Parental Rights, My Ass

Attack the most vulnerable and say it’s for everybody. What could go wrong?by Joe Fitzgerald

The so-called “parental rights” policies designed to force questioning teens to out themselves to their families would affect perhaps 4,000 students in Virginia, according to the Post.

Bringing it a little closer to home, that would work out statistically to about 25 students in Harrisonburg and 40 in Rockingham County.

But would it affect them all? If half the teens questioning their gender are able to talk to their families about what they’re feeling, then we’re left with a policy targeting fewer than three dozen families, county and city, affected by the coercive policy.

Trumpeting this as parental rights ignores that it is only creating those rights for a miniscule minority of parents, and that those are quite possibly, perhaps probably, the parents whose children may have the most to fear from them.
It’s hardly something the wielders of this latest wedge issue are doing for all parents. Rather it is something they are doing to a tiny and isolated group of teens who may already be feeling friendless.
In fairness, the policies would not necessarily force teens to out themselves. The policies could also force them to not talk to anyone at all about their doubts, concerns, feelings, decisions, or anxieties. In effect, the policies would tell the most vulnerable teens they can talk to their parents or to nobody, and if they can’t talk to their parents, Youngkin’s Education Department is telling them, then they can go find a closet.

Some people at Animal Farm have more rights than others.

There are those who will tell you this is not about creating a newer, more simplistic wedge to further inflame those already amped up about guns and abortions. Rather, it is about bathrooms. Remember when we were a nation concerned about war and peace, human rights, international relations, lifting people out of poverty, and educating children? There was a time in many of our lifetimes when those were some of the overwhelming issues, not to mention going to the moon and finding new ways to treat cancer.

It wasn’t a golden age by any means, but people who came of age in a time of a grifter president can be excused if they think half the political establishment has lost its mind. Several generations named for time periods or letters of the alphabet are growing up knowing they won’t have the long-term job security, pension benefits, advancement opportunities, or constantly improving education that for a period from WWII to Reagan were becoming norms. I can only imagine how they feel about bathroom bills at the highest level. I don’t need to imagine their shrugs and eye-rolls about what passes for policy discussions.

Many political leaders have convinced large groups of people that something is being taken away from them if the state doesn’t take enough control over the interactions of a few dozen children and their families. You almost have to admire their ability to blow this spark into a bonfire. Scouts have gotten badges for less, although in fairness they also have to tie a square knot.

My first job was as a gas station attendant. I’ve also been a newspaper reporter and editor. Those jobs have all but disappeared. Checkout clerks and truck drivers will follow. It would be good if the governor and his ilk could explain how to replace those tens of thousands of vanishing jobs instead of using the vast powers of government to victimize, demonize, or terrorize a few hundred of our most at-risk young people.

Joe Fitzgerald is a former mayor of Harrisonburg. This column has been republished with permission from Still Not Sleeping.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

101 responses to “Parental Rights, My Ass”

  1. vicnicholls Avatar
    vicnicholls

    Constitutionally, you can’t do things without your parents permission, as they legally are the guide, not the state. That is a fallacy by used by Hitler, Stalin, you know the communist/socialist/Nazi regimes.

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/09/16/upshot/september-2022-times-siena-poll-crosstabs.html
    “Do you support or oppose allowing public school teachers 2 provide classroom instruction on sexual orientation & gender identity to children in elementary school,” 70% percent answered “oppose”. A majority of Ds (53%) opposed it.

    https://www.theepochtimes.com/inability-to-distinguish-truth-from-fiction-has-laid-ground-for-totalitarianism-author-rod-dreher_4741087.html
    “The ideologues who run our government, children’s hospitals & things like that, prefer ideology to reality,” said Dreher. “This is the law. This is happening everywhere because parents don’t realize what’s going on because the media are hiding it from them.” The state usurping parents’ authority over their children is nothing new, Dreher said, noting that this happened under Stalin in soviet Russia. “The communists intentionally wanted the state to step in & keep these kids from being raised by the ‘bigoted old-fashioned reactionary ideals’ of their parents,” said Dreher. “This is happening in America right now.”

