What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Arkansas SAFE act "The nation's first trial over a state's ban on gender-confirming care for children " (1 Viewer)

Argue all day man..Never changing my mind. ANY kind of gender modifications to any child under 18 is wrong in my opinion. Plain and simple.
Persuasive argument here.

The leading medical authorities all agree recommend gender affirmation treatments. But supermike80 from the inter webs disagrees. I’m torn.
 
Wow, so much wrong here, and its almost hard to believe how wrong you are. This is basically a real issue that requires none of your usual silliness.

First off: Basically shrugging off mental health issues or minimizing them regardless of the cause is kind of obtuse on your part. Also the "we should all agree" is a pretty good straw man starter especially since it seems you have really no knowledge on the subject.

This law is not about "the kids". This law is about fearmongering. If you wanted to make a law about "the kids" how about starting with guns? Guns seem to be doing more damage to kids in school that what bathroom someone uses.

again the comparison to mental health ............ are you saying trans is a mental health disorder ?

and ummmmm we don't allow kids to buy guns or ammunition, or tobacco or alcohol, we don't let them write their own prescription drugs etc etc because they're not adults, not capable of being trusted with really important things like that, right ?
so you show that you didn’t read anything anyone posts…. KIDS DO NOT MAKE THIS DECISION BY THEMSELVES OR FLIPPANTLY. THEY MAKE THIS CHIOICE WITH THEI FAMILY AND WITH THEIR PHYSICIAN.

again, this is all about fear Mongering. Plain and simple.

You are naive and ignorant how this works in practice. Doctors are prohibited from councilling the child. They are required to affirm whatever the child says, hence the name affirmation therapy. As far as parents go, states require 'parental consent', but there are loopholes which as easily bypassed. If parents are non-accepting the child can just say the parents are hostile towards their gender identity and then parental consent is no longer required.

So the typical process of a 13-year old going into a planned parenthood facility. The kid goes in and declares they are transgendered. An activist associate goes over a questionnaire with the child and then they fax it to a doctor. The doctor reviews it and prescribes gender blockers and/or hormones. The kid walks out with drugs in about 30 minutes after their first visit.

Are you good with that process?
 
Argue all day man..Never changing my mind. ANY kind of gender modifications to any child under 18 is wrong in my opinion. Plain and simple.
Persuasive argument here.

The leading medical authorities all agree recommend gender affirmation treatments. But supermike80 from the inter webs disagrees. I’m torn.
He disagrees in other posts, but gender affirming treatments aren't trying to modify gender.
 
Wow, so much wrong here, and its almost hard to believe how wrong you are. This is basically a real issue that requires none of your usual silliness.

First off: Basically shrugging off mental health issues or minimizing them regardless of the cause is kind of obtuse on your part. Also the "we should all agree" is a pretty good straw man starter especially since it seems you have really no knowledge on the subject.

This law is not about "the kids". This law is about fearmongering. If you wanted to make a law about "the kids" how about starting with guns? Guns seem to be doing more damage to kids in school that what bathroom someone uses.

again the comparison to mental health ............ are you saying trans is a mental health disorder ?

and ummmmm we don't allow kids to buy guns or ammunition, or tobacco or alcohol, we don't let them write their own prescription drugs etc etc because they're not adults, not capable of being trusted with really important things like that, right ?
so you show that you didn’t read anything anyone posts…. KIDS DO NOT MAKE THIS DECISION BY THEMSELVES OR FLIPPANTLY. THEY MAKE THIS CHIOICE WITH THEI FAMILY AND WITH THEIR PHYSICIAN.

again, this is all about fear Mongering. Plain and simple.

You are naive and ignorant how this works in practice. Doctors are prohibited from councilling the child. They are required to affirm whatever the child says, hence the name affirmation therapy. As far as parents go, states require 'parental consent', but there are loopholes which as easily bypassed. If parents are non-accepting the child can just say the parents are hostile towards their gender identity and then parental consent is no longer required.

So the typical process of a 13-year old going into a planned parenthood facility. The kid goes in and declares they are transgendered. An activist associate goes over a questionnaire with the child and then they fax it to a doctor. The doctor reviews it and prescribes gender blockers and/or hormones. The kid walks out with drugs in about 30 minutes after their first visit.

Are you good with that process?
LOL. The evil “activist associate”.

That’s not how the process works at all Jon. But keep up the fearmongering.
 
Argue all day man..Never changing my mind. ANY kind of gender modifications to any child under 18 is wrong in my opinion. Plain and simple.
Persuasive argument here.

The leading medical authorities all agree recommend gender affirmation treatments. But supermike80 from the inter webs disagrees. I’m torn.

No they don't. The US standards were set by radicals in gender studies departments. There is no scientific basis for its effectiveness. England had similar standards, but are stepping back and looking at a more comprehensive approach than the asinine doctrine of just gender affirmation, which just gives the child whatever he/she wants. Here is the Cass Report website who is developing the new protocol for gender care in England. It is being performed by doctors taking an independent look and not being driven by insane leftists pushing a radical agenda.


  • The rapid increase in the number of children requiring support and the complex case-mix means that the current clinical model, with a single national provider, is not sustainable in the longer term.
  • We need to know more about the population being referred and outcomes. There has not been routine and consistent data collection, which means it is not possible to accurately track the outcomes and pathways that children and young people take through the service.
  • There is lack of consensus and open discussion about the nature of gender dysphoria and therefore about the appropriate clinical response.
  • Because the specialist service has evolved rapidly and organically in response to demand, the clinical approach and overall service design has not been subjected to some of the normal quality controls that are typically applied when new or innovative treatments are introduced.  
Key points – moving forward

  • Children and young people with gender incongruence or dysphoria must receive the same standards of clinical care, assessment and treatment as every other child or young person accessing health services. 
  • The care of this group of children and young people is everyone’s business. Our initial work indicates that clinicians at all levels feel they have the transferable skills and commitment to support these children and young people, but there needs to be agreement and guidance about the appropriate clinical assessment process that should take place at primary, secondary and tertiary level, underpinned by better data and evidence. 
  • Addressing the challenges will require service transformation, with support offered at different levels of the health service.
  • The Review’s research programme will not just build the evidence base in the UK but will also contribute to the global evidence base, meaning that young people, their families, carers and the clinicians supporting them can make more informed decisions about the right path for them.   
 
Wow, so much wrong here, and its almost hard to believe how wrong you are. This is basically a real issue that requires none of your usual silliness.

First off: Basically shrugging off mental health issues or minimizing them regardless of the cause is kind of obtuse on your part. Also the "we should all agree" is a pretty good straw man starter especially since it seems you have really no knowledge on the subject.

This law is not about "the kids". This law is about fearmongering. If you wanted to make a law about "the kids" how about starting with guns? Guns seem to be doing more damage to kids in school that what bathroom someone uses.

again the comparison to mental health ............ are you saying trans is a mental health disorder ?

and ummmmm we don't allow kids to buy guns or ammunition, or tobacco or alcohol, we don't let them write their own prescription drugs etc etc because they're not adults, not capable of being trusted with really important things like that, right ?
so you show that you didn’t read anything anyone posts…. KIDS DO NOT MAKE THIS DECISION BY THEMSELVES OR FLIPPANTLY. THEY MAKE THIS CHIOICE WITH THEI FAMILY AND WITH THEIR PHYSICIAN.

again, this is all about fear Mongering. Plain and simple.

You are naive and ignorant how this works in practice. Doctors are prohibited from councilling the child. They are required to affirm whatever the child says, hence the name affirmation therapy. As far as parents go, states require 'parental consent', but there are loopholes which as easily bypassed. If parents are non-accepting the child can just say the parents are hostile towards their gender identity and then parental consent is no longer required.

So the typical process of a 13-year old going into a planned parenthood facility. The kid goes in and declares they are transgendered. An activist associate goes over a questionnaire with the child and then they fax it to a doctor. The doctor reviews it and prescribes gender blockers and/or hormones. The kid walks out with drugs in about 30 minutes after their first visit.

Are you good with that process?
LOL. The evil “activist associate”.

That’s not how the process works at all Jon. But keep up the fearmongering.

It is when organizations like planned parenthood are involved. Sorry, but it is a fact. There is no doctor looking at the child before filling them up with drugs.
 
Argue all day man..Never changing my mind. ANY kind of gender modifications to any child under 18 is wrong in my opinion. Plain and simple.
Persuasive argument here.

The leading medical authorities all agree recommend gender affirmation treatments. But supermike80 from the inter webs disagrees. I’m torn.
He disagrees in other posts, but gender affirming treatments aren't trying to modify gender.
Of course they are. It is more than just puberty blockers, which have irreversible effects despite what our government proclaims, but also includes hormone therapy and surgery.
 

