Progressives in Virginia In Position to Overrule Parental Objections to Invasive Child Gender Dysphoria Treatment

by James C. SherlockThe Virginian-Pilot

, in an editorial, bemoaned Governor Youngkin’s endorsement of a policy that would require schools to tell parents about their kids’ transexual identity expressions at school.

It’s as though the potential consequences of such a policy have never crossed his mind.

The sure consequences of opposing that policy were not discussed.

The Pilot brain trust did not address, and perhaps did not care, that a child in Virginia must have a diagnosis of gender dysphoria as a predicate for mental health treatment. And, of course, for physically invasive treatments.

Most Virginians think parental/guardian consent is required for all of that. It certainly should be. But it won’t be if progressives find the right judge.

Medical ethics should help protect kids, but will not. Progressive medical providers think themselves to be doing the best thing for the child, even with the dangerous, irreversible and ghastly treatments to which some providers subject children diagnosed as gender dysphoric.

Neither will judicial ethics. Read the papers every day for things that progressives think best for all of us. Progressive judges will think themselves to be doing the right thing as well.

Virginia is thick with progressive doctors and judges. It is thicker with parents.

The progressives need to be stopped by changes in Virginia law. This is a very complicated subject.  So the background discussion will be extensive.

The editorial references high LGBTQ child suicide rates — the suicide card. A serious issue. Professional mental health intervention will reduce suicides. Everyone can get behind that. But school psychologists are not licensed for clinical practice.

So, professional help depends upon parental/guardian consent or a court order.

Another chapter of the progressive catechism holds that transgender children should be “supported” by puberty blockers, the effects of which are reversible, and cross-gender hormones, the effects of which include sterilization. But that also requires parental/guardian consent.

Or a court order.

The left would have to thread needles with no eyes in justifying both not telling the parents and getting the children medical treatment. So, they ignore the practical impossibility of holding both positions.

Dogma assumes miracles.

Or a court order. Progressive nirvana.

Dangerous parents. The Pilot wants parents kept in the dark.

It wants schools to honor the wishes of a child not to tell his or her parents. As a direct result, the children could not legally be diagnosed or treated without a court order. Which, in turn, would require the parents be advised of the child’s transsexual proclivities.

In order to take the child from the parents’ control using the normal state due process procedures in Virginia, a Child Protective Services (CPS) evaluation is required. It is predicated on evidence of abuse, not an assumption of it by school personnel. If CPS finds abuse, it will remove the child from danger. After which a guardian can make a decision on diagnoses and treatments of the child.

But the guardian would then need to agree with the treatments progressives favor.

So, while I urge the left to pick a side on this issue or at least acknowledge that CPS must be involved, they won’t.

They’d rather go to court. And cut out both parents and guardians.

Off-label use of drugs for treatment of gender dysphoria.

Let’s look at the process that it would take to get hormones that are approved for cancer treatment and chemical sterilization approved by the FDA for use in treatment of gender dysphoria in children:

In a phase 1 clinical trial, the tolerability and safety of the new drug is studied, usually in a small number of healthy volunteers. Phase 2 is aimed at determining the drug’s efficacy and optimal dosing regimen. After phase 2, the drug is entered into the next phase of testing in a phase 3 trial.

The main focus of phase 3 trials is to demonstrate and confirm the preliminary evidence gathered in the previous trials that the drug is, a safe, beneficial and effective treatment for the intended indication.

Phase 3 is the last phase of testing to be completed before the drug’s details and clinical trial results are submitted to the regulatory authorities for approval of the drug’s release on the open market. Phase 3 is therefore a vital phase of drug development and billions may be spent progressing the drug to a phase 3 trial, only for the drug to prove ineffective in a larger patient population or have serious safety concerns that prevent its approval.

Not going to happen.

Not because of the cost, but because the subjects of the trials would have to be children. And the hormone drugs in question are already known to be dangerous in their approved uses on adults. Read the warning labels.

One wonders where children’s hospital pharmacists and patient safety committees stand on this. Or if they have taken a position.

The suicide card. The Pilot, to seal the deal, plays the suicide card.

It asserts that transgender kids (along with the entire LGBTQ+ community of youth) are suicidal at epidemic rates. Yet it does not recommend broad suicide preventions policies. Which would make sense.

It simply recommends keeping information from parents that results in those children not being able to get professional help — mental health help — even without resorting to dangerous drugs or surgical procedures.

And thus increasing the probability of suicide.

The Pilot refers to the Trevor Project, a LGBTQ+ advocacy group with a mission to prevent suicide. I applaud that mission. I agree with much of what they recommend in Model School District Policy on Suicide Prevention. School divisions should review it.

Look in particular at the section on Sample Language for Student Handbook.

The only thing I would change is where it says “help connect the student to appropriate local resources.” I would substitute “help connect the student and his parents/guardian to appropriate local resources.” That mistake is repeated elsewhere.