    Conservatives have had enough bullying, intimidation, doxxing, shaming, by progressives into bowing down to policies. Forget it.

    Medical studies showed/said the brain isn’t mature until mid 20’s. So why do we expect kids are mature enough for decisions like this? Make them eligible for the draft, responsible for debts, go to work, pay rent/food/mortgage, show fiscal responsibility. Just giving it to a kid who thinks reality = TikTok are one of the reasons this country is 2nd world.

    In other countries they’ve found that the changes are wrong, and all those involved should be able to be sued (personally, not the taxpayer picking up the tab) if a child decides to detransition. You know the folks you have been silencing.

    Kids don’t have rights. Too much allowing “I have a voice” when they need to mature, deal with real life, and then come back after they’ve lived out of Mommy/Daddy’s checkbook and house.

    Hundreds of thousands of girls have rights to not have males in their private spaces. To not be raped and sodomized in school bathrooms. To be able to use the restroom during schools.

    The progressives made schools all about progressive ideology, when kids academic skills and interpersonal and work skills are down the tubes. Too bad when those paying for it are going to not put up with this ideology.

    No one convinced us of that – the evidence did it. We had people who stepped up as leaders saying they understood our anger.

    Explain why thousands of girls’ rights to sports, intimiate areas, are toast now and progressives have used the vast power of govt to create victims, demonize, and terrorize hundreds of thousands of Virginian minors. Plus their parents in arresting them when they go to SB meetings because of the coverups.

  2. vicnicholls Avatar
    vicnicholls

    As usual, another air breather who posts without reading the Governors’ satisfying everyone and the law as best they can, toddler tantrum over not getting what they want.

  3. James McCarthy Avatar
    James McCarthy

    Proportions and perspectives concerning public policy effects can be refreshing. Culture war issues nor political ambitions need not skew leadership visions.

  4. LarrytheG Avatar

    Is it true that a child has no rights and essentially “belong” to their parents who make all decisions?

    If true, how does Social Services get involved?

    Does a transgender child have no rights and the parents make all decisions?

    Do transgender kids have some codified rights or none?

    1. I think Wayne answered that by posting Code of Virginia § 1-240.1

      1. LarrytheG Avatar

        What Virginia Code authorizes the state to take over the welfare of the child from the parents?

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          Okay Larry. Unblock him. WayneS’s harmless.

          1. Thanks. I really don’t care one way or the other, but the “offence” for which he blocked me pales in comparison to some of the insults that get hurled his way.

            And I would not block him (or anyone else) no matter what they say to me – unless it’s direct threats, of course.

          2. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            I should think being called “harmless” is the epitome of insult;-)

      2. LarrytheG has “blocked” me, which presumably means he cannot see my comments.

        1. Me too and my quality of life has improved markedly:)

          1. vicnicholls Avatar
            vicnicholls

            Same here but I blocked him long long time ago.

        2. Matt Adams Avatar

          I think we should make a club, at least these threads are readable without his comments.

    2. Only up until the end of the third trimester.

  5. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Isn’t a ship a she? Even when she is a man-o-war?

    The Republicans won’t be happy until Americans, like the French, assign gender to everything.

    1. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
      James Wyatt Whitehead

      She becomes a man o war if the bow is bluff. if she is weatherly, stiff, and fast. Very fast if well handled. Captain Aubrey.

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Plucked her eyebrows on the way
        Shaved her legs and then he was a she…

        1. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
          James Wyatt Whitehead

          Wouldn’t it be nice if we were older and we wouldn’t have to wait so long..

          1. Pet Sounds. A great album – and a masterpiece of audio engineering.

      2. Captain Aubrey had his way with words, didn’t he?

  6. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “Some people at Animal Farm have more rights than others.”