What are the criteria for use of pubertal blockers?​


To begin using pubertal blockers, a child must:

  • Show a long-lasting and intense pattern of gender nonconformity or gender dysphoria
  • Have gender dysphoria that began or worsened at the start of puberty
  • Address any psychological, medical or social problems that could interfere with treatment
  • Have entered the early stage of puberty
  • Provide informed consent

Particularly when a child hasn't reached the age of medical consent, parents or other caretakers or guardians must consent to the treatment and support the adolescent through the treatment process.
 
All the way from California to Florida, and even up the coast to Massachusetts, Planned Parenthood is providing children as young as 16 with "gender-affirming hormone services." For those younger than 16, PP in Massachusetts says it can refer patients "to other Massachusetts providers who can give you hormonal care."

The Southwest and Central Florida sector notes you must be over 18 and capable of providing consent to receive hormone treatment, but it also says 17-year-olds can receive the treatment as long as they have parental consent.

"If you are 16 or younger, additional paperwork is required," the Florida sector's website indicates.
 
Conversely, access to gender-affirming hormones in adolescence appears to have a protective effect. In one study, researchers followed 104 teens and young adults for a year and asked them about their depression, anxiety and suicidality at the time they started receiving hormones or puberty blockers and again at the three-month, six-month and one-year mark. At the beginning of the study, which was published in JAMA Network Open in February 2022, more than half of the respondents reported moderate to severe depression, half reported moderate to severe anxiety, and 43.3 percent reported thoughts of self-harm or suicide in the past two weeks.

[...]

So the study used to claim the enormous benefits of mutilating children studied 104 children around for a year. That is pathetic. Not just the number, but the time period and criteria. You are permantly ruining their ability to have sex and reproduce and all you do is check how they are doing a year later. What about when they are 30 and they have dealt with a decade of complications and maybe ow what children? That is what the study needs to look at.
 
All the way from California to Florida, and even up the coast to Massachusetts, Planned Parenthood is providing children as young as 16 with "gender-affirming hormone services." For those younger than 16, PP in Massachusetts says it can refer patients "to other Massachusetts providers who can give you hormonal care."

The Southwest and Central Florida sector notes you must be over 18 and capable of providing consent to receive hormone treatment, but it also says 17-year-olds can receive the treatment as long as they have parental consent.

"If you are 16 or younger, additional paperwork is required," the Florida sector's website indicates.
The very next paragraph

Across the board, PP requires parental consent to begin hormone treatment for anyone under 18. But, depending upon the service provided, PP says it does not always have to notify parents when a minor visits one of its locations.
 
Of course they are. It is more than just purports blockers, which have irreversible effects despite what our government proclaims, but also includes hormone therapy and surgery.
These don't "modify" gender.
They are neutering the child. Who the hell knows what is meant be gender these days. I agree that you are born with a gender and no surgery or therapy can change that. But with the loony definition of gender, it is all just a feeling which is fluid. So gender is a meaningless term the way 'experts' define it.
 
All the way from California to Florida, and even up the coast to Massachusetts, Planned Parenthood is providing children as young as 16 with "gender-affirming hormone services." For those younger than 16, PP in Massachusetts says it can refer patients "to other Massachusetts providers who can give you hormonal care."

The Southwest and Central Florida sector notes you must be over 18 and capable of providing consent to receive hormone treatment, but it also says 17-year-olds can receive the treatment as long as they have parental consent.

"If you are 16 or younger, additional paperwork is required," the Florida sector's website indicates.
The very next paragraph

Across the board, PP requires parental consent to begin hormone treatment for anyone under 18. But, depending upon the service provided, PP says it does not always have to notify parents when a minor visits one of its locations.

Yes, they require 'parental consent', but there is a huge asterisk which can be easily bypassed in many states like California or Oregon. All the child has to do is claim they fear their parents will not support and they are given a golden ticket around their parents. It is a big charade. But you believe the spin those grooming bastards provide and don't care to know the truth.
 
I agree that you are born with a gender and no surgery or therapy can change that.
Reject the source if you must but I'm going to link wikipedia and then say that the consensus is more like gender is set by three and not changing after that. And it seems that there are at least some arguments that it is set at three (or at least after birth) which at the least opens up some interesting questions.
 
All the way from California to Florida, and even up the coast to Massachusetts, Planned Parenthood is providing children as young as 16 with "gender-affirming hormone services." For those younger than 16, PP in Massachusetts says it can refer patients "to other Massachusetts providers who can give you hormonal care."

The Southwest and Central Florida sector notes you must be over 18 and capable of providing consent to receive hormone treatment, but it also says 17-year-olds can receive the treatment as long as they have parental consent.

"If you are 16 or younger, additional paperwork is required," the Florida sector's website indicates.
The very next paragraph

Across the board, PP requires parental consent to begin hormone treatment for anyone under 18. But, depending upon the service provided, PP says it does not always have to notify parents when a minor visits one of its locations.

Yes, they require 'parental consent', but there is a huge asterisk which can be easily bypassed in many states like California or Oregon. All the child has to do is claim they fear their parents will not support and they are given a golden ticket around their parents. It is a big charade. But you believe the spin those grooming bastards provide and don't care to know the truth.
I am having trouble finding this information so a little help from you please. Thanks.
 
Yes, they require 'parental consent', but there is a huge asterisk which can be easily bypassed in many states like California or Oregon. All the child has to do is claim they fear their parents will not support and they are given a golden ticket around their parents. It is a big charade. But you believe the spin those grooming bastards provide and don't care to know the truth.
Actually, I think we need to know the truth so that we can put the necessary controls in place to keep your dystopia vision doesn't play out. Part of that is to weed through the hyperbole. And at present the truth is that gender affirmation care for children is vastly more of a benefit for children than the alternative. Are some mistakes happening - of course. But this notion that we must care about the kids that ultimately regret messing up their bodies chasing love and acceptance they cannot find elsewhere at the expense of the much larger group of trans children that will suffer needlessly for the rest of their lives without such care is not based on any truth.
 
Conversely, access to gender-affirming hormones in adolescence appears to have a protective effect. In one study, researchers followed 104 teens and young adults for a year and asked them about their depression, anxiety and suicidality at the time they started receiving hormones or puberty blockers and again at the three-month, six-month and one-year mark. At the beginning of the study, which was published in JAMA Network Open in February 2022, more than half of the respondents reported moderate to severe depression, half reported moderate to severe anxiety, and 43.3 percent reported thoughts of self-harm or suicide in the past two weeks.

[...]

So the study used to claim the enormous benefits of mutilating children studied 104 children around for a year. That is pathetic. Not just the number, but the time period and criteria. You are permantly ruining their ability to have sex and reproduce and all you do is check how they are doing a year later. What about when they are 30 and they have dealt with a decade of complications and maybe ow what children? That is what the study needs to look at.

Not sure I should even engage with Jon, since he makes stealthycat seem moderate, but wow are you wrong about all of this.
1) Please link to the "mutilation" of children. I know you guys on the right like to go to the most extreme examples hoping to prove a point to your fear mongering, but no one is getting their unit cut off here (before they are 18) so this does not fall under that concept. Hormonal therapy is reversible. so, you are wrong on part 1.
2) we have already refuted your parental consent nonsense, so I'll let that sit where it is.
3) 104 is well above the number needed for a study, and also speaks to the fact that this issue is much more rare than the fear mongers want you to believe. Kind of like Ye and the Jews. He is blaming the Jews for everything while meanwhile Jews make up less than 3 percent of the US population.
4) What business is it of yours what they do when they are 30? Not sure why any of this in any way is your concern. If you had a child who wanted this and you are opposed to it, you could simply say no, and then they likely will do it anyway when they are old enough (or not wait until 18 as there is plenty of underage drug use and smoking etc). It would be more tricky for them to do so without parental consent but I would argue (going slightly off tangent) that making it harder for underage kids to get weapons would be a better societal outcome than making it impossible for kids to get this sort of therapy.

Finally: the hypocrisy of the right to want to stop people doing things that affect them not at all (This, abortion, gay marriage, etc) while allowing things that are likely more harmful (guns, pollution, climate change) to everyone is so strange it is really hard to fathom. Its like "I don't like that planter in your yard" while a manure spitter is throwing crap on your lawn..
 
Conversely, access to gender-affirming hormones in adolescence appears to have a protective effect. In one study, researchers followed 104 teens and young adults for a year and asked them about their depression, anxiety and suicidality at the time they started receiving hormones or puberty blockers and again at the three-month, six-month and one-year mark. At the beginning of the study, which was published in JAMA Network Open in February 2022, more than half of the respondents reported moderate to severe depression, half reported moderate to severe anxiety, and 43.3 percent reported thoughts of self-harm or suicide in the past two weeks.

[...]

