Children and Puberty Blockers, Hormone Therapy, and Gender Reassignment Surgery

[Kaitzilla]

18 year-olds should be able to do as they please!


But what about the younger ones?

Should teens or kids be allowed access to powerful medical interventions such as puberty blockers, hormone replacement therapy, or gender reassignment surgery?

With parental permission, or without?

Should parents lose custody if they say no?

Should the government pass laws about this issue?
If yes, Feds or states?


From what I've read it is usually puberty blockers for the child -> hormone replacement for the teen -> surgery once 18 years or higher is reached.

 

[MaryKB]

This is absurd. You cannot "debate" peoples' rights to exist.

These questions are between a doctor, therapist, and the family involved. Discussing it like this feels extremely gross.

 

[Kaitzilla]

This is absurd. You cannot "debate" peoples' rights to exist.

These questions are between a doctor, therapist, and the family involved. Discussing it like this feels extremely gross.

I disagree.

Texas Child Protection Services has already declared the surgery to be child abuse.
https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc...firmation-surgery-minors-child-abuse-n1276687

Is there any thread to talk about that action?

What if they go further?

 

[MaryKB]

I disagree.

Texas Child Protection Services has already declared the surgery to be child abuse.
https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc...firmation-surgery-minors-child-abuse-n1276687

Is there any thread to talk about that action?

What if they go further?

Everyone knows that Texas is effed up - we could have a thread specifically about the atrocities of the Texas government. This thread however is debating the legitimacy of peoples' lives.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

This is absurd. You cannot "debate" peoples' rights to exist.

Red herring. That is not the issue at hand.

These questions are between a doctor, therapist, and the family involved. Discussing it like this feels extremely gross.

If you can't discuss it, you also can't have laws about it, or prevent laws about it.

This thread however is debating the legitimacy of peoples' lives.

No, it isn't.

 

[Anysense]

This is absurd. You cannot "debate" peoples' rights to exist.

Well, I think one's right to do something to somebody else - including their children - is debatable.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Well, I think one's right to do something to somebody else - including their children - is debatable.

So is childrens' ability to consent to things, generally. Society seems to broadly agree about that.

 

[Fippy]

Gender reassignment surgery for kids and teens under 18 years old?
Why should that ever be allowed..at this age lots of ideas (good, bad or questionable) go thru their heads.
They need to be protected from making hasty lifelong decisions until they can think like adults.

 

[Kaitzilla]

My opinion on the subject is that kids get depressed when they are powerless to change things for the better.

If the parents, kid, doctor, and mental health professional all agree, then there shouldn't be any blocks from the government for medical treatment for any age or procedure.

I'm a bit uneasy about kids being on puberty blockers for gymnastics to stay small and keep rotating fast, but I guess that is ok too.

 

[Kyriakos]

Well, assuming the puberty blockers don't have side-effects (by which I mean that they simply prevent puberty from kicking in), I am in favor of their use. But for surgery when the person is still legally a child (<18?) I do think that it is very risky, since (obviously) you can't go back if you change your mind, and kids can change their mind. Why not use puberty blockers until the person is of legal age to decide for themselves? (while they may still change their mind, it is their right and responsibility as an adult to choose whatever).

 

[El_Machinae]

I don't know when people remember entering the discussion, but I can only emphasize what an amazing godsend it was when society was trying to figure out whether the puberty blockers were a good idea

Of course there was the fight, and the controversy and the delays, but wow! did it sure make a difference. It's always reminded me of the 'hand washing' controversy of yesteryear, where the data were just so robust.

There's no amount of Amazon Prime you can binge that will fund that science. Or the next mental health issue that has a super-simple benefit that just needs to be discovered.

 

[Kyriakos]

If puberty blockers worked as age blockers... that would be a great development ^_^

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Well, assuming the puberty blockers don't have side-effects (by which I mean that they simply prevent puberty from kicking in), I am in favor of their use.

It's hard for any medication to have literally no side effects. If it weren't a big deal, why not just leave them as an OTC option that anybody can just walk in and buy if they wanted? You can do that with things like Tylenol, even though that can kill you if you take too much.

Maybe they really are that safe, or even safer. But then why the need to consult with a physician at all in order to purchase them?

 

[Kyriakos]

I have no knowledge of the matter, just wanted to bait El Machinae

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Well if they functioned as age blockers outright, they would be extremely popular, though less so with children lol.