    For example (Christian?) teachers have more rights than parents of trans students…. Youngkin’s position in black and white…

    1. Please explain.

      1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        Under Youngkin’s policy, the “rights” of teachers overrule the rights of parents of trans students. It says so in black and white.

        1. Please provide a quote?

          EDIT – If you’re answering on the other thread please don’t feel the need to duplicate it here…

          1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Again…?

            4. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraphs (2) and (3) of this section,
            [School Division] personnel shall refer to a student by a name other than one in
            the student’s official record, or by pronouns other than those appropriate to the
            sex appearing in the student’s official record, only if an eligible student or a
            student’s parent has instructed [School Division] in writing that such other
            name or other pronouns be used because of the student’s persistent and sincere
            belief that the student’s gender differs from his or her sex.

            6. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (4) of this section, [School
            Division] shall not compel [School Division] personnel or other students to
            address or refer to students in any manner that would violate their
            constitutionally protected rights.

            #6 puts the “rights’ of teachers over the rights of parents of trans students (#4).

          2. I don’t see that.

          3. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Well, not sure why you don’t. It is plain to me. Parents have the right to “instruct” the school on how to address their child and “[School Division] personnel shall” follow those instructions. If, however, “[School Division] personnel” claim a right to not do so, their rights overrule the rights of the parents (according to Youngkin). That is what “notwithstanding” means.

          4. DJRippert Avatar

            The parents have rights over the their children. They do not have rights over the school personnel (who are not their children).

            Why is this hard?

          5. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            No, Youngkin specifically writes:

            “Parents are in the best position to work with their children and, where
            appropriate, their children’s health care providers to determine (a) what names,
            nicknames, and/or pronouns, if any, shall be used for their child by teachers and
            school staff while their child is at school”

            Shall means mandatory. Parents have the right to require certain names, etc be used by teachers. That is their fundamental right according to Youngkin. If, for instance, a parent instructs the school to only use male pronouns for their trans female child, do you doubt Youngkin would deny that right?

            But hold on there, according to #6 above if a teacher claims a right not to (and only then) they are exempt from the requirements made by the parents. Youngkin’s position is only when the parents are trans kids parents can the parents right be overruled by those of teachers.

            An aside: what happens when a child comes out as trans and wants to change their pronouns. A parents writes to the school that only birth sex pronouns shall be used – or refuses to write such a letter requesting the change. A teacher says that it violates their rights to be forced to use birth pronouns for trans students (using the same argument Tanner Cross used but to the opposite effect). Do you support that as the clear exercise of constitutional rights of that teacher over the rights of the parents?

          6. You are correct about that.

            In order for the law to not be contradictory, either “shall” needs to be changed to “should” in the above section, or the schools need to be empowered to require teachers to call children by the names chosen by their parent(s).

            Personally, I don’t have a problem with schools doing exactly that. If the parent authorizes a particular name for their child then there is no reason why a teacher or administrator should be able to refuse to use the name (within reason). And, as always, if a teacher suspects child abuse, such as a case where a parent instructs teachers to call their kid “sh!thead”, they need to report their suspicions to social services.

          7. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Twice in one day, we agree – pretty much anyway…!!

          8. What? You think a parent should be able to make his kid’s teachers call him “sh!thead”?

            😉

          9. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Mine did!

          10. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Sometimes it is an accurate characterization… but…no….

          11. True.

          12. What? You think a parent should be able to make his kid’s teachers call him “sh!thead”?

            😉

          13. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Ye gods and little fishes! A miracle!

          14. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Again…?

            4. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraphs (2) and (3) of this section,
            [School Division] personnel shall refer to a student by a name other than one in
            the student’s official record, or by pronouns other than those appropriate to the
            sex appearing in the student’s official record, only if an eligible student or a
            student’s parent has instructed [School Division] in writing that such other
            name or other pronouns be used because of the student’s persistent and sincere
            belief that the student’s gender differs from his or her sex.