But that work is far superior to Model Policies for the
Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia’s Public Schools. Which uses the word suicide twice in 23 pages of text.

A part of the Trevor Project suicide prevention Model Policy with which I respectfully disagree is:

Referrals and LGBTQ Youth

Information about a student’s sexual orientation or gender identity should be treated as confidential and not disclosed to parents, guardians, or third parties without the student’s permission.

In the case of parents who have exhibited rejecting behaviors, great sensitivity needs to be taken in what information is communicated with parents.

Additionally, when referring students to out-of-school resources, it is important to connect LGBTQ students with LGBTQ-affirming local health and mental health service providers. Affirming service providers are those that adhere to best practices guidelines regarding working with LGBTQ clients as specified by their professional association (e.g., apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/guidelines.aspx).

The Trevor Project, like others who advocate such policies, drifts through the complexities it raises without addressing them.

  • With the student’s permission.” No discussion of the fact that young children are defined as children and have special sets of laws written to protect them because their brain development and experience levels preclude complex risk-reward judgments;
  • Parents who have exhibited rejecting behaviors.” But the Trevor Project finesses that. It does not mention that schools must call child protection authorities in such cases. In Virginia, schools have no option. Due process will then determine whether the parents are dangerous to their children. That is certainly far better than the one in Model Policies for the
Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia’s Public Schools, which does not require parents to have exhibited such behavior: “Regardless of the circumstances, the school should support the student’s need for privacy and not disclose a student’s gender identity to other students or parents.”  
  • When referring.” School psychologists are not licensed for clinical practice. Are schools to refer students to outside “health and mental health service providers” without parental or legal guardian permission? In what state is that legal? Certainly not in Virginia.

Where do progressives stand?

The left’s positions on schools informing parents about the transgender expressions of a child are seemingly contradictory to a logical person:

  • Don’t tell the parents; and
  • Get the children the treatment they “need” — with dangerous drugs unapproved for the purpose.

The left seemingly must pick one. It would be interesting to see which they would choose. But they will continue to support both.

And seek court orders to get what they want in one step.

It gets worse. There is, unfortunately, a path to realizing that objective that does not go through parents and guardians. Progressive doctors and judges.

Doctors prescribed opioids to people for money. And went to jail for it.

So, there will be mental health professionals who will provide the gender dysphoria diagnosis on request. Because they believe in transgender support and diagnose any kid who exhibits transgender expression as gender dysphoric — a necessary step to provide that support. That is not even illegal.

So, please don’t contend that won’t happen. Or has not already.

In America broadly and in Virginia, parents can make decisions regarding their child’s medical treatment in everyday situations without state intervention. If the child is in a life-threatening health situation, a judge may put the child in state custody if the parent refuses medical treatment.

All the emphasis on LGBTQ youth suicide has two purposes:

  • To foreclose debate on the recommended diagnoses and treatments;  and
  • to serve as a predicate for judicial findings of child gender dysphoria as a life-threatening condition.

Judge-shopping is a real thing in both progressive and conservative circles.

Some progressive judges will lean forward on this issue. Again, please don’t contend none will do it. Read the papers.

If a progressive judge finds gender dysphoria life-threatening, he or she can overrule parental/guardian objections and order a diagnosis from a progressive mental health professional and then invasive treatments from doctors specializing in them. A progressive virtuous circle.

Recommendation for providers. I recommend children’s hospitals set internal requirements to get a court order for purposes of:

  • protecting children;
  • reducing liability; and
  • impressing physicians specializing in treating children for gender dysphoria with the seriousness of the matter.

It would be even better if those hospitals sought a second opinion on the diagnosis outside of the hospital system and took it to the judge. Break the closed loop.

That will help a lot for systems determined to do what most of us think is the right thing. Which I suspect is most of them.

But as a practical matter, it is unlikely to be a problem for a progressive-run children’s hospital with progressive doctors inclined to both issue a diagnosis and provide the treatments to find a judge to order those treatments with parental or guardian concurrence.

Those institutions and their medical people already are doing the right thing as they perceive it.

They should get the court order anyway. See the reasons above.

Recommendations for the state. The Virginia law controlling sterilization of children applies only to surgery. Chemical sterilization is not addressed. There is no logical reason it is not. It just isn’t.

That is what opens Virginia children up to be subjects of treatments with cross-gender hormones — drugs known

  • to be dangerous in on-label uses in cancer treatments and chemical sterilization; and
  • not proven safe or authorized by the FDA for any use in children.

Change the law to prohibit chemical sterilization of children. Make it a serious felony.

The issue of doing any treatments against the wishes of the parents or guardian also needs to be addressed.

I recommend Virginia specify in law that judges may not make a determination of a life- or health-threatening condition in the case of a child gender dysphoria diagnosis and use that finding to order treatments of any sort without parental or guardian consent.

