Category: Sexual Orientation

What happens if parents want to stop a child from “transitioning” from their natal sex? Obviously the child needs help because the desire to live as a member of the opposite sex is very distressing. The old medical consensus used to be that the best policy was “watchful waiting”, partly because nearly all children gradually change their mind and partly because the treatment is simply not safe. This is in danger of becoming a new dogma for the media, police, schools and policy makers. From their point of view, if gender affirmation is the only possible medical response to gender discomfort, the common sense response of watchful waiting constitutes child abuse. And this warrants removing children from their parents’ care.

Even if you allow room for differences of opinion regarding the content of HB19-1032, the approach promoted by the bill has the blunt force trauma of a singular perspective pushed upon an entire state. This approach should offend the liberty-loving inclinations of us all. Consider for a moment a legislative majority that supported mandated abstinence-only curriculum for teaching human sexuality. My arguments would be the same. Regardless of who is in charge in the Colorado Legislature, parental choice in education best serves children when those choices can be made as close as possible to home.

An English court has been presented with a mind-bending transgender dilemma in family law. Sir Andrew McFarlane, president of the Family Division of the High Court has called for the working of the 2008 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act to be examined. It emerged that “TT”, born a woman but identifying as a man, was allowed “to access fertility treatment legally reserved for women” only days after being legally accepted as a “trans man” and granted a Gender Recognition Certificate under the 2004 Gender Recognition Act. TT subsequently gave birth to a child, and “he” is now seeking to be legally recognised on “YY’s” birth certificate as the “father”.