            6. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (4) of this section, [School
            Division] shall not compel [School Division] personnel or other students to
            address or refer to students in any manner that would violate their
            constitutionally protected rights.

            #6 puts the “rights’ of teachers over the rights of parents of trans students (#4).

  7. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “Hundreds of thousands of girls have rights to not have males in their private spaces. To not be raped and sodomized in school bathrooms. To be able to use the restroom during schools.”

    Stop vilifying trans students, Vic! You are the epitome of deplorable at this point.

  8. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Well now, I have a small dilemma. If a 14-year old can on their own volition refuse lifesaving medical treatment, can they not make a similar decision if it is merely life altering?

    Starchild Abraham Cherrix might agree.

    1. Under Abraham’s law, both the child (aged 14-17) and the parent(s) must agree to refuse treatment.

      The child cannot unilaterally take the decision.

      from Code of Virginia 63.2-100.2 – …a decision by parents who have legal authority for the child or, in the absence of parents with legal authority for the child, any person with legal authority for the child, who refuses a particular medical treatment for a child with a life-threatening condition shall not be deemed a refusal to provide necessary care if (i) such decision is made jointly by the parents or other person with legal authority and the child;  (ii) the child has reached 14 years of age and is sufficiently mature to have an informed opinion on the subject of his medical treatment;  (iii) the parents or other person with legal authority and the child have considered alternative treatment options;  and (iv) the parents or other person with legal authority and the child believe in good faith that such decision is in the child’s best interest.

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Condition ii… that sure looks unilateral to me.

        Definition of abused or neglected child. Specifies that a decision by parents or another person with legal authority over a child to refuse a particular medical treatment for a child with a life-threatening condition shall not be deemed a refusal to provide necessary care if (i) such decision is made jointly by the parents or other person with legal authority for the child, and the child; (ii) the child has reached 14 years of age and is sufficiently mature to have an informed opinion on the subject of his medical treatment; (iii) the parents or other person with legal authority, and the child have considered alternative treatment options; and (iv) the parents or other person with legal authority, and the child believe in good faith that such decision is in the child’s best interest. Stipulates that this test shall not be construed to limit the provisions of § 16.1-278.4 on children in need of services.

        1. Right. such decision is made jointly by the parents or other person with legal authority for the child…

        2. Right. such decision is made jointly by the parents or other person with legal authority for the child…

          1. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            No. That’s condition i), parent & child. Condition ii) is the 14-yo on their own. Otherwise, it’s redundant.

            The remaining two conditions then have to be met. So, the parents are not negligent if i, iii, and iv, OR ii, iii, and iv.

          2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Respectfully disagree. The “and” before (iv) means that all four criteria must be met to qualify for the exemption. the point of item ii is that if the child is younger than 14, the exemption does not apply at all and it will be deemed a refusal on the part of the parents. I see nothing that excludes the parents in this law.

          3. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Then how is ii) not just simply included in i)? Condition i) clearly states parent/guardian AND child, regardless of age. Condition ii) is in direct contradiction of i) if child is 14.

            But then, no one has ever accused the GA of being unambiguous.

          4. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            i. says it has to be a JOINT decision (parents can’t make it unilaterally), ii. says the child must be at least 14 (treatment can not be denied at all unless the child is at least 14), iii. says they (parents and child) have to consider other options, and iv. says they (parents and child) have to believe it is in the child’s best interest. All four criteria must be met or the parents face child abuse charges. Clear as mud!

          5. Hey, check it out! Eric and I agree on something!

            😉

          6. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            You only think you do. Wait until the smoke clears.

          7. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Condition i demands like-mindedness. Parent AND child would have to agree to withhold treatment. Condition ii is opposite mindedness with 14-yo for withholding and parents not. The parents of a 14-yo cannot force the child to undergo lifesaving treatment, e.g., a 3rd organ transplant.

