“taking LGBT patient testimony seriously also means that parents should lose veto power over most transition-related paediatric care”
Even the far left professor and cultural critic Camille Paglia has said that she believes indulging children in this is a form of child abuse.
Campus Reform reports:
ASU prof: Parents should lose ‘veto power’ over ‘most transition-related pediatric care’
An academic paper argues that parents should lose “veto power” over their children’s gender transition proceedings.
Maura Priest — a philosophy professor at Arizona State University — wrote a response in the Journal of Medical Ethics to another paper from Melbourne Law School researcher Lauren Notini, which argues that ongoing puberty suppression “is consistent with the proper goals of medicine to promote well-being, and therefore could ethically be offered to non-binary adults in principle.” Priest agrees with the authors’ conclusion, but claims that medical opinion should not override LGBT testimony when it comes to making decisions around the gender transition process.
“If the medical community is to take LGBT testimony seriously (as they should) then it is no longer the job of physicians to do their own weighing of the costs and benefits of transition-related care,” Priest wrote. “Assuming the patient is informed and competent, then only the patient can make this assessment, because only the patient has access to the true weight of transition-related benefits.”
Furthermore, Priest argued that “taking LGBT patient testimony seriously also means that parents should lose veto power over most transition-related paediatric care.”
Notini’s article stated that a hypothetical patient — in this case, an eighteen-year-old female named Phoenix who identifies as “gender non-binary” — should still be approved for hormone treatment despite the risk of lowering her bone density. In particular, Phoenix would have a “very low absolute risk of fracture.”
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.