So the study used to claim the enormous benefits of mutilating children studied 104 children around for a year. That is pathetic. Not just the number, but the time period and criteria. You are permantly ruining their ability to have sex and reproduce and all you do is check how they are doing a year later. What about when they are 30 and they have dealt with a decade of complications and maybe ow what children? That is what the study needs to look at.

Not sure I should even engage with Jon, since he makes stealthycat seem moderate, but wow are you wrong about all of this.
1) Please link to the "mutilation" of children. I know you guys on the right like to go to the most extreme examples hoping to prove a point to your fear mongering, but no one is getting their unit cut off here (before they are 18) so this does not fall under that concept. Hormonal therapy is reversible. so, you are wrong on part 1.
2) we have already refuted your parental consent nonsense, so I'll let that sit where it is.
3) 104 is well above the number needed for a study, and also speaks to the fact that this issue is much more rare than the fear mongers want you to believe. Kind of like Ye and the Jews. He is blaming the Jews for everything while meanwhile Jews make up less than 3 percent of the US population.
4) What business is it of yours what they do when they are 30? Not sure why any of this in any way is your concern. If you had a child who wanted this and you are opposed to it, you could simply say no, and then they likely will do it anyway when they are old enough (or not wait until 18 as there is plenty of underage drug use and smoking etc). It would be more tricky for them to do so without parental consent but I would argue (going slightly off tangent) that making it harder for underage kids to get weapons would be a better societal outcome than making it impossible for kids to get this sort of therapy.

Finally: the hypocrisy of the right to want to stop people doing things that affect them not at all (This, abortion, gay marriage, etc) while allowing things that are likely more harmful (guns, pollution, climate change) to everyone is so strange it is really hard to fathom. Its like "I don't like that planter in your yard" while a manure spitter is throwing crap on your lawn..
This is a silly comparison. jeez. And to our points. Providing puberty blockers is mutilation. and #4 is exactly as it should be.
 
Conversely, access to gender-affirming hormones in adolescence appears to have a protective effect. In one study, researchers followed 104 teens and young adults for a year and asked them about their depression, anxiety and suicidality at the time they started receiving hormones or puberty blockers and again at the three-month, six-month and one-year mark. At the beginning of the study, which was published in JAMA Network Open in February 2022, more than half of the respondents reported moderate to severe depression, half reported moderate to severe anxiety, and 43.3 percent reported thoughts of self-harm or suicide in the past two weeks.

[...]

So the study used to claim the enormous benefits of mutilating children studied 104 children around for a year. That is pathetic. Not just the number, but the time period and criteria. You are permantly ruining their ability to have sex and reproduce and all you do is check how they are doing a year later. What about when they are 30 and they have dealt with a decade of complications and maybe ow what children? That is what the study needs to look at.

Not sure I should even engage with Jon, since he makes stealthycat seem moderate, but wow are you wrong about all of this.
1) Please link to the "mutilation" of children. I know you guys on the right like to go to the most extreme examples hoping to prove a point to your fear mongering, but no one is getting their unit cut off here (before they are 18) so this does not fall under that concept. Hormonal therapy is reversible. so, you are wrong on part 1.
2) we have already refuted your parental consent nonsense, so I'll let that sit where it is.
3) 104 is well above the number needed for a study, and also speaks to the fact that this issue is much more rare than the fear mongers want you to believe. Kind of like Ye and the Jews. He is blaming the Jews for everything while meanwhile Jews make up less than 3 percent of the US population.
4) What business is it of yours what they do when they are 30? Not sure why any of this in any way is your concern. If you had a child who wanted this and you are opposed to it, you could simply say no, and then they likely will do it anyway when they are old enough (or not wait until 18 as there is plenty of underage drug use and smoking etc). It would be more tricky for them to do so without parental consent but I would argue (going slightly off tangent) that making it harder for underage kids to get weapons would be a better societal outcome than making it impossible for kids to get this sort of therapy.

Finally: the hypocrisy of the right to want to stop people doing things that affect them not at all (This, abortion, gay marriage, etc) while allowing things that are likely more harmful (guns, pollution, climate change) to everyone is so strange it is really hard to fathom. Its like "I don't like that planter in your yard" while a manure spitter is throwing crap on your lawn..
This is a silly comparison. jeez. And to our points. Providing puberty blockers is mutilation. and #4 is exactly as it should be.
Nope and nope. The effects of a puberty blocker is reversible. Wrong again. I guess taking the pill is "mutilation" as well since it stops a pregnancy from happening.
 
Conversely, access to gender-affirming hormones in adolescence appears to have a protective effect. In one study, researchers followed 104 teens and young adults for a year and asked them about their depression, anxiety and suicidality at the time they started receiving hormones or puberty blockers and again at the three-month, six-month and one-year mark. At the beginning of the study, which was published in JAMA Network Open in February 2022, more than half of the respondents reported moderate to severe depression, half reported moderate to severe anxiety, and 43.3 percent reported thoughts of self-harm or suicide in the past two weeks.

[...]

So the study used to claim the enormous benefits of mutilating children studied 104 children around for a year. That is pathetic. Not just the number, but the time period and criteria. You are permantly ruining their ability to have sex and reproduce and all you do is check how they are doing a year later. What about when they are 30 and they have dealt with a decade of complications and maybe ow what children? That is what the study needs to look at.

Not sure I should even engage with Jon, since he makes stealthycat seem moderate, but wow are you wrong about all of this.
1) Please link to the "mutilation" of children. I know you guys on the right like to go to the most extreme examples hoping to prove a point to your fear mongering, but no one is getting their unit cut off here (before they are 18) so this does not fall under that concept. Hormonal therapy is reversible. so, you are wrong on part 1.
2) we have already refuted your parental consent nonsense, so I'll let that sit where it is.
3) 104 is well above the number needed for a study, and also speaks to the fact that this issue is much more rare than the fear mongers want you to believe. Kind of like Ye and the Jews. He is blaming the Jews for everything while meanwhile Jews make up less than 3 percent of the US population.
4) What business is it of yours what they do when they are 30? Not sure why any of this in any way is your concern. If you had a child who wanted this and you are opposed to it, you could simply say no, and then they likely will do it anyway when they are old enough (or not wait until 18 as there is plenty of underage drug use and smoking etc). It would be more tricky for them to do so without parental consent but I would argue (going slightly off tangent) that making it harder for underage kids to get weapons would be a better societal outcome than making it impossible for kids to get this sort of therapy.

Finally: the hypocrisy of the right to want to stop people doing things that affect them not at all (This, abortion, gay marriage, etc) while allowing things that are likely more harmful (guns, pollution, climate change) to everyone is so strange it is really hard to fathom. Its like "I don't like that planter in your yard" while a manure spitter is throwing crap on your lawn..
This is a silly comparison. jeez. And to our points. Providing puberty blockers is mutilation. and #4 is exactly as it should be.
Nope and nope. The effects of a puberty blocker is reversible. Wrong again. I guess taking the pill is "mutilation" as well since it stops a pregnancy from happening.
You like these wild, completely irrevelant comparisons, but no. Next?
 
Oregon:
Does OHP cover gender dysphoria for youth? OHP does provide coverage for youth experiencing gender dysphoria, most often through counseling and in some cases puberty delaying medication and/or cross hormone therapy. Similar to other health issues with youth, health care decisions are made between the doctors, patients and families to determine the best course of treatment.

Can a youth access gender-affirming surgery with or without a parental involvement?
Oregon law establishes the age of consent for all medical or dental treatment at 15 years of age. However, it would be extremely unusual for a minor to access treatment for gender dysphoria without parental involvement. Gender dysphoria is often closely linked with suicide, severe depression or suicidal thoughts. In rare cases, counseling, puberty suppression and hormone treatment may be insufficient to address gender dysphoria, depression or suicide. While infrequent, surgical treatment for gender dysphoria may be needed for older teens in some cases where it is the physician-advised course of treatment. An example might be a teen preparing to attend college and undergoing surgery before the start of their freshman year. Oregon medical providers follow treatment guidelines that include many safeguards before any person, adult or youth, can undergo gender affirming surgeries. Most surgical procedures for gender transition require parental or familial supports and involvement both in the decisionmaking process and during recovery. In the rare case where a physician and an older teen along with his/her family decides that surgery before the age of 18 would be the best course of action, and is medically necessary—then the same laws would apply for medical consent generally. Oregon’s medical consent law has been in place for decades and has worked well. It would be concerning to modify the law on a procedure-by-procedure or medical condition basis.
 
Yes, they require 'parental consent', but there is a huge asterisk which can be easily bypassed in many states like California or Oregon. All the child has to do is claim they fear their parents will not support and they are given a golden ticket around their parents. It is a big charade. But you believe the spin those grooming bastards provide and don't care to know the truth.
But without the parents and more precisely their insurance how exactly is this lucrative?