            The purpose of the law is when to hold the parents blameless.

          8. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            This is about when medical service can be denied. It may be that a parent can’t force a 14 y.o. to take medical treatment but this law says a parent can’t force a 14 y.o. (or any child for that matter) to refuse medical treatment. Only in the case where the child agrees and the child is 14 or older will the parents not be charged with child abuse for refusing treatment. Regulations and legislation are never straightforward. Too many lawyers is the problem.

          9. The most important part of ii is: …and is sufficiently mature to have an informed opinion on the subject of his medical treatment.

            It covers the instances where a 14 year old may not be mature enough to participate in his/her medical decisions. In such a case the entire section would be moot and the parents would be negligent if they refused “necessary care” for the child.

            I’m not sure how you determine the level of maturity of a child without going to court, though.

          10. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            A child, having undergone two lung transplants (cystic fibrosis) that failed can end the medical torture. ConditIon ii is the “Let me go, Mom” clause.

          11. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            I’m not sure how you determine the level of maturity of a lawmaker without going to court.

          12. The semi-colons following each numbered condition, with the “AND” following the semi-colon between conditions iii and iv mean that all four conditions have to be met. That is how laws in Virginia are structured.

            You would be correct if there was an “OR” between i and ii and an “AND” after the semi-colon following condition ii.

            It might have been less confusing if they had made ii, i and i, ii in the list.

  9. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
    f/k/a_tmtfairfax

    ” I’ve also been a newspaper reporter and editor. Those jobs have all but disappeared.”

    It explains everything.

  10. Trumpeting this as parental rights ignores that it is only creating those rights for a miniscule minority of parents…

    This is an illogical and invalid argument. Requiring schools to involve parents in decisions regarding their children’s lives does not constitute “creating” a right.

    No new right is being “created” here. A codified right is being protected.

    Code of Virginia § 1-240.1. Rights of parents.
    A parent has a fundamental right to make decisions concerning the upbringing, education, and care of the parent’s child.

    Or is there some obscure, alternate meaning to the word “fundamental” which you think the GA had in mind when it passed this law?

    On a more basic level, if you think the government “creates” rights then you may very well be living in the wrong country. In the United States, government has only two possible actions it can take regarding individual rights: Respect or infringe. And respecting individual rights is usually (or at least should be) a result of inaction, not action.

    1. vicnicholls Avatar
      vicnicholls

      I would add rights are GOD GIVEN, not by man, so that man usurps’ them.

      1. Agreed.

        I’ll also accept: Rights are Natural for those not of a religious persuasion.

        😉

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          Heretics have the right to immolate.

          1. Yes, but do immolate and inimmolate mean the same thing?

          2. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Burning questions.

          3. almost (in)flammable to be Mr obvious.

    2. DJRippert Avatar

      The author of the article is the former mayor of Harrisonburg. Heaven forbid you expect him to understand the state code.

    3. James McCarthy Avatar
      James McCarthy

      Reading the term “creating” as defining or clarifying or reinforcing seems to be the intended meaning. Affirmative government action is often a remedial necessity in protecting and preserving rights. When parents fail in their duty of exercising fundamental rights in regard to children, the state may step in. Sometimes the exercise of those fundamental rights may be abusive.

      1. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
        f/k/a_tmtfairfax

        Point well taken so long as there is a process that enables the school officials that believe that disclosing information about the child to parents would create a serious risk to the child’s health, safety or well-being to go before a judge, see that guardian ad litem is appointed to represent the child’s interests, and get an order from the court permitting non-disclosure or other needed measures, such as placing the child in foster care to avoid the bad home situation. Of course, at some point, the parents need notice and opportunity for a hearing to contest the action.

        1. James McCarthy Avatar
          James McCarthy

          That appeared to be the author’s point.

