I don’t know the extent to which the federal government has the power to stop paediatric gender medicine in the Democrat-run states. Some federal measures appear to be expected soon. Some may be challenged in court. We will see.
As of August 2023, the Australian federal government has not banned gender transition in minors, but there is a bill that would prohibit certain gender clinical interventions.
Explanation
• The Childhood Gender Transition Prohibition Bill 2023 would prohibit health practitioners from performing certain gender clinical interventions on minors.
• However, minors can still access gender-affirming medical treatment with the consent of their parents or carers, or through a court order.
• Gender-affirming medical care can include puberty blockers, hormone treatment, and surgical procedures.
• The law around stage 3 treatment is less clear, and it may still require a court application.
• States and territories in Australia are responsible for providing gender services.
I live in a democratic run state in the US & am wondering how it will play out too. But from what I can see, at least in public schools, teachers will have to adhere to the sex binary. That in itself is huge, no more pronoun pleasers.
Well, perhaps I am too hopeful. As I understand it, would be effective immediately. Of course it will likely be challenged in court as you say. There is still work to be done 🤞
What a sad story for Grace and her mother. It is interesting to note the mother’s insight to avoid a referral to the gender clinic, essentially the place of no return, they’re not joking when they refer to ‘affirmation’.
Also the fact that the daughter has Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), a common feature of the gender dysphoria cohort.
I would ask tolerance as I post a paper from a past posting in GCN as it is so relevant to situation of Grace and her mother: A mental health condition that needs to be addressed far away from the Gender:
“All-cause and suicide mortalities among adolescents and young adults who contacted specialised gender identity services in Finland in 1996–2019: a register study”,
The Objective, Conclusions and Implications of that study are summarised verbatim:
Objective: To examine all-cause and suicide mortalities in gender-referred adolescents and the impact of psychiatric morbidity on mortality.
Conclusions: Clinical gender dysphoria does not appear to be predictive of all-cause nor suicide mortality when psychiatric treatment history is accounted for.
Clinical implications: It is of utmost importance to identify and appropriately treat mental disorders in adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria to prevent suicide.
The message:: Skip the puberty blockers, cross sex hormones and mutilating surgery and treat the psychiatric conditions!
I reference two short papers from Australia’s Sage Journals by Psychiatrist Dr Andrew Amos:
The first from February 2024, titled: ‘Gender dysphoria: Reconsidering ethical and iatrogenic factors in clinical practice’
Conclusions: Consistent with other western centres, in the 2010s, the Tavistock began treating patients with gender dysphoria under the 'Dutch protocol' for gender affirming care. Bell reveals concerning lapses of clinical governance influenced by activists and linked to patient harm. The recent suspension of a senior child psychiatrist from an Australian public hospital service after questioning the evidence base and ethical foundation of gender affirming care underlines the need to resolve these uncertainties to address the crisis in the treatment of gender dysphoria.
The second from June 2024, titled: ‘To examine the compatibility of gender-affirming care with the principles and practices of psychiatry’.
Conclusions: The assumption that there is no pathology involved in the development of gender diversity is a necessary precondition for the unquestioning affirmation of self-reported gender identity. Cases where psychosis is the undeniable cause of gender diversity demonstrate this assumption is categorically false. To protect this false assumption, gender-affirming guidelines forbid the application of the core psychiatric competencies of phenomenology and psychopathology to the assessment of gender diversity. They substitute the political goal of expanding personal liberty for the evidence-based medicine processes of clinical reasoning, rendering them incompatible with competent, ethical medical practice.
At least this BS will stop in the USA after the Trump proclamation. And hopefully the common sense will spread to Australia.
I don’t know the extent to which the federal government has the power to stop paediatric gender medicine in the Democrat-run states. Some federal measures appear to be expected soon. Some may be challenged in court. We will see.
As of August 2023, the Australian federal government has not banned gender transition in minors, but there is a bill that would prohibit certain gender clinical interventions.
Explanation
• The Childhood Gender Transition Prohibition Bill 2023 would prohibit health practitioners from performing certain gender clinical interventions on minors.
• However, minors can still access gender-affirming medical treatment with the consent of their parents or carers, or through a court order.
• Gender-affirming medical care can include puberty blockers, hormone treatment, and surgical procedures.
• The law around stage 3 treatment is less clear, and it may still require a court application.
• States and territories in Australia are responsible for providing gender services.
I live in a democratic run state in the US & am wondering how it will play out too. But from what I can see, at least in public schools, teachers will have to adhere to the sex binary. That in itself is huge, no more pronoun pleasers.
Do you mean that teachers in your state will be governed by Trump’s executive order?
Well, perhaps I am too hopeful. As I understand it, would be effective immediately. Of course it will likely be challenged in court as you say. There is still work to be done 🤞
What a sad story for Grace and her mother. It is interesting to note the mother’s insight to avoid a referral to the gender clinic, essentially the place of no return, they’re not joking when they refer to ‘affirmation’.
Also the fact that the daughter has Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), a common feature of the gender dysphoria cohort.
I would ask tolerance as I post a paper from a past posting in GCN as it is so relevant to situation of Grace and her mother: A mental health condition that needs to be addressed far away from the Gender:
“All-cause and suicide mortalities among adolescents and young adults who contacted specialised gender identity services in Finland in 1996–2019: a register study”,
The Objective, Conclusions and Implications of that study are summarised verbatim:
Objective: To examine all-cause and suicide mortalities in gender-referred adolescents and the impact of psychiatric morbidity on mortality.
Conclusions: Clinical gender dysphoria does not appear to be predictive of all-cause nor suicide mortality when psychiatric treatment history is accounted for.
Clinical implications: It is of utmost importance to identify and appropriately treat mental disorders in adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria to prevent suicide.
The message:: Skip the puberty blockers, cross sex hormones and mutilating surgery and treat the psychiatric conditions!
I reference two short papers from Australia’s Sage Journals by Psychiatrist Dr Andrew Amos:
The first from February 2024, titled: ‘Gender dysphoria: Reconsidering ethical and iatrogenic factors in clinical practice’
Conclusions: Consistent with other western centres, in the 2010s, the Tavistock began treating patients with gender dysphoria under the 'Dutch protocol' for gender affirming care. Bell reveals concerning lapses of clinical governance influenced by activists and linked to patient harm. The recent suspension of a senior child psychiatrist from an Australian public hospital service after questioning the evidence base and ethical foundation of gender affirming care underlines the need to resolve these uncertainties to address the crisis in the treatment of gender dysphoria.
The second from June 2024, titled: ‘To examine the compatibility of gender-affirming care with the principles and practices of psychiatry’.
Conclusions: The assumption that there is no pathology involved in the development of gender diversity is a necessary precondition for the unquestioning affirmation of self-reported gender identity. Cases where psychosis is the undeniable cause of gender diversity demonstrate this assumption is categorically false. To protect this false assumption, gender-affirming guidelines forbid the application of the core psychiatric competencies of phenomenology and psychopathology to the assessment of gender diversity. They substitute the political goal of expanding personal liberty for the evidence-based medicine processes of clinical reasoning, rendering them incompatible with competent, ethical medical practice.