ETA: I'm not accepting the "easily bypassed" argument other than "for sake of argument".
 
Conversely, access to gender-affirming hormones in adolescence appears to have a protective effect. In one study, researchers followed 104 teens and young adults for a year and asked them about their depression, anxiety and suicidality at the time they started receiving hormones or puberty blockers and again at the three-month, six-month and one-year mark. At the beginning of the study, which was published in JAMA Network Open in February 2022, more than half of the respondents reported moderate to severe depression, half reported moderate to severe anxiety, and 43.3 percent reported thoughts of self-harm or suicide in the past two weeks.

[...]

So the study used to claim the enormous benefits of mutilating children studied 104 children around for a year. That is pathetic. Not just the number, but the time period and criteria. You are permantly ruining their ability to have sex and reproduce and all you do is check how they are doing a year later. What about when they are 30 and they have dealt with a decade of complications and maybe ow what children? That is what the study needs to look at.

Not sure I should even engage with Jon, since he makes stealthycat seem moderate, but wow are you wrong about all of this.
1) Please link to the "mutilation" of children. I know you guys on the right like to go to the most extreme examples hoping to prove a point to your fear mongering, but no one is getting their unit cut off here (before they are 18) so this does not fall under that concept. Hormonal therapy is reversible. so, you are wrong on part 1.
2) we have already refuted your parental consent nonsense, so I'll let that sit where it is.
3) 104 is well above the number needed for a study, and also speaks to the fact that this issue is much more rare than the fear mongers want you to believe. Kind of like Ye and the Jews. He is blaming the Jews for everything while meanwhile Jews make up less than 3 percent of the US population.
4) What business is it of yours what they do when they are 30? Not sure why any of this in any way is your concern. If you had a child who wanted this and you are opposed to it, you could simply say no, and then they likely will do it anyway when they are old enough (or not wait until 18 as there is plenty of underage drug use and smoking etc). It would be more tricky for them to do so without parental consent but I would argue (going slightly off tangent) that making it harder for underage kids to get weapons would be a better societal outcome than making it impossible for kids to get this sort of therapy.

Finally: the hypocrisy of the right to want to stop people doing things that affect them not at all (This, abortion, gay marriage, etc) while allowing things that are likely more harmful (guns, pollution, climate change) to everyone is so strange it is really hard to fathom. Its like "I don't like that planter in your yard" while a manure spitter is throwing crap on your lawn..
Yes, kids under 18 are getting surgeries.
 
Conversely, access to gender-affirming hormones in adolescence appears to have a protective effect. In one study, researchers followed 104 teens and young adults for a year and asked them about their depression, anxiety and suicidality at the time they started receiving hormones or puberty blockers and again at the three-month, six-month and one-year mark. At the beginning of the study, which was published in JAMA Network Open in February 2022, more than half of the respondents reported moderate to severe depression, half reported moderate to severe anxiety, and 43.3 percent reported thoughts of self-harm or suicide in the past two weeks.

[...]

So the study used to claim the enormous benefits of mutilating children studied 104 children around for a year. That is pathetic. Not just the number, but the time period and criteria. You are permantly ruining their ability to have sex and reproduce and all you do is check how they are doing a year later. What about when they are 30 and they have dealt with a decade of complications and maybe ow what children? That is what the study needs to look at.

Not sure I should even engage with Jon, since he makes stealthycat seem moderate, but wow are you wrong about all of this.
1) Please link to the "mutilation" of children. I know you guys on the right like to go to the most extreme examples hoping to prove a point to your fear mongering, but no one is getting their unit cut off here (before they are 18) so this does not fall under that concept. Hormonal therapy is reversible. so, you are wrong on part 1.
2) we have already refuted your parental consent nonsense, so I'll let that sit where it is.
3) 104 is well above the number needed for a study, and also speaks to the fact that this issue is much more rare than the fear mongers want you to believe. Kind of like Ye and the Jews. He is blaming the Jews for everything while meanwhile Jews make up less than 3 percent of the US population.
4) What business is it of yours what they do when they are 30? Not sure why any of this in any way is your concern. If you had a child who wanted this and you are opposed to it, you could simply say no, and then they likely will do it anyway when they are old enough (or not wait until 18 as there is plenty of underage drug use and smoking etc). It would be more tricky for them to do so without parental consent but I would argue (going slightly off tangent) that making it harder for underage kids to get weapons would be a better societal outcome than making it impossible for kids to get this sort of therapy.

Finally: the hypocrisy of the right to want to stop people doing things that affect them not at all (This, abortion, gay marriage, etc) while allowing things that are likely more harmful (guns, pollution, climate change) to everyone is so strange it is really hard to fathom. Its like "I don't like that planter in your yard" while a manure spitter is throwing crap on your lawn..
This is a silly comparison. jeez. And to our points. Providing puberty blockers is mutilation. and #4 is exactly as it should be.
Nope and nope. The effects of a puberty blocker is reversible. Wrong again. I guess taking the pill is "mutilation" as well since it stops a pregnancy from happening.
You like these wild, completely irrevelant comparisons, but no. Next?
full new quote:

“Little is known about the long-term side effects of hormone or puberty blockers in children with gender dysphoria.

Although the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) advises this is a physically reversible treatment if stopped, it is not known what the psychological effects may be.

It’s also not known whether hormone blockers affect the development of the teenage brain or children’s bones. Side effects may also include hot flushes, fatigue and mood alterations.”

Soooo: it is physically reversible so no one is being "mutilated" As for the other effects, they are lumping it under "we are not sure" and "we shall see" (kind of the same language the anti-vax crew was using to support their hysteria as well). That is exactly why we need to have 3 pages about this when, again, none of those arguing on the right have any real dog in the fight.
 
Argue all day man..Never changing my mind. ANY kind of gender modifications to any child under 18 is wrong in my opinion. Plain and simple.
Persuasive argument here.

The leading medical authorities all agree recommend gender affirmation treatments. But supermike80 from the inter webs disagrees. I’m torn.
First of all..to say all medical authorities agree shows just how biased your sources are, cause that simply not true. Secondly, I never attempted to even hint I was a medical professional and no one should take my advice. As I said, you do you..I don't care. But I disagree with the concept entirely.
Cool post though brah
 
Conversely, access to gender-affirming hormones in adolescence appears to have a protective effect. In one study, researchers followed 104 teens and young adults for a year and asked them about their depression, anxiety and suicidality at the time they started receiving hormones or puberty blockers and again at the three-month, six-month and one-year mark. At the beginning of the study, which was published in JAMA Network Open in February 2022, more than half of the respondents reported moderate to severe depression, half reported moderate to severe anxiety, and 43.3 percent reported thoughts of self-harm or suicide in the past two weeks.

[...]

So the study used to claim the enormous benefits of mutilating children studied 104 children around for a year. That is pathetic. Not just the number, but the time period and criteria. You are permantly ruining their ability to have sex and reproduce and all you do is check how they are doing a year later. What about when they are 30 and they have dealt with a decade of complications and maybe ow what children? That is what the study needs to look at.

Not sure I should even engage with Jon, since he makes stealthycat seem moderate, but wow are you wrong about all of this.
1) Please link to the "mutilation" of children. I know you guys on the right like to go to the most extreme examples hoping to prove a point to your fear mongering, but no one is getting their unit cut off here (before they are 18) so this does not fall under that concept. Hormonal therapy is reversible. so, you are wrong on part 1.
2) we have already refuted your parental consent nonsense, so I'll let that sit where it is.
3) 104 is well above the number needed for a study, and also speaks to the fact that this issue is much more rare than the fear mongers want you to believe. Kind of like Ye and the Jews. He is blaming the Jews for everything while meanwhile Jews make up less than 3 percent of the US population.
4) What business is it of yours what they do when they are 30? Not sure why any of this in any way is your concern. If you had a child who wanted this and you are opposed to it, you could simply say no, and then they likely will do it anyway when they are old enough (or not wait until 18 as there is plenty of underage drug use and smoking etc). It would be more tricky for them to do so without parental consent but I would argue (going slightly off tangent) that making it harder for underage kids to get weapons would be a better societal outcome than making it impossible for kids to get this sort of therapy.

Finally: the hypocrisy of the right to want to stop people doing things that affect them not at all (This, abortion, gay marriage, etc) while allowing things that are likely more harmful (guns, pollution, climate change) to everyone is so strange it is really hard to fathom. Its like "I don't like that planter in your yard" while a manure spitter is throwing crap on your lawn..
This is a silly comparison. jeez. And to our points. Providing puberty blockers is mutilation. and #4 is exactly as it should be.
Nope and nope. The effects of a puberty blocker is reversible. Wrong again. I guess taking the pill is "mutilation" as well since it stops a pregnancy from happening.
You like these wild, completely irrevelant comparisons, but no. Next?
full new quote:

“Little is known about the long-term side effects of hormone or puberty blockers in children with gender dysphoria.