      2. Not a single one of my go-to* dictionaries includes a definition of “create” that includes “clarify” or “reinforce”, so why would I even consider reading it that way?

        And if “clarifying” or “reinforcing” is what the man meant, then maybe that is what he should have written.

        * Oxford, Cambridge, Merriam Webster and Collins

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          Matt says OED and Collins don’t count.

          1. OED definitely counts. In recent years I have not agreed with some of the new words they have added, but they know the English language inside and out – especially when it comes to obscure/archaic meanings for words.

            Collins is a distant #4 but because it is a popular dictionary I keep track of it.

          2. OED definitely counts. In recent years I have not agreed with some of the new words they have added, but they know the English language inside and out – especially when it comes to obscure/archaic meanings for words.

            Collins is a distant #4 but because it is a popular dictionary I keep track of it.

        2. James McCarthy Avatar
          James McCarthy

          I did not indicate definition of the term only how I apprehended the meaning of the sentence – as you noted he might have written.

    4. Ask the Humpty Dumpty leftinestas about word meanings….

    5. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      “Or is there some obscure, alternate meaning to the word “fundamental” which you think the GA had in mind when it passed this law?”

      I guess Youngkin interprets “fundamental” to dependent on whether those parents agree with him politically. Otherwise, he would not have given teachers veto power over the rights of trans student’s parents.

        1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
          Eric the half a troll

          What question do you have? Parents of trans kids have no “fundamental” rights according to Youngkin. Teacher’s rights override everything.

        2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
          Eric the half a troll

          What question do you have? Parents of trans kids have no “fundamental” rights according to Youngkin. Teacher’s rights override everything.

          1. In what way has Mr. Youngkin given teachers veto power over parental rights?

          2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            He says schools must conform with the requests of parents of trans kids but that teachers don’t have to follow those requests because of their rights. Did you not read the policy?

          3. I must have missed that part.

  11. DJRippert Avatar

    “Remember when we were a nation concerned about war and peace, human rights, international relations, lifting people out of poverty, and educating children? There was a time in many of our lifetimes when those were some of the overwhelming issues, not to mention going to the moon and finding new ways to treat cancer.”

    Yes, back in the good old days when boys used the boys room and girls used the girls room.

    Yes, back in the old days when the state respected the state las which puts parents in the driver’s seat f0r decisions regarding their children’s lives.

    1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      “Yes, back in the good old days when boys used the boys room and girls used the girls room….”

      “…and queers stayed in the closet where they belonged…”

      “Yes, back in the old days when the state respected the state las which puts parents in the driver’s seat f0r decisions regarding their children’s lives….”

      “…unless those children are trans, of course…”

      1. DJRippert Avatar

        The author was longing for the good old days, not me.

    2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      “Yes, back in the good old days when boys used the boys room and girls used the girls room….”

      “…and queers stayed in the closet where they belonged…”

      “Yes, back in the old days when the state respected the state las which puts parents in the driver’s seat f0r decisions regarding their children’s lives….”

      “…unless those children are trans, of course…”

  12. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “In effect, the policies would tell the most vulnerable teens they can talk to their parents or to nobody, and if they can’t talk to their parents, Youngkin’s Education Department is telling them, then they can go find a closet.”

    A very real outcome in this situation is that the number of homeless trans youth will grow (either through parent’s actions as a result of teacher’s outing students) or the child’s conclusion that they have no other option and they would be better off on the street. This latter would be more likely in foster home settings, I suspect.

  13. walter smith Avatar
    walter smith

    You people are crazy.
    Youngkin is not giving parents any rights. Parents have the rights. They birthed the child. This is akin to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
    The parental rights pre-dated the State and survive the State. Further, sorry to hit you with truth, but gender dysphoria is a mental disorder. In a sane world, which would therefore have to exclude current Lefties, this would be discouraged and the doctors who engage in it would lose their licenses for mutilating children.

