Our Federal Minister for Health and Aged care, Mark Butler, has been asked establish an independent inquiry into the ‘gender clinic medical records and a centralised registry tracking all minors treated for gender dysphoria’ as proposed by the National Association of Practising Psychiatrists (NAPP).
I am not optimistic that he will comply with such a request given Labor’s ‘stand’ on issues that might upset the electorate.
That aside, it interesting to note that the ‘Parliamentary website which cites ‘Qualifications and occupation before entering Federal Parliament’ references the only job Mr Butler has ever held a was as a Union Official from 1992 to 2007.
His qualifications would mirror those in the ‘chook raffle’ analogy.
I too doubt he will do the right thing, although it’s interesting to speculate about the degree to which his senior officials might be quietly informing themselves about the fact that the gender-affirmative worldview has some very persuasive critics.
ALP party policy position , of obligatory Gender Affirmative Care for minors, was adopted at their 2018 federal conference, and remains unchanged. All State Labor jurisdictions are obliged to comply under their party rules. For as long as their policy position exclusively references the self appointed, basically social activist group, WPATH ( and the Australian chapter AusPATH) their S.O.C 8 remains as the treatment protocol guidelines. Any legislative change , specifically, to protect future vulnerable children from medical ( hormonal and surgical) interventions would require future legislators becoming made aware that an overwhelming majority of relevant medical practitioners, who are directly involved with presenting gender incongruent minors ( paediatricians, child psychiatrists and paediatric endocrinologists) do not agree with obligatory G.A.C. specifically for minors, and , do not support current punitive “ anti conversion therapy “ legislation. Current nation wide lay legislators are either simply misinformed out of ignorance or perniciously consciously following an ideological position. It might take the facilitating of a change for it to become a “ hot button “ issue in the next federal election to convince future lay legislators that a majority of the medical profession, ( were they to be surveyed) and the electorate , support protecting vulnerable children, and the majority of medical practitioners.
Perhaps migrate to either Sweden to France where insight and commons sense seems to prevail and there is a more more conservative approach to 'gender-affirming care' for minors.
Someone will eventually have to write an entire book about the experiences of clinicians who called foul on the child-sterilizing cult.
Proposed title: "Fear of Gender: The Culture Of Silence In Pediatric 'Gender Medicine'"
Our Federal Minister for Health and Aged care, Mark Butler, has been asked establish an independent inquiry into the ‘gender clinic medical records and a centralised registry tracking all minors treated for gender dysphoria’ as proposed by the National Association of Practising Psychiatrists (NAPP).
I am not optimistic that he will comply with such a request given Labor’s ‘stand’ on issues that might upset the electorate.
That aside, it interesting to note that the ‘Parliamentary website which cites ‘Qualifications and occupation before entering Federal Parliament’ references the only job Mr Butler has ever held a was as a Union Official from 1992 to 2007.
His qualifications would mirror those in the ‘chook raffle’ analogy.
I too doubt he will do the right thing, although it’s interesting to speculate about the degree to which his senior officials might be quietly informing themselves about the fact that the gender-affirmative worldview has some very persuasive critics.
ALP party policy position , of obligatory Gender Affirmative Care for minors, was adopted at their 2018 federal conference, and remains unchanged. All State Labor jurisdictions are obliged to comply under their party rules. For as long as their policy position exclusively references the self appointed, basically social activist group, WPATH ( and the Australian chapter AusPATH) their S.O.C 8 remains as the treatment protocol guidelines. Any legislative change , specifically, to protect future vulnerable children from medical ( hormonal and surgical) interventions would require future legislators becoming made aware that an overwhelming majority of relevant medical practitioners, who are directly involved with presenting gender incongruent minors ( paediatricians, child psychiatrists and paediatric endocrinologists) do not agree with obligatory G.A.C. specifically for minors, and , do not support current punitive “ anti conversion therapy “ legislation. Current nation wide lay legislators are either simply misinformed out of ignorance or perniciously consciously following an ideological position. It might take the facilitating of a change for it to become a “ hot button “ issue in the next federal election to convince future lay legislators that a majority of the medical profession, ( were they to be surveyed) and the electorate , support protecting vulnerable children, and the majority of medical practitioners.
Is there anything parents (who want to remain anonymous until their children are free from harm) can do to assist?
Not sure. You could ask Genspect — info@genspect.org
Cheers- never thought about asking them. Will do
Perhaps migrate to either Sweden to France where insight and commons sense seems to prevail and there is a more more conservative approach to 'gender-affirming care' for minors.
Not a bad thought!