Or, in today’s highly politicized environment, one certainly will.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

87 responses to “Progressives in Virginia In Position to Overrule Parental Objections to Invasive Child Gender Dysphoria Treatment”

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

    The factor that you keep skipping over is that a large majority of parents will already know about their trans children before the school does. It is likely the rare instance that a parent is not aware and in those cases, there are very likely good reasons (that involves very real risk to the child’s welfare). I have no problem with a school being very judicious about what it shares with those particular parents…. I certainly don’t think legislators in Richmond or the Governor should be making that call unilaterally.

    1. I certainly don’t think legislators in Richmond or the Governor should be making that call unilaterally.

      Is a governor of a state empowered to enforce state laws?

      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.

    2. I certainly don’t think legislators in Richmond or the Governor should be making that call unilaterally.

      Is a governor of a state empowered to enforce state laws? Of course he is:

      Virginia State Constitution, Article V- Executive, Section 7 – Executive and Administrative Powers. “The Governor shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

      And here is the law:

      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.

      Also, by definition, the General Assembly does act “unilaterally” when it passes legislation.

      1. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        That seems pretty clear to me. The law requires that parents have a FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT to make decisions concerning the … care of the parent’s child.

        Bypassing notification of the parents while providing care for gender dysphoria seems to be an agent of the state (teacher or other school employee) preventing the parental exercise of a fundamental right.

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

        Sorry, but in the case where a parent does not even know their child’s sexual identity, the school should have the ability to make a judgement call. If you can’t understand that, there is really nothing else to discuss.

        1. James Kiser Avatar
          James Kiser

          Your right about one thing you have nothing to offer to a sane conversation.

        2. James C. Sherlock Avatar
          James C. Sherlock

          “A parent does not even know their child’s sexual identity”.

          That is a wild and utterly self-serving progressive assumption. How the hell do you know? I really don’t care what you assume. It is completely irrelevant.

          The problem is with governance – the state.

          Schools have been directed by two consecutive progressive administrations to make the same assumption and act, or in this case not act, on it. To not tell the child’s parents what is going on with their child in school – at the child’s request – because they assume tha the parents are abusive. How the hell do they know?

          Seriously – at the child’s request? An 8 year old girl?

          I would take it seriously were I her counselor, but I would immediately call CPS to investigate.

          Your fellow believers want them to skip the philosophically and strategically inconvenient step of having CPS investigate whether there is actually abuse in play.

          You ought to be ashamed of yourself. So should all of your progressive true believers.

          You assume what you want to get the outcome you desire.

          Removing parents, who are likely to be more conservative than you when it comes to their kids, from the process of raising them is a strategic progressive goal.

          Mao had the same goal. He beat you to it. Millions died in pursuit of that goal.

          The current Chinese dictator has taken up the cause.

          He has taken the children of the Muslim Uighurs away from their parents and is having the state raise them. So they won’t hold Muslim beliefs when they get older.

          Tell me, and be specific, how this is different. Take all of the time you need.

          Then don’t answer the question. Which is the norm.

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

            “Your fellow believers want them to skip the philosophically and strategically inconvenient step of having CPS investigate whether there is actually abuse in play.”

            That is not true. It is the Conservatives who wish to force the teacher to not only return the child to the parents but also place the child at greater risk by informing the parents of the child’s trans orientation.

          2. James C. Sherlock Avatar
            James C. Sherlock

            So, I see you did not answer my question. Which, as I said, is the norm. Thanks for conforming.

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

            What this question?:

            ““A parent does not even know their child’s sexual identity”.

            That is a wild and utterly self-serving progressive assumption. How the hell do you know?”

            If the parent already know about their child’s sexual identity, why the Conservative demand that they be informed if the child informs the school? They already know. So there is no need to tell them what they already know and if they don’t there is probably good reason.

          4. No Conservative I know wants to see children returned to abusive parents.

            But please remember that choosing not to rear a child in exact accordance with “progressive” beliefs is not the same thing as child abuse.

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

            Recap: Sherlock contends that teachers and schools do not want to call CPS if they suspect abuse (something he said would be justified in his mind if the child is keeping their sexual identity a secret from their parents (I quote):

            “To not tell the child’s parents what is going on with their child in school – at the child’s request – because they assume tha the parents are abusive. How the hell do they know?

            Seriously – at the child’s request? An 8 year old girl?

            I would take it seriously were I her counselor, but I would immediately call CPS to investigate.”

            So here is the issue in a nutshell. Sherlock would deem this child to be at such risk of abuse that he would immediately call CPS. I pointed out that what Conservatives (including Youngkin) want is to inform the parents of the child’s sexual identity secret and hand the child back to the parents. I have seen no Conservative (aside from Sherlock) call for bringing in CPS in this scenario… have you…? I honestly have no problem with that solution for teachers… call CPS and let them deal with it… seems a bit cold but seeing as how Conservatives have vilified teachers and school counselors over this issue, it may be the only path forward… but that is moot because this is not the “solution” Conservatives seek.