Although the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) advises this is a physically reversible treatment if stopped, it is not known what the psychological effects may be.

It’s also not known whether hormone blockers affect the development of the teenage brain or children’s bones. Side effects may also include hot flushes, fatigue and mood alterations.”

Soooo: it is physically reversible so no one is being "mutilated" As for the other effects, they are lumping it under "we are not sure" and "we shall see" (kind of the same language the anti-vax crew was using to support their hysteria as well). That is exactly why we need to have 3 pages about this when, again, none of those arguing on the right have any real dog in the fight.
So the possibility of screwing with a kids brain is OK...Roger..Message received.
 
Conversely, access to gender-affirming hormones in adolescence appears to have a protective effect. In one study, researchers followed 104 teens and young adults for a year and asked them about their depression, anxiety and suicidality at the time they started receiving hormones or puberty blockers and again at the three-month, six-month and one-year mark. At the beginning of the study, which was published in JAMA Network Open in February 2022, more than half of the respondents reported moderate to severe depression, half reported moderate to severe anxiety, and 43.3 percent reported thoughts of self-harm or suicide in the past two weeks.

[...]

So the study used to claim the enormous benefits of mutilating children studied 104 children around for a year. That is pathetic. Not just the number, but the time period and criteria. You are permantly ruining their ability to have sex and reproduce and all you do is check how they are doing a year later. What about when they are 30 and they have dealt with a decade of complications and maybe ow what children? That is what the study needs to look at.

Not sure I should even engage with Jon, since he makes stealthycat seem moderate, but wow are you wrong about all of this.
1) Please link to the "mutilation" of children. I know you guys on the right like to go to the most extreme examples hoping to prove a point to your fear mongering, but no one is getting their unit cut off here (before they are 18) so this does not fall under that concept. Hormonal therapy is reversible. so, you are wrong on part 1.
2) we have already refuted your parental consent nonsense, so I'll let that sit where it is.
3) 104 is well above the number needed for a study, and also speaks to the fact that this issue is much more rare than the fear mongers want you to believe. Kind of like Ye and the Jews. He is blaming the Jews for everything while meanwhile Jews make up less than 3 percent of the US population.
4) What business is it of yours what they do when they are 30? Not sure why any of this in any way is your concern. If you had a child who wanted this and you are opposed to it, you could simply say no, and then they likely will do it anyway when they are old enough (or not wait until 18 as there is plenty of underage drug use and smoking etc). It would be more tricky for them to do so without parental consent but I would argue (going slightly off tangent) that making it harder for underage kids to get weapons would be a better societal outcome than making it impossible for kids to get this sort of therapy.

Finally: the hypocrisy of the right to want to stop people doing things that affect them not at all (This, abortion, gay marriage, etc) while allowing things that are likely more harmful (guns, pollution, climate change) to everyone is so strange it is really hard to fathom. Its like "I don't like that planter in your yard" while a manure spitter is throwing crap on your lawn..
Yes, kids under 18 are getting surgeries.
ok, please show your work there. Show me where kids are having things cut off on put in before they are 18 and I will concede that point and agree that it is wrong to do.
 
I'm learning today so here's some more information and thought:


A 2021 systematic review of 44 peer-reviewed studies found that parent connectedness, measured by a six-question scale asking about such things as how safe young people feel confiding in their guardians or how cared for they feel in the family, is associated with greater resilience among teens and young adults who are transgender or gender-diverse. Rafferty says he sees his role with regard to prepubertal children as offering a safe environment for the child to explore their gender and for parents to ask questions. “The gender-affirming approach is not some railroad of people to hormones and surgery,” Safer says. “It is talking and watching and being conservative.”

Only once children are older, and if the incongruence between the sex assigned to them at birth and their experienced gender has persisted, does discussion of medical transition occur. First a gender therapist has to diagnose the young person with gender dysphoria.


After a gender dysphoria diagnosis—and only if earlier conversations suggest that hormones are indicated—guidelines call for discussion of fertility, puberty suppression and hormones. Puberty-suppressing medications have been used for decades for cisgender children who start puberty early, but they are not meant to be used indefinitely. The Endocrine Society guidelines recommend a maximum of two years on GnRHa therapy to allow more time for children to form their gender identity before undergoing puberty for their sex assigned at birth, the effects of which are irreversible.

“[Puberty blockers] are part of the process of ‘do no harm,’” Forcier says, referencing a popular phrase that describes the Hippocratic Oath, which many physicians recite a version of before they begin to practice.

THE HARMS OF DENYING CARE​

Data suggest the effects of denying that care are worse than whatever side effects result from delaying sex-assigned-at-birth puberty. And medical society guidelines conclude that the benefits of gender-affirming care outweigh the risks. Without gender-affirming hormone therapy, cisgender hormones take over, forcing body changes that can be permanent and distressing.
 
Conversely, access to gender-affirming hormones in adolescence appears to have a protective effect. In one study, researchers followed 104 teens and young adults for a year and asked them about their depression, anxiety and suicidality at the time they started receiving hormones or puberty blockers and again at the three-month, six-month and one-year mark. At the beginning of the study, which was published in JAMA Network Open in February 2022, more than half of the respondents reported moderate to severe depression, half reported moderate to severe anxiety, and 43.3 percent reported thoughts of self-harm or suicide in the past two weeks.

[...]

So the study used to claim the enormous benefits of mutilating children studied 104 children around for a year. That is pathetic. Not just the number, but the time period and criteria. You are permantly ruining their ability to have sex and reproduce and all you do is check how they are doing a year later. What about when they are 30 and they have dealt with a decade of complications and maybe ow what children? That is what the study needs to look at.

Not sure I should even engage with Jon, since he makes stealthycat seem moderate, but wow are you wrong about all of this.
1) Please link to the "mutilation" of children. I know you guys on the right like to go to the most extreme examples hoping to prove a point to your fear mongering, but no one is getting their unit cut off here (before they are 18) so this does not fall under that concept. Hormonal therapy is reversible. so, you are wrong on part 1.
2) we have already refuted your parental consent nonsense, so I'll let that sit where it is.
3) 104 is well above the number needed for a study, and also speaks to the fact that this issue is much more rare than the fear mongers want you to believe. Kind of like Ye and the Jews. He is blaming the Jews for everything while meanwhile Jews make up less than 3 percent of the US population.
4) What business is it of yours what they do when they are 30? Not sure why any of this in any way is your concern. If you had a child who wanted this and you are opposed to it, you could simply say no, and then they likely will do it anyway when they are old enough (or not wait until 18 as there is plenty of underage drug use and smoking etc). It would be more tricky for them to do so without parental consent but I would argue (going slightly off tangent) that making it harder for underage kids to get weapons would be a better societal outcome than making it impossible for kids to get this sort of therapy.

Finally: the hypocrisy of the right to want to stop people doing things that affect them not at all (This, abortion, gay marriage, etc) while allowing things that are likely more harmful (guns, pollution, climate change) to everyone is so strange it is really hard to fathom. Its like "I don't like that planter in your yard" while a manure spitter is throwing crap on your lawn..
This is a silly comparison. jeez. And to our points. Providing puberty blockers is mutilation. and #4 is exactly as it should be.
Nope and nope. The effects of a puberty blocker is reversible. Wrong again. I guess taking the pill is "mutilation" as well since it stops a pregnancy from happening.
You like these wild, completely irrevelant comparisons, but no. Next?
full new quote:

“Little is known about the long-term side effects of hormone or puberty blockers in children with gender dysphoria.

Although the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) advises this is a physically reversible treatment if stopped, it is not known what the psychological effects may be.

It’s also not known whether hormone blockers affect the development of the teenage brain or children’s bones. Side effects may also include hot flushes, fatigue and mood alterations.”

Soooo: it is physically reversible so no one is being "mutilated" As for the other effects, they are lumping it under "we are not sure" and "we shall see" (kind of the same language the anti-vax crew was using to support their hysteria as well). That is exactly why we need to have 3 pages about this when, again, none of those arguing on the right have any real dog in the fight.
So the possibility of screwing with a kids brain is OK...Roger..Message received.
Again, so this is the only thing that conceivably you have an issue with screwing with a kids brain that has to be taken out of the hands of their doctor and parents? OK. ADD? Cancer treatment (intrathecal chemo wreaks havoc on the brain)? Antidepressants? Pain meds for high school athletes? Again, why are we cherry picking this particular topic over all the more "real" issues. Maybe bc it is a talking point and not a real "scourge"? Shouldn't the government then have a policy in place for all these things and parental and medical professionals choices be damned?
 
