Utah Bans Transition Care for Transgender Youth

[NWRatCon]

Utah Bans Transition Care for Transgender Youth (NYT, Subscription)​

Gov. Spencer Cox of Utah signed a bill on Saturday that blocks minors from receiving gender-transition health care, the first such measure in the country this year in what is expected to be a wave of legislation by state lawmakers to restrict transgender rights.

The law prohibits transgender youth in the state from receiving gender-affirming surgery and places an indefinite ban on hormone therapy, with limited exceptions.

Mr. Cox, a Republican, said in a statement that banning these treatments was necessary until more research could be done on their long-term effects.

“While we understand our words will be of little comfort to those who disagree with us, we sincerely hope that we can treat our transgender families with more love and respect as we work to better understand the science and consequences behind these procedures,” the governor said.

Once again, a State ignores medical science (yes, I know they claim not to), the wishes of parents (so much for "family values") and pushes to harm a significant part of the US population as political theater. I expect this will be struck down in short order. The Supreme Court - particularly the "conservatives" - have long pushed the fundamental interest of parents in the care and raising of children:

"The liberty interest at issue in this case-the interest of parents in the care, custody, and control of their childrenis perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by this Court. More than 75 years ago, in Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U. S. 390, 399, 401 (1923), we held that the "liberty" protected by the Due Process Clause includes the right of parents to "establish a home and bring up children" and "to control the education of their own." Two years later, in Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U. S. 510, 534-535 (1925), we again held that the "liberty of parents and guardians" includes the right "to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control." We explained in Pierce that "[t]he child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations." Id., at 535. We returned to the subject in Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U. S. 158 (1944), and again confirmed that there is a constitutional dimension to the right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children. "It is cardinal with us that the custody, care and nurture of the child reside first in the parents, whose primary function and freedom include preparation for obligations the state can neither supply nor hinder." Id., at 166.

Continued.

 

[NWRatCon]

In subsequent cases also, we have recognized the fundamental right of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children. See, e. g., Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U. S. 645, 651 (1972) ("It is plain that the interest of a parent in the companionship, care, custody, and management of his or her children 'comes to this Court with a momentum for respect lacking when appeal is made to liberties which derive merely from shifting economic arrangements'" (citation omitted)); Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U. S. 205, 232 (1972) ("The history and culture of Western civilization reflect a strong tradition of parental concern for the nurture and upbringing of their children. This primary role of the parents in the upbringing of their children is now established beyond debate as an enduring American tradition"); Quilloin v. Walcott, 434 U. S. 246, 255 (1978) ("We have recognized on numerous occasions that the relationship between parent and child is constitutionally protected"); Parham v. J. R., 442 U. S. 584, 602 (1979) ("Our jurisprudence historically has reflected Western civilization concepts of the family as a unit with broad parental authority over minor children. Our cases have consistently followed that course"); Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U. S. 745, 753 (1982) (discussing "[t]he fundamental liberty interest of natural parents in the care, custody, and management of their child"); Glucksberg, supra, at 720 ("In a long line of cases, we have held that, in addition to the specific freedoms protected by the Bill of Rights, the 'liberty' specially protected by the Due Process Clause includes the righ[t] ... to direct the education and upbringing of one's children" (citing Meyer and Pierce)). In light of this extensive precedent, it cannot now be doubted that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects the fundamental right of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children." Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000)

Of course, if it is politically expedient, this Court may just ignore all those precedents to rule the way they want to....

 

[VanceMack]

No doubt the idiot left will be very upset that children cant be mutilated and sterilized.

 

[Bok Tuklo]

No doubt the idiot left will be very upset that children cant be mutilated ...

Down with circumcision!

 

[VanceMack]

Down with circumcision!

OK then.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

No doubt the idiot left will be very upset that children cant be mutilated and sterilized.

At the moment I'm distracted by your hideously large banner.

 

[VanceMack]

At the moment I'm distracted by your hideously large banner.

Get over it.

 

[Bok Tuklo]

At the moment I'm distracted by your hideously large banner.

I thought that was the point.

 

[Ginger Ale]

It's becoming more and more important in these divided states of America to choose where you live with great thought. I'd say we were getting more like the EU everyday.

 

[NWRatCon]

I thought that was the point.

Some people who can make no contribution prefer to just prevent conversation by any means.

 

[Napoleon]

What the science tells us is that gender dysphoria resolves naturally with puberty in the vast majority of cases. So it seems prudent that such permanent body modification surgeries and puberty blockers be prohibited for children.

 

[reflechissez]

What the science tells us is that gender dysphoria resolves naturally with puberty in the vast majority of cases. So it seems prudent that such permanent body modification surgeries and puberty blockers be prohibited for children.

Why don't you ever show your work?

 

[NWRatCon]

The rightwing attack on all things sexually-associated is getting awfully fascist in its scope, from dictating one version of family values unrelated to the interests of the family or values, to dictating how candy is marketed. No acknowledgement that 10% or so of the population does not identify as "heterosexual" or that gender dysphoria even exists. It is of a piece, though, of the general dismissal of scientific thought among adherents.

 

[NWRatCon]

Why don't you ever show your work?