          6. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
            James Wyatt Whitehead

            Teachers do not make the call to Child Protective Services. A teacher who observes abuse or suspects abuse will usually go to a guidance director or counselor. A statement is taken. Guidance director and principal make that call to CPS.

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

            OK. Again, fully appropriate. You are saying , I believe, that Youngkin should require that the school must turn any case of child not informing parents of their sexual identity (or orientation?) over to CPS and they have then met their responsibility?

          8. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
            James Wyatt Whitehead

            Here is what I am saying:
            1. The school should inform parents of minors struggling with sexual identity. Guidance counselors should disclose this immediately. Let the parents know. The kid is a minor and the parent is the major.
            2. The school should inform parents if a minor is attempting to legally and surgically alter their sexual orientation.
            3. Upon reaching the age of 18 the power to make these decisions is assumed by the former minor. No interference from school or parents.
            4. If school staff members suspect or have evidence of abuse of a minor who is abused by their parents/guardians should report this to guidance counselors, guidance director, principal or law enforcement. Including the subject matter we are speaking on.

          9. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            According to Sherlock, just the fact that the child has not communicated their sexual identity to their parents (or guardian) is enough just cause for him to immediately call CPS. It looks like you may disagree with him but if that is the case, then there is no onus for the school to notify the parents because it should be turned over to CPS. I have been told that no Conservative believes that a child who the school suspects is at risk of abuse (which is why CPS is being called) should be turned over to those parents. Do you still believe there is an onus on the school to inform those parents of the child’s sexual identity or should that decision be left to others (like CPS or a licensed professional)?

          10. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
            James Wyatt Whitehead

            Yes the schools should inform parents about a child’s sexual identity status if the child is attempting to initiate some form of change.

            Should the school become aware that sexual identity status changes are posing a risk such as suicide or abuse from parents then CPS should be notified as well.

          11. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            That is pretty amazing that Conservatives believe that CPS is warranted because of risk of child abuse but still you feel the school should out the child to those same guardians thereby increasing the risk of abuse. You care so much about so-called parental rights to know about a child’s sexual identity that you would increase the risk of domestic child abuse to fulfill it. Really amazing.

          12. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
            James Wyatt Whitehead

            No Eric. If a child as at risk CPS should be notified. You ask too much of schools. It is a burden that schools are not built for.

            Glad you were amazed. I can do the pull my finger trick too.

          13. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            If Johnny is wearing a dress to school, they should just let them wear a dress, maintain discipline (i.e., make sure they aren’t bullied for it) and move on to teaching math. If Johnny asks that they not tell their parents about their dress , then a red flag should go up and it should be escalated in the district to counselors and administrators. They should then decide the best course of action. I have no doubt the first suggestion would be to bring their parents to the table to discuss the issue (or it should be). Based on Johnny’s reaction, the call to refer to CPS would be made. In any case, it should not be “well, we have to notify your parents first… our hands are tied”. This is clearly an at risk student (which is probably why Sherlock said he would call CPS immediately).

            Counseling beyond what I outlined above should be left to medical professionals (who are also trained to spot abuse risks and are better equipped to manage parental involvement issues).

            As to the burden to the school, the percentage of students who identify as trans is really very small and the percentage whose parents are not aware of that identity is smaller still. What I outlined above (and which is consistent with the current recommended guidance) would not be a burden to the schools.

            As to your finger trick, when you misfire do you just smile and say, “SBD…😏”…?

          14. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
            James Wyatt Whitehead

            I would be frosted blue if I found out the school had not provided me with this kind of crucial information first before anyone else. Your line of thinking confirms why I am completely divorced from public education.

          15. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            So, again, the risk of abuse is so that Sherlock would call in CPS and your thing is to first notify the potential abusers. Maybe the divorce is for the best.

          16. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
            James Wyatt Whitehead

            Whatever. Tired of playing.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gbJg6-Ghw0

          17. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            That is pretty amazing that Conservatives believe that CPS is warranted because of risk of child abuse but still you feel the school should out the child to those same guardians thereby increasing the risk of abuse. You care so much about so-called parental rights to know about a child’s sexual identity that you would increase the risk of domestic child abuse to fulfill it. Really amazing.

          18. Thank you for that clarification.

          19. I have seen no Conservative (aside from Sherlock) call for bringing in CPS in this scenario… have you…?

            Yes. This morning when I looked in the mirror, for instance. I am quite conservative when it comes to parental rights. But it is also a “conservative” tenet that child abuse not be tolerated. I suspect that is a near-universal tenet regardless of one’s political persuasion.

            We already have legal procedures in place for school officials to follow when they suspect a parent is abusive. And, if Youngkin’s new policy does not include separate/additional procedures to be followed when child abuse is suspected, it needs to.

          20. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            So, what you are saying is that Youngkin’s policy should state that if the child asks that their sexual orientation be kept confidential that the case should be turned over to CPS. That is what Sherlock said. I would prefer the issue of parental notification or CPS involvement be left to the school or it’s administration to decide but if the legislature must make this call for schools, assuming the worse and handing it over to CPS is the second best solution, imo. I have not seen any other Conservative make that suggestion – certainly not publicly.