Again, silly argument, and I see you always going to an 11 year old. Again, if a child has a breathing issue and needs a nose job would you allow the government to say no to it? Kids dye their hair all the time BTW and it is about as dangerous as puberty restrictive meds. You wish to take this to an extreme, but this is not "extreme"

use a 9 year old or a 15 year old - you choose

and again, a nose job for a breathing issue is a medical problem that needs cured .... are you now saying trans is a medical problem that needs cured ?

If there was such a child who wanted all of the above and her parents were cool with that and they were somehow able to find a physician willing to do all that (and risk his medical licence in the process) I'd have an issue with that the same way I do with anyone who does all that to their body at any age; HOWEVER: this is in no way the same as a child who has issues about their gender identity, brings that to their parents who (and again, likely proving you don't have kids) after assessing their child (who they have known since, well, birth) and a physician decide this is what is best for the child then going on with a REVERSIBLE treatment (not surgery) proceed that was then no, I have no issue with it.

transitioning isn't as easily reversed when you're talking drugs etc ............. I have two kids and they wanted to do a lot of things when they were kids I didn't allow them to do because they were kids making kid choices and those choices/feelings/thoughts/ideas often came fast, left fast, and I'm very glad I realized they were kids



This is similar to your abortion argument: you make it seem like this is just something someone dreams up bc it is a Fad or convenient for them while ignoring in most cases there is a lot more emotional involvement that just "I want it". Its not a stuffed Pony, its a medical decision and the stakeholders involved are treating it that way, but somehow you do not believe they are using sound judgement. Somehow, yours is better, even though you have absolutely no dog in the fight.

you're right, its a very very deep and important decision wrapped in emptions and involvement and kids shouldn't be making these decisions
 
As the sibling of a sister that died at 10 from what was then a childhood disease (Cystic Fibrosis), I cannot agree that children of 8, 9, 10 cannot fully understand the conversations and thus the consequences involved in making such decisions. Children that have normal childhoods with nothing ripping them apart going on are generally not, but children ("painting with a big brush") that do are forced to be able to join such conversations.

again we're now saying trans is a disease that needs cured ?

at 10 years old, a person isn't adult enough to make adult decisions ..... do you disagree ?
 
Conversely, access to gender-affirming hormones in adolescence appears to have a protective effect. In one study, researchers followed 104 teens and young adults for a year and asked them about their depression, anxiety and suicidality at the time they started receiving hormones or puberty blockers and again at the three-month, six-month and one-year mark. At the beginning of the study, which was published in JAMA Network Open in February 2022, more than half of the respondents reported moderate to severe depression, half reported moderate to severe anxiety, and 43.3 percent reported thoughts of self-harm or suicide in the past two weeks.

[...]

So the study used to claim the enormous benefits of mutilating children studied 104 children around for a year. That is pathetic. Not just the number, but the time period and criteria. You are permantly ruining their ability to have sex and reproduce and all you do is check how they are doing a year later. What about when they are 30 and they have dealt with a decade of complications and maybe ow what children? That is what the study needs to look at.

Not sure I should even engage with Jon, since he makes stealthycat seem moderate, but wow are you wrong about all of this.
1) Please link to the "mutilation" of children. I know you guys on the right like to go to the most extreme examples hoping to prove a point to your fear mongering, but no one is getting their unit cut off here (before they are 18) so this does not fall under that concept. Hormonal therapy is reversible. so, you are wrong on part 1.
2) we have already refuted your parental consent nonsense, so I'll let that sit where it is.
3) 104 is well above the number needed for a study, and also speaks to the fact that this issue is much more rare than the fear mongers want you to believe. Kind of like Ye and the Jews. He is blaming the Jews for everything while meanwhile Jews make up less than 3 percent of the US population.
4) What business is it of yours what they do when they are 30? Not sure why any of this in any way is your concern. If you had a child who wanted this and you are opposed to it, you could simply say no, and then they likely will do it anyway when they are old enough (or not wait until 18 as there is plenty of underage drug use and smoking etc). It would be more tricky for them to do so without parental consent but I would argue (going slightly off tangent) that making it harder for underage kids to get weapons would be a better societal outcome than making it impossible for kids to get this sort of therapy.

Finally: the hypocrisy of the right to want to stop people doing things that affect them not at all (This, abortion, gay marriage, etc) while allowing things that are likely more harmful (guns, pollution, climate change) to everyone is so strange it is really hard to fathom. Its like "I don't like that planter in your yard" while a manure spitter is throwing crap on your lawn..
This is a silly comparison. jeez. And to our points. Providing puberty blockers is mutilation. and #4 is exactly as it should be.
Nope and nope. The effects of a puberty blocker is reversible. Wrong again. I guess taking the pill is "mutilation" as well since it stops a pregnancy from happening.
You like these wild, completely irrevelant comparisons, but no. Next?
full new quote:

“Little is known about the long-term side effects of hormone or puberty blockers in children with gender dysphoria.

Although the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) advises this is a physically reversible treatment if stopped, it is not known what the psychological effects may be.

It’s also not known whether hormone blockers affect the development of the teenage brain or children’s bones. Side effects may also include hot flushes, fatigue and mood alterations.”

Soooo: it is physically reversible so no one is being "mutilated" As for the other effects, they are lumping it under "we are not sure" and "we shall see" (kind of the same language the anti-vax crew was using to support their hysteria as well). That is exactly why we need to have 3 pages about this when, again, none of those arguing on the right have any real dog in the fight.
So the possibility of screwing with a kids brain is OK...Roger..Message received.
Again, so this is the only thing that conceivably you have an issue with screwing with a kids brain that has to be taken out of the hands of their doctor and parents? OK. ADD? Cancer treatment (intrathecal chemo wreaks havoc on the brain)? Antidepressants? Pain meds for high school athletes? Again, why are we cherry picking this particular topic over all the more "real" issues. Maybe bc it is a talking point and not a real "scourge"? Shouldn't the government then have a policy in place for all these things and parental and medical professionals choices be damned?
Ugh..Here you go with the comparisons again. Stop it. Transgenderism is a mental illness in my opinion. Period. And should be treated as such. There is nothing physical about it.
 
Again, so this is the only thing that conceivably you have an issue with screwing with a kids brain that has to be taken out of the hands of their doctor and parents? OK. ADD? Cancer treatment (intrathecal chemo wreaks havoc on the brain)? Antidepressants? Pain meds for high school athletes? Again, why are we cherry picking this particular topic over all the more "real" issues. Maybe bc it is a talking point and not a real "scourge"? Shouldn't the government then have a policy in place for all these things and parental and medical professionals choices be damned?

for the record I do not like drugging kids with schedule II drugs because they have extra energy or don't have patience, discipline or focus ...... and we might very well look back and realize the damage done on that count

you keep using examples that are diseases or illnesses that needs cured ......... is that how you see trans ? something that needs cured ?
 
Ugh..We are doing this again? We have been down this road. Just because I don't know any trans people does NOT mean I can't have an opinion on the subject. That's just the dumbest argument ever.
I don't know anyone that is in a verbally abusive relationship either. Are you saying I can't have an opinion on that either? Ugh..I hate these arguments.
There is a major difference. Almost nobody supports verbal abuse. Something like 50% of the country support trans people. We aren’t talking about a clear one sided issue. I believe saying you have your mind made up about a group of people who are not hurting others and are experiencing deep social emotional struggles without ever interacting with them seems like the wrong move. If one is so passionate about the topic, then one should probably approach it from the front lines. Meet people, see if the issue eye to eye.
 
children aren't capable of making their own medical decisions - can we agree on that ?
Depends on the age. I think they should have guidance and a very strong input on medical decisions. Children at 14 tend to be considered old enough to choose which parent they want to live with in cases of split custody. Many States allow students to drop out of school at 16. I don’t think there is one clear age where there is total agreement on when kids can or can’t make important decisions with far ranging impact.
 
Is there a link to the claim kids can get hormone blockers or similar without parental permission?

Not saying it’s for sure accurate but this 2022
Politico article says otherwise:

In all states, minors who seek transgender treatment need parental consent.

Link
 
The leading medical authorities all agree recommend gender affirmation treatments. But supermike80 from the inter webs disagrees. I’m torn.
  • The rapid increase in the number of children requiring support and the complex case-mix means that the current clinical model, with a single national provider, is not sustainable in the longer term.
  • We need to know more about the population being referred and outcomes. There has not been routine and consistent data collection, which means it is not possible to accurately track the outcomes and pathways that children and young people take through the service.
  • There is lack of consensus and open discussion about the nature of gender dysphoria and therefore about the appropriate clinical response.
  • Because the specialist service has evolved rapidly and organically in response to demand, the clinical approach and overall service design has not been subjected to some of the normal quality controls that are typically applied when new or innovative treatments are introduced.  