 

[Narz]

I'd say 16 not 18. Obviously young angsty teenagers should be prevented from making such monumental & irreversible decisions they may later regret. In most states kids younger than that can't even get a tattoo & obviously messing w your endocrine system (let alone your reproductive system) is a much bigger deal.

 

[amadeus]

This is absurd. You cannot "debate" peoples' rights to exist.

It is not an existential question.

Children cannot:

• work
• get a bank loan
• consent to sex
• drive a car
• vote
• join the army

Should those restrictions also be abolished?

 

[Gorbles]

A large part of problem with the framing of this as one of age is generally due to a lack of education on the available measures. Puberty blockers, for example, are reversible. They don't stop puberty, they merely delay it. So it's framed as "protecting our kids" . . . but from what? Poor decisions? Every kid makes at least one. As El_Mac said (and hopefully I'm not misrepresenting their point here) the science is pretty evident. The cultural reaction seems to be overwhelmingly (by the percentages we have available to us, which is quite a lot of data at this point) from parents and associated relations.

Change is scary. I'm not going to deny that. I understand the fear that drives these reactions, even if the reactions themselves are what cause further harm.

But the real problem, as with a fair few things these days, is the uptake of "culture war" talking points, which undermine the science (pretty much by definition). This thrives because of a lack of widespread understanding of the science that allows misinformation to proliferate. And the additional problem here is that because of the "culture war", you see political parties taking up talking points purely on that basis, rather than any actual merit.

Gender reassignment surgery for kids and teens under 18 years old?
Why should that ever be allowed..at this age lots of ideas (good, bad or questionable) go thru their heads.
They need to be protected from making hasty lifelong decisions until they can think like adults.

There's nothing that indicates 18 is a magical age where people suddenly develop some kind of baseline of maturity.

That said, something like GRA isn't anything the same as prescribing hormone blockers, and it would benefit the thread if we separated them out into the respective categories.

Children cannot:

• work
• get a bank loan
• consent to sex
• drive a car
• vote
• join the army

Should those restrictions also be abolished?

None of these are existential, either. So I appreciate the logical train of thought, but unfortunately they don't match the clinical distress evidenced with gender dysphoria. It's not intentional, but this is a bit of a false equivalence. Hence my "education" drift, above.

 

[Kyriakos]

A large part of problem with the framing of this as one of age is generally due to a lack of education on the available measures. Puberty blockers, for example, are reversible. They don't stop puberty, they merely delay it. So it's framed as "protecting our kids" . . . but from what? Poor decisions? Every kid makes at least one. As El_Mac said (and hopefully I'm not misrepresenting their point here) the science is pretty evident. The cultural reaction seems to be overwhelmingly (by the percentages we have available to us, which is quite a lot of data at this point) from parents and associated relations.

Change is scary. I'm not going to deny that.

But the real problem, as with a fair few things these days, is the uptake of "culture war" talking points, which undermine the science (pretty much by definition). This thrives because of a lack of widespread understanding of the science that allows misinformation to proliferate. And the additional problem here is that because of the "culture war", you see political parties taking up talking points purely on that basis, rather than any actual merit.


There's nothing that indicates 18 is a magical age where people suddenly develop some kind of baseline of maturity.

That said, something like GRA isn't anything the same as prescribing hormone blockers, and it would benefit the thread if we separated them out into the respective categories.


None of these are existential, either. So I appreciate the logical train of thought, but unfortunately they don't match the clinical distress evidenced with gender dysphoria. It's not intentional, but this is a bit of a false equivalence. Hence my "education" drift, above.

If it is a "false equivalence" due to dysphoria being the crucial factor, why should people not accept euphoria as a crucial factor in (eg) consent?
While the boundary is largely arbitrary, I think it would be more logical to stick to it for all such issues. Besides, from the start of puberty (in context, the age, since drugs can push it further), to 18, it is only a few years, so why not have the surgery those very few years later?

 

[amadeus]

None of these are existential, either. So I appreciate the logical train of thought, but unfortunately they don't match the clinical distress evidenced with gender dysphoria.

I would agree with you; my intent wasn’t to imply any particular position from me on this topic.

This had actually come up in some discussion once before and I had changed my opinion after being told that the puberty blockers did not have an irreversible effect should the child ultimately decide that they had not made the right choice.