          21. No, that is not precisely what I am saying. Only cases in which abuse is suspected should be turned over to CPS. Otherwise, parents have a fundamental right to be involved in what is going on with their children – whether in or out of school.

          22. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Sherlock stated that the simple fact that the child has not told their parents of the sexual identity is just cause for involving CPS. In fact, he chastised Liberals for supposedly not doing so in that case. Now if I am not getting my BR contributors confused, I believe he has some experience in this area. Which one of you is right and if you guys can’t come to an agreement, what makes you think the legislature is better equipped to dictate a “one-size fits all” solution? (remember when “one-size fits all” was a Conservative anathema here on BR)… 🤷‍♂️

          23. No, that is not precisely what I am saying. Only cases in which abuse is suspected should be turned over to CPS. Otherwise, parents have a fundamental right to be involved in what is going on with their children – whether in or out of school.

          24. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            The ONLY person who should be able to provide counseling to a child without the parents’ detailed understanding is a licensed child psychologist / psychiatrist. That counseling should be done with the parents’ understanding that the only information provided to the parents from the counseling session is in cases where the child wants to hurt themselves or others.

            So, if the school refers the child to a licensed clinical psychologist (with the parents’ approval) and the clinical psychologist sets the ground rules that only in cases of self-harm or harm to others will the parents be notified of what is discussed in the counseling session – fine.

          25. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            So not what Sherlock said should happen in the case of the child not informing their parents of their sexual identity – he said call CPS.

            But, notice, you want the parents or guardians to be informed first, approve of a referral to a licensed professional and then information can be kept in confidence – like closing the barn door after the horses have escaped. In my opinion, the school really should not be actively “counselling” trans students on sexual identity issues but should be referring the student as necessary. Any doctor can then decide the best method for parental or guardian involvement and can trump the school as appropriate. CPS involvement can come from the licensed professional as well if appropriate. They are way more experienced at identifying and managing risks to their patients than anyone else (including abuse risks), imo.

          26. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            So, what you are saying is that Youngkin’s policy should state that if the child asks that their sexual orientation be kept confidential that the case should be turned over to CPS. That is what Sherlock said. I would prefer the issue of parental notification or CPS involvement be left to the school or it’s administration to decide but if the legislature must make this call for schools, assuming the worse and handing it over to CPS is the second best solution, imo. I have not seen any other Conservative make that suggestion – certainly not publicly.

          27. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            I concur with your assessment that child abuse is not tolerated regardless of your political persuasion.

            I recently listened to a book where the author participated with foundations to foil human trafficking. His axiom was that if you’re okay with selling drugs, you’re probably okay with gun running, and if you’re okay with gun running, you’re probably okay with selling human’s into sexual slavery child and older. At that point you’ll do anything that can turn you a substantial profit.

            The point being that people who contributed to that foundation and it’s work were from all political persuasions.

          28. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            I concur with your assessment that child abuse is not tolerated regardless of your political persuasion.

            I recently listened to a book where the author participated with foundations to foil human trafficking. His axiom was that if you’re okay with selling drugs, you’re probably okay with gun running, and if you’re okay with gun running, you’re probably okay with selling human’s into sexual slavery child and older. At that point you’ll do anything that can turn you a substantial profit.

            The point being that people who contributed to that foundation and it’s work were from all political persuasions.

          29. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            ” …. but also place the child at greater risk by informing the parents of the child’s trans orientation.”

            And there we have it – the child is not at risk when confiding in the government but is at risk if the parents know.

            Government > parents.

            It’s the Marxist way.

          30. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            So, to the Conservative mind, the school has no role in protecting students from domestic abuse… the Neo-fascist way…

          31. What is CPS looking for? It is very common for parents that behave perfectly normal right up until their kid comes out, and that’s when the abuse starts in reaction. Hell, even parents who are just abusive in general can clean up their acts to fool CPS. Are you okay with random check-ins? The child getting therapy that will help them, and not some conversion therapy garbage? Routine interviews with the child? Or are you going to bemoan parental rights some more?

            You’re the calling the risks “playing the suicide card” with a sneer. You’re acting like this proposal wouldn’t guarantee abuse. And, gutless coward that you are, still won’t answer me when I ask what we do with transgender adults who needed medical intervention as teens and are now stuck in bodies they didn’t desire. I told you what we should do with kids who need to detransition (medical treatment where possible, therapy, and ensure it is covered by insurance/medicare), but you can’t do the same because we know this isn’t about helping kids.

          32. James C. Sherlock Avatar
            James C. Sherlock

            That is the first time I have ever been called a gutless coward. I’ll consider the source and let it pass.

            Detransition – ensure what is covered by insurance? Getting their lives back? They are sterile. The doctors don’t get a do over. Is that your version of thoughts and prayers?