    1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      Sorry, but gender dysphoria itself is not considered a mental disorder. “Gender dysphoria in adults and children is considered a disorder if the person also experiences significant distress or impairment in major areas of life as a result of the incongruence. Identifying with a gender different from the one that was assigned is not a mental disorder in
      itself. There is debate in the field as to whether this experience should be classified as a mental illness.” https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/conditions/gender-dysphoria

      1. walter smith Avatar
        walter smith

        Dick – I believe you have stated that someone in your family has had a sex change. I have a great friend who has a child who has had a sex change. I’ve got plenty of problems from my own kids, but am quite happy I have not had to face that. I can see being confused and I can see unhappy, but if it comes to thinking that changing your sex makes sense, then I think it is a mental disorder, and that doctors are wrong to perform these surgeries. Like abortion, just because you CAN doesn’t mean you should…

        1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
          Eric the half a troll

          “Like abortion, just because you CAN doesn’t mean you should…”

          And like abortion sometimes it is a necessary procedure and is a very personal and impactful decision… one that the state does not need to be involved with.

          1. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            OK Troll. It is never necessary. It is a denial of reality. 3.5 billion cells wired one way. It is a mirage of happiness. An illusion.
            You make the alcoholic “happy” by giving him a fifth, but you don’t help him. And the “State” is involved – a great amount of resources are devoted to the medical procedures and ongoing treatments to actually harm that person.

          2. vicnicholls Avatar
            vicnicholls

            I’m going to have to steal that one: You make the alcoholic “happy” by giving him a fifth, but you don’t help him.

          3. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Being trans=abortion=alcoholism… this is what passes for Conservative “common sense” these days… alas….

          4. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            I guess it was too complicated for you to see the parallels, huh?

        2. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
          Dick Hall-Sizemore

          Is the child of your friend happier now after the gender change?

          It may be a “mental disorder”, but that state must be the mental confusion/anguish that occurs due to feeling that your mental idea of your gender does not agree with your body.

          As I have said before, I cannot relate to this, so I don’t understand it. At the same time, I have come to respect the feelings of those who do.

          1. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            He says so, but is the former girl now really a boy? Now 26 years old or so. Can never be a father, or now a mother.
            It’s like people injured after the Covid jabs. It’s hard to admit you were wrong or duped or misplaced your trust. I think the medical “professionals” doing this are unethical – grifters for money. Not really helping in a substantive way. Profiting off of Confusion and unhappiness and the people pushing it are selling oceanfront in Nebraska…

          2. He can adopt or foster, or are they not considered fathers?

          3. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Seriously? If you adopt a child, the child is considered your child. You are to love the child like it is you own flesh and blood. I think most adoptive parents do. But do foster parents who do it for money? Humans can be very evil. Nonetheless, I am speaking biologically…and I think you should have known that. The “car” has been “fixed” not to run. You have chosen to put a “sexual governor” on your car, in denial of the car’s reality and purpose. I don’t think you “help” such people.

          4. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Further to my reply below is this article. Medical professionals have not covered themselves with glory lately, nor have lawyers. As they destroy trust in medicine and law for political ends, they destroy the fabric of society.
            https://victorygirlsblog.com/vanderbilt-admits-gender-clinic-is-cash-cow/

    2. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      Sorry, but gender dysphoria itself is not considered a mental disorder. “Gender dysphoria in adults and children is considered a disorder if the person also experiences significant distress or impairment in major areas of life as a result of the incongruence. Identifying with a gender different from the one that was assigned is not a mental disorder in
      itself. There is debate in the field as to whether this experience should be classified as a mental illness.” https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/conditions/gender-dysphoria

  14. It turns out that for “questioning teens” there is a provable, concrete, reliable answer to the question. They are either male or female and they can peek down their pants to find out, or if necessary they can take a DNA test.

    Every “questioning teen” has an adult sexual predator grooming them. Every one. Each and every case requires a criminal investigation.

Leave a Reply