@jon_mx is doing heavy lifting in this thread.


"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Arthur Schopenhauer


When I see people attacking jon, I think of the above quote. Some people want to ridicule jon, and some would violently oppose him if they could get away with it, but the truth will always be self evident in the end.

What's the truth? - The majority of parents don't want what the radical left is demanding, offering and trying to push onto their kids. An extremely large cross section of parents across socioeconomic status, age, race, religion and culture will just plain vote against it. Their numbers are too overwhelming to try to surmount. The Virginia gubernatorial election was a test case of this in effect.

The more information jon presents, the more desperate the attacks on him will get. How many elections will Team Blue have to lose for the truth of this issue to become self evident to the zealot induced radical Big Blue base?
 
Ugh..We are doing this again? We have been down this road. Just because I don't know any trans people does NOT mean I can't have an opinion on the subject. That's just the dumbest argument ever.
I don't know anyone that is in a verbally abusive relationship either. Are you saying I can't have an opinion on that either? Ugh..I hate these arguments.
There is a major difference. Almost nobody supports verbal abuse. Something like 50% of the country support trans people. We aren’t talking about a clear one sided issue. I believe saying you have your mind made up about a group of people who are not hurting others and are experiencing deep social emotional struggles without ever interacting with them seems like the wrong move. If one is so passionate about the topic, then one should probably approach it from the front lines. Meet people, see if the issue eye to eye.
50% is a made up number that the media has forced on you. And what does "support trans people" mean exactly?
 
Again, so this is the only thing that conceivably you have an issue with screwing with a kids brain that has to be taken out of the hands of their doctor and parents? OK. ADD? Cancer treatment (intrathecal chemo wreaks havoc on the brain)? Antidepressants? Pain meds for high school athletes? Again, why are we cherry picking this particular topic over all the more "real" issues. Maybe bc it is a talking point and not a real "scourge"? Shouldn't the government then have a policy in place for all these things and parental and medical professionals choices be damned?

for the record I do not like drugging kids with schedule II drugs because they have extra energy or don't have patience, discipline or focus ...... and we might very well look back and realize the damage done on that count

you keep using examples that are diseases or illnesses that needs cured ......... is that how you see trans ? something that needs cured ?
You like to use the word illness, I use the word condition that needs to be managed. As a doctor, many conditions cannot be cured, simply managed. In any and all those cases, government does not intervene. It is up to the patient, their parents, and the doctor. We can look at this logically as a spectrum of choices and when does the government have a say or should they:
On one side we have real issues: Cancer, Pediatric Diabetes, ie life threatening conditions. On the other side we have a contact lens fitting. Putting a kid into a contact lens in no way is the same as a cancer treatment, but it is putting something into their body (in this case a class II medical device) that can have side effects (where a pair of glasses do not). On the entirety of this spectrum (ADD treatment likely falls somewhere in the middle) the government does not take the decisions for these conditions out of the hands of the patient, their parents, or their doctor. The only time they do is abortion and now this. Why? Abortion I can see the reasoning: the "unborn (as ou put it)" has no say, but here? Everyone is having a say.

Makes. No. Sense. Unless you see it as what it is: a political grandstanding moment instead of actual care for the person involved.
 
When I see people attacking jon, I think of the above quote. Some people want to ridicule jon, and some would violently oppose him if they could get away with it, but the truth will always be self evident in the end.

What's the truth? - The majority of parents don't want what the radical left is demanding, offering and trying to push onto their kids. An extremely large cross section of parents across socioeconomic status, age, race, religion and culture will just plain vote against it. Their numbers are too overwhelming to try to surmount. The Virginia gubernatorial election was a test case of this in effect.

The more information jon presents, the more desperate the attacks on him will get. How many elections will Team Blue have to lose for the truth of this issue to become self evident to the zealot induced radical Big Blue base?
So, this issue is about winning elections? It is not about any children. At least for the right side of the aisle? Thus you think that "team blue" is embracing a politically disadvantaged position. Says a lot!
 
The leading medical authorities all agree recommend gender affirmation treatments. But supermike80 from the inter webs disagrees. I’m torn.
  • The rapid increase in the number of children requiring support and the complex case-mix means that the current clinical model, with a single national provider, is not sustainable in the longer term.
  • We need to know more about the population being referred and outcomes. There has not been routine and consistent data collection, which means it is not possible to accurately track the outcomes and pathways that children and young people take through the service.
  • There is lack of consensus and open discussion about the nature of gender dysphoria and therefore about the appropriate clinical response.
  • Because the specialist service has evolved rapidly and organically in response to demand, the clinical approach and overall service design has not been subjected to some of the normal quality controls that are typically applied when new or innovative treatments are introduced.  



What's the truth? - The majority of parents don't want what the radical left is demanding, offering and trying to push onto their kids. An extremely large cross section of parents across socioeconomic status, age, race, religion and culture will just plain vote against it. Their numbers are too overwhelming to try to surmount. The Virginia gubernatorial election was a test case of this in effect.
I disagree with the rest of what you said, but agree with you here. Fear mongering requires people be worried about this happening to them or their kids. Creating a fear based platform is the only way for the right to win elections now (that and suppressing the vote) so they don't really deal with "real issues" they just make them up. Critical race theory and this transgender dust up all happen to be coming from the same person, using the same language. Again, John Oliver already exposed this but by all means, continue marching to that beat.
 
Wow, so much wrong here, and its almost hard to believe how wrong you are. This is basically a real issue that requires none of your usual silliness.

First off: Basically shrugging off mental health issues or minimizing them regardless of the cause is kind of obtuse on your part. Also the "we should all agree" is a pretty good straw man starter especially since it seems you have really no knowledge on the subject.

This law is not about "the kids". This law is about fearmongering. If you wanted to make a law about "the kids" how about starting with guns? Guns seem to be doing more damage to kids in school that what bathroom someone uses.

again the comparison to mental health ............ are you saying trans is a mental health disorder ?

and ummmmm we don't allow kids to buy guns or ammunition, or tobacco or alcohol, we don't let them write their own prescription drugs etc etc because they're not adults, not capable of being trusted with really important things like that, right ?
so you show that you didn’t read anything anyone posts…. KIDS DO NOT MAKE THIS DECISION BY THEMSELVES OR FLIPPANTLY. THEY MAKE THIS CHIOICE WITH THEI FAMILY AND WITH THEIR PHYSICIAN.

again, this is all about fear Mongering. Plain and simple.

You are naive and ignorant how this works in practice. Doctors are prohibited from councilling the child. They are required to affirm whatever the child says, hence the name affirmation therapy. As far as parents go, states require 'parental consent', but there are loopholes which as easily bypassed. If parents are non-accepting the child can just say the parents are hostile towards their gender identity and then parental consent is no longer required.

So the typical process of a 13-year old going into a planned parenthood facility. The kid goes in and declares they are transgendered. An activist associate goes over a questionnaire with the child and then they fax it to a doctor. The doctor reviews it and prescribes gender blockers and/or hormones. The kid walks out with drugs in about 30 minutes after their first visit.

Are you good with that process?

I know you weren't asking me, but I am not good with that process at all. For children, I think parental involvement is paramount and should be required. I think doctors should be free to counsel the kid and explore the possibility of alternative diagnoses. I think counseling and mental health consults should be part of the process prior to medical intervention. So if the process is that a 13-year-old can go to Planned Parenthood and walk out with drugs 30 minutes later with their parents being completely unaware, then I agree that more robust processes and requirements need to be put into place. But where that analysis doesn't take me to is the proposed solution that there is a blanket ban on treatment under any circumstance for anyone under the age of 18 as suggested by this proposed legislation.

Also, for what it's worth, I have a close family friend who started hormones as a teen and ultimately underwent sex reassignment surgery. The process she went through is nothing like you describe. She went to multiple counseling sessions over a period of nearly a year before starting medical intervention. She had numerous medical and mental health consults. Her parents were informed and involved every step of the way. It was a thoughtful and deliberate process that played out over time. Full disclosure - she was 18 by the time she started medical intervention, but she nevertheless went through a pretty rigorous course of evaluation before taking the steps she did. And I think it was a good thing.
 
The leading medical authorities all agree recommend gender affirmation treatments. But supermike80 from the inter webs disagrees. I’m torn.
  • The rapid increase in the number of children requiring support and the complex case-mix means that the current clinical model, with a single national provider, is not sustainable in the longer term.
  • We need to know more about the population being referred and outcomes. There has not been routine and consistent data collection, which means it is not possible to accurately track the outcomes and pathways that children and young people take through the service.
  • There is lack of consensus and open discussion about the nature of gender dysphoria and therefore about the appropriate clinical response.
  • Because the specialist service has evolved rapidly and organically in response to demand, the clinical approach and overall service design has not been subjected to some of the normal quality controls that are typically applied when new or innovative treatments are introduced.  



