomenon is the spectre of government intervening to force parents to allow their children to “transition.” As young people increasingly inhabit digital communities populated exclusively by their peers and impervious to adults, transgenderism is becoming a social phenomenon. I have spoken to many parents who have been stunned and devastated when one of their children comes out as transgender (in some cases, the parents were totally unaware of the fact that their children were consuming transgender content online or being taught gender ideology at schools—in one case, a mother had two transgender children.) This has led to inevitable face-offs between parents desperate to prevent their children from permanently mutilating or altering their bodies, and trans activists and their judicial and political allies. ...

In that context, a recent article from the Journal of Medical Ethics titled “Medically assisted gender affirmation: when children and parents disagree” is particularly concerning. Authored by Samuel Dublin, Megan Lane, Shane Morrison, Asa Radix, Uri Belkind, Christian Vercler, and David Inwards-Breland, the article lays out how and why parents should be cut out of the equation if they appear resistant to pursuing “transition.”  ...

...  We discuss three potential avenues for providing gender-affirming care over parental disagreement: legal carve-outs to parental consent, the mature minor doctrine and state intervention for neglect. Our discussion approaches this parent–child disagreement in a manner that prioritises the developing autonomy of transgender youth in the decision-making process surrounding medically assisted gender affirmation. We base our arguments in the literature surrounding the risks and benefits of gender-affirming therapy in transgender children and the existing legal basis for recognising minors’ decision-making authority in certain medical situations.

... [T]hey suggest that parental consent be nullified in situations where it is most needed, that we claim children who are not old enough to vote or smoke or drive are “mature” enough to permanently alter their bodies, or that—and this one is the most terrifying—the state be given the power to intervene and take children away from their parents for “neglect.”  ... More at The Bridgehead