            You ask “what we do with transgender adults who needed medical intervention as teens and are now stuck in bodies they didn’t desire.” Interesting question. Never heard that one before.

            It is a hypothetical that does not stand up to medical reality. You should ask Kaitlin Jenner and any of the tens of thousands of adults who transitioned as adults.

            Get a new question.

            Here is one. Would you gladly turn your own child over to the state if it wanted to sterilize him or her and you didn’t?

          33. 1. Surgery can undo some of medical transition. In trans women, mastectomy, for example. I think insurance providers should cover for these surgeries, and failing that medicare as a fallback.

            Cute feigning of ignorance. But hey, you finally answered. Puberty does things that require surgery to rectify, and some things that are limited. Broad/narrow shoulders, height, changes to voice, all are more easily handled by skipping the wrong puberty. Especially important in light of sporting organizations setting up rules around trans competition. If a trans girl goes through tanner stage 2 of male puberty, they cannot compete.

            Your question is a fun trick, but no dice. Context is critical. Is the state plucking my kid off the street to sterilize them Tuskegee-style? Or is it the result of a process that only came after some time of discussion and thought by the child with a trained professional? Because personally I’d opt to be open with my child so they feel comfortable sharing that with me. No state involved!

          34. James C. Sherlock Avatar
            James C. Sherlock

            So no, you would not want the state to intervene. Thank you.

          35. Rosie, you’re relatively new to the blog, so I’ll cut you some slack. The rule here is: no ad hominem attacks. Commenters continually test the limits of my tolerance, but calling a contributor a “gutless coward” is unacceptable.

          36. He literally compared us to Mao. Tit for tat.

          37. You implied that he compared you to Mao as he was explaining how Mao took parents out of the picture in China. You need to thicken up your skin and read carefully.

          38. Lefty665 Avatar

            she inferred, he implied.

          39. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            “The rule here is: no ad hominem attacks.”

            😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂. My lord that is rich, JAB…!!

          40. James C. Sherlock Avatar
            James C. Sherlock

            I missed a few of your incisive points. Article was about invasive therapy, not mental health care. Go read it again.

            Parents can fool CPS? That’s an argument now? Are you getting near the end of your list? Routine interviews with the child? But you just told us parents can fool CPS.

            Mock suicide -prevention? I think I -praised the Trevor Project’s Model District Policy on Suicide Prevention and recommended it to School Divisions for consideration. I’ll go back and check.

            If there are any other questions I can help you with, let me know.

            P.s. Calling a man you have met a coward is quite a leap for a man who hides behind the screen name “Rosie”.

            .

          41. Bemoan (v) -(1) to express deep grief or distress over, (2) to regard with displeasure, disapproval, or regret.

            It is you and your cohorts who are bemoaning parental rights.

          42. Bemoan (v) -(1) to express deep grief or distress over, (2) to regard with displeasure, disapproval, or regret.

            It is you and your cohorts who are bemoaning parental rights. Mr. Sherlock supports parental rights.

        3. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          They’re just upset that corporal punishment was made illegal.

          If the parents can hide from the school then the school can hide from the parents. Turnabout is fair play among equal caregivers.

          1. Turnabout is fair play among equal caregivers.

            No, it is not. In fact, parents and the schools are not even equal caregivers.
            Legally, parents have far more rights than the schools. The schools are the state. I have seen you argue that the state should have no say in a person’s medical decisions. Are you now saying they should be involved?

        4. No. I don’t ‘understand’ that, and I am fundamentally opposed to school officials being given the power to make such judgements. As others have pointed out, if school officials think a child is in danger from their parent(s), it is their legal obligation to notify Social Services. Social Services is the correct agency to investigate and determine whether the perceived danger is real.

          Apart from that notification, no school official should ever be granted the power to unilaterally make such judgements. Until a child’s parent is determined to be a danger, and that parent has, after due process, had his/her parental rights legally revoked, the code section I referenced in my initial response to you applies.

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

            Maybe I should have been clearer so as to not let you spin this to something I did not say. The school in these scenarios (i.e., where a student has opted to not share their sexual orientation with their parent or guardian) should be able to make a judgement call on wether the parents need to be informed of the student’s orientation. I am saying nothing more. Sherlock says he would call CPS immediately in this scenario… I have stated that I am OK with that if the legislature must make this call for them (even though it might not be the best outcome for the student) but most Conservatives have not suggested this… instead they say schools must tell the parents… period…

  2. I’ll go into a larger breakdown later, but the premise that parents are not to be told by default is wrong and you’ve been told this ad nauseam and are ignoring it.

    School staff disclose the student’s status to whomever the child permits them to.

    1. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
      James Wyatt Whitehead

      “School staff disclose the student’s status to whomever the child permits them to.”

      I know that. That is a problem. We are taking about minors. The majors (parents) rights are upheld by state law. Model Policies is yet again not in compliance.