What's the truth? - The majority of parents don't want what the radical left is demanding, offering and trying to push onto their kids. An extremely large cross section of parents across socioeconomic status, age, race, religion and culture will just plain vote against it. Their numbers are too overwhelming to try to surmount. The Virginia gubernatorial election was a test case of this in effect.
I disagree with the rest of what you said, but agree with you here. Fear mongering requires people be worried about this happening to them or their kids. Creating a fear based platform is the only way for the right to win elections now (that and suppressing the vote) so they don't really deal with "real issues" they just make them up. Critical race theory and this transgender dust up all happen to be coming from the same person, using the same language. Again, John Oliver already exposed this but by all means, continue marching to that beat.
ugh.....The bias here is so gross. The right is the only platform using fear? I HATE biased positions like this, the person posting them shows no credibility whatsoever going forward.
Keep watching John Oliver though...It seems to be helping your bias
 
Wow, so much wrong here, and its almost hard to believe how wrong you are. This is basically a real issue that requires none of your usual silliness.

First off: Basically shrugging off mental health issues or minimizing them regardless of the cause is kind of obtuse on your part. Also the "we should all agree" is a pretty good straw man starter especially since it seems you have really no knowledge on the subject.

This law is not about "the kids". This law is about fearmongering. If you wanted to make a law about "the kids" how about starting with guns? Guns seem to be doing more damage to kids in school that what bathroom someone uses.

again the comparison to mental health ............ are you saying trans is a mental health disorder ?

and ummmmm we don't allow kids to buy guns or ammunition, or tobacco or alcohol, we don't let them write their own prescription drugs etc etc because they're not adults, not capable of being trusted with really important things like that, right ?
so you show that you didn’t read anything anyone posts…. KIDS DO NOT MAKE THIS DECISION BY THEMSELVES OR FLIPPANTLY. THEY MAKE THIS CHIOICE WITH THEI FAMILY AND WITH THEIR PHYSICIAN.

again, this is all about fear Mongering. Plain and simple.

You are naive and ignorant how this works in practice. Doctors are prohibited from councilling the child. They are required to affirm whatever the child says, hence the name affirmation therapy. As far as parents go, states require 'parental consent', but there are loopholes which as easily bypassed. If parents are non-accepting the child can just say the parents are hostile towards their gender identity and then parental consent is no longer required.

So the typical process of a 13-year old going into a planned parenthood facility. The kid goes in and declares they are transgendered. An activist associate goes over a questionnaire with the child and then they fax it to a doctor. The doctor reviews it and prescribes gender blockers and/or hormones. The kid walks out with drugs in about 30 minutes after their first visit.

Are you good with that process?

I know you weren't asking me, but I am not good with that process at all. For children, I think parental involvement is paramount and should be required. I think doctors should be free to counsel the kid and explore the possibility of alternative diagnoses. I think counseling and mental health consults should be part of the process prior to medical intervention. So if the process is that a 13-year-old can go to Planned Parenthood and walk out with drugs 30 minutes later with their parents being completely unaware, then I agree that more robust processes and requirements need to be put into place. But where that analysis doesn't take me to is the proposed solution that there is a blanket ban on treatment under any circumstance for anyone under the age of 18 as suggested by this proposed legislation.

Also, for what it's worth, I have a close family friend who started hormones as a teen and ultimately underwent sex reassignment surgery. The process she went through is nothing like you describe. She went to multiple counseling sessions over a period of nearly a year before starting medical intervention. She had numerous medical and mental health consults. Her parents were informed and involved every step of the way. It was a thoughtful and deliberate process that played out over time. Full disclosure - she was 18 by the time she started medical intervention, but she nevertheless went through a pretty rigorous course of evaluation before taking the steps she did. And I think it was a good thing.
Thank goodness she waited until she was 18 to start medical intervention? And she isn't messed up? Cause from what I am reading here, not starting your kids as early as possible is a horrible horrible thing to do to them. Good to hear she/he did the responsible thing and waited until adulthood to make that decision. Seems this idea CAN actually work. Who'd have thunk it?
 
But where that analysis doesn't take me to is the proposed solution that there is a blanket ban on treatment under any circumstance for anyone under the age of 18 as suggested by this proposed legislation.

I don't think this legislation bans ALL treatment. I think it bans SPECIFIC treatment. Is mental health counseling banned under this legislation? I was under the impression it banned hormone type treatments and surgery. But I'm only very vaguely familiar with this bill.
 
But where that analysis doesn't take me to is the proposed solution that there is a blanket ban on treatment under any circumstance for anyone under the age of 18 as suggested by this proposed legislation.

I don't think this legislation bans ALL treatment. I think it bans SPECIFIC treatment. Is mental health counseling banned under this legislation? I was under the impression it banned hormone type treatments and surgery. But I'm only very vaguely familiar with this bill.

Sorry, yes, that is what I meant. Medical treatments.
 
Wow, so much wrong here, and its almost hard to believe how wrong you are. This is basically a real issue that requires none of your usual silliness.

First off: Basically shrugging off mental health issues or minimizing them regardless of the cause is kind of obtuse on your part. Also the "we should all agree" is a pretty good straw man starter especially since it seems you have really no knowledge on the subject.

This law is not about "the kids". This law is about fearmongering. If you wanted to make a law about "the kids" how about starting with guns? Guns seem to be doing more damage to kids in school that what bathroom someone uses.

again the comparison to mental health ............ are you saying trans is a mental health disorder ?

and ummmmm we don't allow kids to buy guns or ammunition, or tobacco or alcohol, we don't let them write their own prescription drugs etc etc because they're not adults, not capable of being trusted with really important things like that, right ?
so you show that you didn’t read anything anyone posts…. KIDS DO NOT MAKE THIS DECISION BY THEMSELVES OR FLIPPANTLY. THEY MAKE THIS CHIOICE WITH THEI FAMILY AND WITH THEIR PHYSICIAN.

again, this is all about fear Mongering. Plain and simple.

You are naive and ignorant how this works in practice. Doctors are prohibited from councilling the child. They are required to affirm whatever the child says, hence the name affirmation therapy. As far as parents go, states require 'parental consent', but there are loopholes which as easily bypassed. If parents are non-accepting the child can just say the parents are hostile towards their gender identity and then parental consent is no longer required.

So the typical process of a 13-year old going into a planned parenthood facility. The kid goes in and declares they are transgendered. An activist associate goes over a questionnaire with the child and then they fax it to a doctor. The doctor reviews it and prescribes gender blockers and/or hormones. The kid walks out with drugs in about 30 minutes after their first visit.

Are you good with that process?

I know you weren't asking me, but I am not good with that process at all. For children, I think parental involvement is paramount and should be required. I think doctors should be free to counsel the kid and explore the possibility of alternative diagnoses. I think counseling and mental health consults should be part of the process prior to medical intervention. So if the process is that a 13-year-old can go to Planned Parenthood and walk out with drugs 30 minutes later with their parents being completely unaware, then I agree that more robust processes and requirements need to be put into place. But where that analysis doesn't take me to is the proposed solution that there is a blanket ban on treatment under any circumstance for anyone under the age of 18 as suggested by this proposed legislation.

Also, for what it's worth, I have a close family friend who started hormones as a teen and ultimately underwent sex reassignment surgery. The process she went through is nothing like you describe. She went to multiple counseling sessions over a period of nearly a year before starting medical intervention. She had numerous medical and mental health consults. Her parents were informed and involved every step of the way. It was a thoughtful and deliberate process that played out over time. Full disclosure - she was 18 by the time she started medical intervention, but she nevertheless went through a pretty rigorous course of evaluation before taking the steps she did. And I think it was a good thing.
Thank goodness she waited until she was 18 to start medical intervention? And she isn't messed up? Cause from what I am reading here, not starting your kids as early as possible is a horrible horrible thing to do to them. Good to hear she/he did the responsible thing and waited until adulthood to make that decision. Seems this idea CAN actually work. Who'd have thunk it?

No she's not messed up. She is doing very well. And it wasn't like she waited until age 18 as some magic number. It's just that she happened to be past 18 when she had completed her counseling and consults and everyone was comfortable moving forward. If she had started this a year earlier, she would have been under 18. So it's not the age of 18 requirement that is particularly relevant to me so much as I think there should be safeguards and consults in place to make sure that the decision to proceed with medical intervention is a deliberate and well-informed one. Also, as part of the process, she made a number of sperm donations to freeze prior to initiating treatment to allow an opportunity to have a child down the road that shares her DNA. Again, these are questions that should be thought through. I am in favor of a process similar to the one my friend went through.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top