He can't lift his skirt above his knees! Quelle horreur! What would the Sisters think? His "scientific community" is resident in his imagination.

 

[Napoleon]

Why don't you ever show your work?

I have a multitude of times on this point.

“Evidence from the 10 available prospective follow-up studies from childhood to adolescence (reviewed in the study by Ristori and Steensma28) indicates that for ~80% of children who meet the criteria for GDC, the GD recedes with puberty.”

Gender dysphoria in adolescence: current perspectives

Increasing numbers of adolescents are seeking treatment at gender identity services in Western countries. An increasingly accepted treatment model that includes puberty suppression with gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs starting during the early ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[reflechissez]

I have a multitude of times on this point.

“Evidence from the 10 available prospective follow-up studies from childhood to adolescence (reviewed in the study by Ristori and Steensma28) indicates that for ~80% of children who meet the criteria for GDC, the GD recedes with puberty.”

Gender dysphoria in adolescence: current perspectives

Increasing numbers of adolescents are seeking treatment at gender identity services in Western countries. An increasingly accepted treatment model that includes puberty suppression with gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs starting during the early ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

From your article: "Cross-sex hormones are used for adolescents aged 16 years and older who continue to experience persistent GD. People aged 18 years and older with a diagnosis of GD may undergo SR surgery.32"

What's wrong with this approach? How do you suggest those dealing with GD be treated?

 

[NWRatCon]

According to the American Psychiatric Association, "Due to the dynamic nature of puberty development, lack of gender-affirming interventions (i.e. social, psychological, and medical) is not a neutral decision; youth often experience worsening dysphoria and negative impact on mental health as the incongruent and unwanted puberty progresses. Trans-affirming treatment, such as the use of puberty suppression, is associated with the relief of emotional distress, and notable gains in psychosocial and emotional development, in trans and gender diverse youth".[54]

 

[reflechissez]

According to the American Psychiatric Association, "Due to the dynamic nature of puberty development, lack of gender-affirming interventions (i.e. social, psychological, and medical) is not a neutral decision; youth often experience worsening dysphoria and negative impact on mental health as the incongruent and unwanted puberty progresses. Trans-affirming treatment, such as the use of puberty suppression, is associated with the relief of emotional distress, and notable gains in psychosocial and emotional development, in trans and gender diverse youth".[54]

Yep, Just "wait it out" doesn't seem like an effective approach.

 

[Napoleon]

According to the American Psychiatric Association, "Due to the dynamic nature of puberty development, lack of gender-affirming interventions (i.e. social, psychological, and medical) is not a neutral decision; youth often experience worsening dysphoria and negative impact on mental health as the incongruent and unwanted puberty progresses. Trans-affirming treatment, such as the use of puberty suppression, is associated with the relief of emotional distress, and notable gains in psychosocial and emotional development, in trans and gender diverse youth".[54]

The science tells us that gender dysphoria is resolved by puberty in ~80% of cases per the NIH link I posted. The policy should reflect the majority outcome per the scientific study of the issue not the outliers/exceptions. Especially since what we’re talking about are irreversible body modification and suppression of natural resolution to the disorder.

 

[reflechissez]

The science tells us that gender dysphoria is resolved by puberty in ~80% of cases per the NIH link I posted. The policy should reflect the majority outcome per the scientific study of the issue not the outliers/exceptions. Especially since what we’re talking about are irreversible body modification and suppression of natural resolution to the disorder.

Does that mean there was no therapy?

 

[BirdinHand]

I’m worried for this country when we have politicians with zero medical knowledge dictating what medical procedures people can/cannot receive.

Congratulations zealots and culture war enthusiasts I guess?

 

[NWRatCon]

From your article: "Cross-sex hormones are used for adolescents aged 16 years and older who continue to experience persistent GD. People aged 18 years and older with a diagnosis of GD may undergo SR surgery.32"

What's wrong with this approach? How do you suggest those dealing with GD be treated?

It is a confirmed tendency of your correspondent to fixate on a single discrepancy or aberrant notion and ignore the vast majority of context in which such deviance occurs - like picking one line of a multi-part analysis, or one sentence from an opinion and ignoring everything after the "but". I expect no difference here.

 

[NWRatCon]

Does that mean there was no therapy?

And, what does "resolved" mean? Being vague and ambiguous is another hallmark of your correspondent's methodology. "Science tells us". "History tells us" that most of his posts, when boiled down to their essence, are uninformed bullshit.

 

[Napoleon]

From your article: "Cross-sex hormones are used for adolescents aged 16 years and older who continue to experience persistent GD. People aged 18 years and older with a diagnosis of GD may undergo SR surgery.32"

What's wrong with this approach? How do you suggest those dealing with GD be treated?

For the reason I stated - policy should be based on the majority outcome rather than the outliers especially since what we’re talking about is irreversible medical intervention. Per the link - gender dysphoria is transient and resolves naturally ~80% of the time.

 

[Napoleon]

And, what does "resolved" mean? Being vague and ambiguous is another hallmark of your correspondent's methodology. "Science tells us".

It means what it says. They no longer have gender dysphoria.