The transing of our children – also known as the child mutilation industry – suffered two significant blows during the week.
In the US, according to The NZ Herald
“The US Supreme Court has upheld a state law banning gender-affirming medical treatments for transgender minors – an issue at the heart of the American culture wars. The court voted 6-3 on Wednesday (local time) to uphold a Tennessee law barring hormone therapy, puberty blockers and gender transition surgery for those under the age of 18. The six conservative justices on the top court rejected a challenge to the law while the three liberals dissented. Two dozen Republican-led states have enacted laws restricting medical care for transgender youth, and the case will have repercussions for the prohibitions across the country. “This case carries with it the weight of fierce scientific and policy debates about the safety, efficacy and propriety of medical treatments in an evolving field,” wrote Chief Justice John Roberts, author of the majority opinion.
“The Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal group, welcomed the ruling as a “huge win for children” and a “step towards ending dangerous experiments on kids”.
According to a report on DailyWire
“Thursday’s ruling is expected to have broad implications for the other state bans on the same transgender medical interventions for minors. More than 20 states with Republican-led legislatures have similar bans.”
Excellent.
And in Australia, The Australian reports:
“A judge who helped decide a landmark case in 2013 giving parents, rather than courts, the authority to approve the prescription of puberty blockers for their children says the outcome might have been different if today’s medical evidence had been available.
“Former Family Court judge Steven Strickland, who sat on the Full Court in Re Jamie, which authorised parents to prescribe children puberty blockers without the court’s consent, told The Australian that advanced medical evidence had shown it was “pretty clear” the treatment was risky.
“The medical evidence was the other way in Re Jamie, namely that the court could at least authorise that first step, because the medical evidence was that there was no risk involved. But now that’s quite different and there’s no dispute about that, that there are risks involved.”
The transgender industry continues to collapse under the weight of evidence.
NZ has been prescribing puberty blockers – and at a rate 10x higher per head of population than the UK where puberty blockers have recently been stopped because of what’s known as the 4-year long CASS Review which concluded that:
“Puberty blockers should no longer be prescribed to children except in the context of research due to these powerful drugs’ effects on brain development and bone health”
“Cross-sex hormones — estrogen and testosterone — should be prescribed to trans-identifying 16 and 17-year-olds only with an “extremely cautious” approach, and there should be a “clear clinical rationale” for not waiting until the teen is 18”
The CASS report also destroyed the suicide trope – better a live son than a dead daughter – which is used to manipulate parents
“Young people facing gender-related distress had no significantly different levels of suicide risk to other young people with similar levels of complex presentations.
“No evidence that gender-affirming treatment reduces suicide risk.
The façade of the justification for transing our children is crumbling before our eyes – and not soon enough.
At the end of last year, the Ministry of Health published its review of puberty blockers.
“The Evidence Review found a lack of good quality evidence for the effectiveness or safety of puberty blocking treatment in young people with gender dysphoria. We do not have good evidence to say that the medicines used improve the longer-term outcomes for young people with gender-related health needs – nor that the potential longer-term risks are low.”
Wow – that is damning.
That should be the end of it. When would you prescribe something that lacks good quality evidence, and has no evidence that improves outcomes or how bad the risks are.
Yes you wouldn’t.
And any parent who has a doctor who wants to prescribe them for their child should be shouting – hell no!
Earlier this year, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released a major new report urging exploratory therapy for youth with gender dysphoria rather than the chemicalisation and surgical intervention approach.
The report said that many of these children and adolescents have co-occurring psychiatric or neurodevelopmental conditions, rendering them especially vulnerable, and is published against the backdrop of growing international concern about pediatric medical transition. They say:
“Health authorities have also recognized the exceptional nature of this area of medicine. That exceptionalism is due to a convergence of factors. One is that the diagnosis of gender dysphoria is based entirely on subjective self-reports and behavioral observations, without any objective physical, imaging, or laboratory markers. The diagnosis centers on attitudes, feelings, and behaviors that are known to fluctuate during adolescence. .. Medical professionals have no way to know which patients may continue to experience gender dysphoria and which will come to terms with their bodies.”
The report clearly outlined the risks of significant harm:
“Nevertheless, the “gender-affirming” model of care includes irreversible endocrine and surgical interventions on minors with no physical pathology. These interventions carry risk of significant harms including infertility/sterility, sexual dysfunction, impaired bone density accrual, adverse cognitive impacts, cardiovascular disease and metabolic disorders, psychiatric disorders, surgical complications, and regret. Meanwhile, systematic reviews of the evidence have revealed deep uncertainty about the purported benefits of these interventions.”
That’s quite a list, isn’t it.
The report also said:
“The “gender-affirming” model of care, as practiced in U.S. clinics, is characterized by a child-led process in which comprehensive mental health assessments are often minimized or omitted, and the patient’s “embodiment goals” serve as the primary guide for treatment decisions. In some of the nation’s 15 leading pediatric gender clinics, assessments are conducted in a single session lasting two hours.”
The report rightly criticised the “gender-affirming” model of care recommended by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) – a group which has been totally and utterly discredited after the WPATH Files which exposed WPATH as just pseudoscientific surgical and hormonal experiments on children
But WPATH is also the basis of NZ’s model via the activist group PATHA (Professional Association for Transgender Health Aotearoa),
The HHS report said:
“… In the U.S., the most influential clinical guidelines for the treatment of pediatric gender dysphoria are published by WPATH and the Endocrine Society. A recent systematic review of international guideline quality did not recommend either guideline for clinical use after determining they “lack developmental rigour and transparency.”
Finally the report also calls out the harmful resistance to psychotherapy, including the mischaracterisation of such approaches as “conversion therapy” which actually affirms children in their biological body.
“The rise in youth gender dysphoria and the corresponding demand for medical interventions have occurred against the backdrop of a broader mental health crisis affecting adolescents… There is a dearth of research on psychotherapeutic approaches to managing gender dysphoria in children and adolescents. This is due in part to the mischaracterization of such approaches as “conversion therapy.”
“A more robust evidence base supports psychotherapeutic approaches to managing common comorbid mental health conditions. Psychotherapy is a noninvasive alternative to endocrine and surgical interventions for the treatment of pediatric gender dysphoria. Systematic reviews of evidence have found no evidence of adverse effects of psychotherapy in this context.”
Last week left another number of nails in the coffin of the ideology of transing our kids with chemicals and castration.
It’s an ideology that should rest in hell – far away from our vulnerable young people.