    2. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      You write “whomever the child permits them to” in bold. Congratulations. You and I agree wholeheartedly on a key point.

      1. Great! Glad we agree that parents can only be notified if the child grants permission.

        So, expected that to take a bit more time. Hmmm, know any good BBQ recipes for labor day?

        1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
          James C. Sherlock

          No, Rosie, I totally disagree with the philosophy, but agree that is state policy.

          1. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            It may be the philosophy of the state’s educrats but is not state policy as defined by state law.

    3. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      In your “larger breakdown later”, I encourage you to respond to my extended reply to Eric above. The world awaits.

  3. Warmac9999 Avatar
    Warmac9999

    At a ceremony on Tuesday, Gov. Doug Ducey (R-Ariz.) signed a revolutionary school voucher legislation into law. The bill, HB 2853, gives all Arizona families access to a universal voucher system — the first in the country.

    It specifically empowers parents by giving them the ability to reroute public education revenue and use it for private school tuition and other education costs.

    Above is the solution to the public school problem

    1. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
      James Wyatt Whitehead

      I hope it works. I will follow this story.

      1. Warmac9999 Avatar
        Warmac9999

        It will not be perfect. It will take time to implement. There will be some failures along with successes. However, it is certainly an obvious attempt at a viable solution. Let’s get back to public education not public schools.

    2. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Have you ever read any of Captain Sherlock’s pieces on what happens at nursing homes when private equity firms buy them?

      Private schools are not immune.

      1. Warmac9999 Avatar
        Warmac9999

        Nothing involving man is perfect, and thus the possibility of corruption and perversion cannot be ruled out.

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          That’s obvious. Mar-a-Lago is proof.

          1. Lefty665 Avatar

            as is Hunter’s notebook.

  4. James Kiser Avatar
    James Kiser

    So a kid who is 6 can decide it wants to take all kinds of hormone altering drugs because schools say so. But can’t buy cigarettes or beer. Yup all this sure makes sense to dumbocrats.

    1. I heard the surgeries are an excuse to harvest their organs to McDonald’s for McRib meat! Just take my word for it.

      1. In all seriousness, do you think a six-year-old child should be permitted to decide for him/herself to start taking puberty-blocking drugs?

        And, if not six years old, at what age do you think a minor should have full personal control over such a decision?

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

          How many 6 year olds have you heard on going through transitions without any parental involvement? I know of no cases but I must admit I am not as obsessed as Conservatives over the transexual student topic.

          1. No one that I know of. But then again, I did not bring up the subject of six-year-olds. I asked someone a question.

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

            You did not bring it up but you certainly jumped into the fray to argue the point.

        2. Children do not start puberty-blockers until around eight…for precocious puberty. Which nobody bats at an eye at and Sherlock isn’t even aware of since he thinks these drugs aren’t approved for anything. Hormone Replacement Therapy doesn’t occur until they are teenagers. Surgery is typically reserved until 18 or in rare, urgent cases where the dysphoria is greatly impacting the student or otherwise putting them at risk.

          No, I don’t think a child should making the decision alone. I have gone on the record many times that trans children should see professional help to sort out their issues. Maybe they are transgender and need social transition. Maybe they need medical transition. Maybe they aren’t transgender. The goal is to produce happy children who grow up to be happy, functional adults. If your goal is to prevent children from being transgender, then you are not interested in the welfare of the child and just trying to play gatekeeper in the hopes of reducing the number of icky trans people who make you uncomfortable.

          1. And for the record, Iwant parents to be involved. But if the parents have a goal of “my kid is not transgender no matter what anyone says, even my own child” then they still have to sign off on medical transition, but they shouldn’t be surprised when they’re out of the loop for social transition.

          2. Do they start them at 8 years old without parental consent?

            By the way, I have my personal opinions regarding “trans people” (as you call them), but I am libertarian enough to not concern myself with other people’s beliefs and actions unless they infringe on some else’s rights. I don’t care how many people are, or consider themselves, “trans”. They are people first and I treat them as such unless they go out of their way to indicate I should not.

            However, I am adamant where minor children are concerned, that no kind of medical treatment or surgery should be performed without parental consent – with my aforementioned caveat regarding abusive parents who have had their parental right legally limited or revoked following due process.

            Also, for certain personal decisions, I think 16 is a reasonable age for not requiring parental consent. Elective surgery, however, is not one of those things.

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

            How do you feel about faith healer parents who refuse medical treatment for their sick children. What is the Libertarian mindset there…??

        3. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          Where’s he going to get ’em? Using his AMEX Platinum card on Amazon?

          If the kid has hormone replacement drugs, then I’d say a doctor has usurped the teacher’s responsibility to say anything to anyone.

          What’s the difference between a vitamin and a hormone? You can make a vitamin.

  5. Lefty665 Avatar

    You jump to the conclusion that “They’d rather go to court. And cut out both parents and guardians.” . You then proceed on a pejorative judgemental rant repeatedly asserting that will inevitably happen. You do it all without citing anyone who actually has advocated that course.

    Congrats Admiral, you have once again jumped the shark. Galileo would recognize your MO from the inquisition.

    1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      I extend you a personal invitation to reply to my response to Eric above. I am tingly with anticipation.

      1. Lefty665 Avatar

        Sorry, you’ll have to go take care of your tingles yourself.

        You started with a proposition on parental rights that most would agree with then launched off into la la land as I noted above.

        Congrats Admiral on screwing up a reasonable position.

    2. Matt Adams Avatar
      Matt Adams

      You want to call that jumping the shark? There are individuals on this very thread that are saying just as much.

      Your “dislike” of Sherlock is clouding your judgement to even see what is going on right here.

      1. Lefty665 Avatar

        I appreciate your point of view. I do not dislike Sherlock, I dislike what he is doing. He makes unsupported judgements and jumps to unsupported conclusions to generate arguments. He does it repeatedly in post after post. That is his MO.

        For example, in this post, Sherlock has indeed stirred up a big wrangle. He did it not by presenting facts and quoting people directly on his topic, but by making unsupported judgements and jumping to conclusions.

        First he asserted that there are a bunch of people who want to bypass both parents and CPS to go directly to court to get gender changes ordered.

        Second he slanders our judicial system by asserting that there are a bunch of judges in Virginia who would leap at the opportunity to do that.

        Is it possible both those things are true? Maybe, but he has presented not the first piece of supporting documentation or evidence that either is.

        Over about the last month after getting wound up in several of his made up issues the light bulb came on for me. I started looking at how he was operating rather than getting sucked into the judgemental arguments he was precipitating. That has led me to comment on that rather than getting down in the muck wrangling.

        If the objective of BR is to precipitate people yelling at each other then Sherlock has succeeded spectacularly, this thread is a prime example. If on the other hand the objective of BR is to explore issues and to have rational discussions among people whose views vary then Sherlock’s behavior has debased the platform.

        There’s an old caution about wrestling with a pig in the slop of his pen. The pig likes it. Sherlock clearly likes it. Me, not so much.

        I value many of the posts on BR and have enjoyed becoming acquainted with most of the folks who hang out here. It is generally a pretty bright crowd. That keeps me coming back. I care enough about BR that I have taken the time to discuss and to possibly raise awareness about a segment that seems needlessly and repeatedly destructive.

        1. Matt Adams Avatar
          Matt Adams

          “First he asserted that there are a bunch of people who want to bypass both parents and CPS to go directly to court to get gender changes ordered.”

          Again, that is ferreted out in the comments by two posters who want exactly that by their own admissions.

          “I value many of the posts on BR and have enjoyed becoming acquainted with most of the folks who hang out here. It is generally a pretty bright crowd. That keeps me coming back. I care enough about BR that I have taken the time to discuss a segment that seems needlessly and intentionally disruptive.”

          I think there are other authors & commentators. who are far more egregious violators of the behavior you outline.

          1. Lefty665 Avatar

            I think there are other authors & commentators. who are far more egregious violators of the behavior you outline.

            Perhaps, but Sherlock’s behavior is by far the most prolific and consistent.

            I confess I have had limited interest in staying current on the postings in this thread, but I have just scrolled through it (ugh). There are lots of postings I do not agree with, but that is to be expected. Perhaps I missed them, but I did not see advocates of going directly to court, not passing go, not involving either parents or CPS other than Sherlock’s judgemental inflammatory initial jumps to conclusions.

          2. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            “Perhaps, but Sherlock’s behavior is by far the most prolific and consistent.”

            I would say the only difference between Sherlock and eric/larry/nancy/rosie (of note, I have blocked two of those three and the third blocked me for calling him on his bs) is the he publishes articles.

            Even the venerable McSmarmy and DHS follow the same pattern, they just publishes less articles.

            As for the comment about individuals. The notion that you should go directly to CPS is jumping straight to the courts. Unless there is documented reasons to why CPS should be involved they shouldn’t and in reality they will just muck things up as they always do.

  6. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Let’s at least be sane. A school kid, presumably under the age of 18, taking hormone replacement or undergoing transgender surgery has already alleviated the teacher of ANY responsibility to adress the issue. A higher authority is clearly in charge — a doctor. They outrank teachers, principals, counselors, and even the superintendent. And, except for pregnancy, doctors outrank governors.

    Realistically, something beyond Conservatives, what we are speaking of when we are considering things unknown to the parents is one thing, and one thing only — confidences. Even active x-dressing will find it way to parents through the coconut telegraph faster than a guidance counselor can say, “Ferris Bueller”!

    So, let’s get back to brass tacks! What responsibility does a teacher have if a child confides in them that they are feeling “gender challenged”?

    Maybe instead of a “hotline” to report teachers, da gub’na can set up an LBGTQ+ Crisis hotline for students and THEN he can be responsible to tell the parents since micromanaging seems to be his thing.

Leave a Reply