Can Kids Consent to Hormone Blockers?

maybe in Mexico! Just sayin'

The word "sterilization" does not appear in post 25.

I did check Wikipedia though, and I found this:

Do you object to the use of hormone blockers for those reasons as well, or is your concern trolling limited to transgender youth?

Near the end of the 9th grade, I was forced to choose the 10th grade classes that would dictate the classes I'd be able to take in 11th grade, which would dictate the classes I'd be able to take in 12th grade, which would dictate whether or not I'd be able to attend college or university, and which ones I'd be able to attend.

I was 14, and I was required to make decisions that would play a major role in determining the direction of the rest of my life. I'm 40, and my career today is still affected by those choices I made in the 9th grade.

Where the fuck was Federal Farmer then to insist I shouldn't be forced to make such important decisions?

Concern trolling?

You want me to be concerned about something that happened what, 20 years ago when the Internet barely existed and I didn’t know you?

Yes.
FUCK YES.
GOD DAMN RIGHT.

/thread
(or it should be, as far as the original question, but I know it won't and I'll need to draw a couple of you fuckers a picture in crayon)

Concern trolling.

It's still happening to 9th graders now. Where's your outrage?

You don’t understand nuances do you?

Eye-yi-yi-yi-yi.

You're so fucking out of the lot I feel like I ought to get paid for teaching remedial classes. Let's start with a general pro-tip for almost any subject that will serve you well in life:
DON'T FUCKING FORM OPINIONS ABOUT SUBJECTS YOU KNOW FUCK-ALL ABOUT.

Now, let's start with Tavestock.
1. Puberty suppression is NOT new or experimental, it's been used for other purposes for 30+ years and the effects are WELL understood.
2. It's been used widely for trans kids for almost 20 years and that represents a pretty huge dataset to inform providers and parents' decisions.
3. Pubescent age kids consent to medical procedures routinely, usually with parental input. Comparing medical treatment to having sex or something like getting a tattoo is debasing and an insult to medicine.
4. Blockers are just that - a SUSPENSION of puberty for a period of time to give kids EVEN MORE TIME to be certain about their gender treatments (I've explained this shit to you before) and do not have permenant effect. They are administered to kids who've already professed a transgender identity for an extended period of time, not as casually as a flu shot (and in places without socialized medicine, are insanely expensive so you better have very good insurance and they, too, will have to be satisfied the treatment is appropriate before they pay).
5. The original Tavestck case was bullshit on multiple levels. It was brought by a detransitioner (which of course exists but are exceedingly rare) who fell in with TERF ideology and allowed herself to become a stalking horse against trans people in general. The main load of bullshit is the contention that being allowed to take blockers somehow locked her into a course of medical transition which she now regrets. (from what I understand she's kind of a troubled soul) but blockers do no such thing. However, given that the whole media ecosystem in the UK has been over-run by anti-trans TERF bullshit, the court ignored medical science and made a political decision. The original decision blocked access to blockers for under 16 (which by then it's too late) entirely. The decision that provokes your question is a moderation of the original decision which allows access with parental consent.
6. Over and above the reality that kids can and do consent to serious medical decisions, parents consent on their childs behalf every hour of every day and anyone who finds that objectionable is a few centuries late to the discussion, and if you find it objectionable ONLY in this regard, that's just anti-trans bigotry, as if our medical care isn't worthy of the same footing as that of others.
7. laying aside the reality that blockers are a "pause" and NOT permanent in any way, how many tens of thousands of parents have to testify "this treatment saved my child's life" before that carries more weight with the clickbait crowd than the one-in-a-thousand individual who's trying to "save" the rest of us from "their mistake"? Is Rogan asking Nicole Maines how it worked out for her? Or jazz Jennings? Or any of thousands of other thriving kids?
8. I am so VERY god-damn sick of the self-righteous motherfuckers roaming the countryside babbling about "kids don't even know what shoes they want to wear today" or some other drivel, expressing their firmly held opinion about people they have never met, or talked with, or god-forbid LISTENED TO! Some motherfucking Security Guard in Possum Trot TN knows exactly what to do (probably involving a good ass beating amirite?) but whole fucking medical and scientific professional organizations considering mountains of clinical research and years of professional experience treating tens (hundreds?) of thousands of individuals, and the parents of those kids, and indeed the god-damn trans person themselves...they are all involved in some massive conspiracy to...what, exactly?

Here's a thought: if you are not transgender, or directly involved in the life of a trans loved one, or a professional provider working with trans clients, or a medical professional scientists directly involved with research with and for trans people - you are invited and required to sit ALL the way the fuck down and shut your god damn meddling mouth and stay in your lane.

This don't concern you.


(Allies are needed, but only because the fucking busybodies and Pharisees refuse to butt out)

This is typically the case. Technically there's the rare exception when the "parent" is so blatently anti-trans that they become abusive or abandon the child such that they are not the primary caregiver anymore, but given the difficulty of obtaining these treatments in the best of conditions it's practically almost unheard of (and when it turns up in some news story it's BECAUSE its rare)

None of your god damned business. Stay in your lane.

Did your parents have to sign off on those decisions? Could they have decided otherwise?

Fuck off with that shit @Nova . We're having a discussion, not deciding policy.

Same motherfuckers telling us now that surgically modifying genitals is an affront to god because you should stay like he made you

Discussing the legitimacy of other people lives and, in point of fact, the whole course of the lives of the kids in question - in for the most part complete absence of any first hand knowledge...or even the level of interest to go read up on the subject, talk to some one who's been affected (both with them and without) and so forth is great sport for those of us who don't have to live in a world affected by the ignorance of those discussions.

Right now states are literally making it a felony offense to treat a trans child with ANY medical support that might aid them in transition.
Why?

Because 10 million ignorant ass motherfuckers had a "discussion" and decided we weren't fit to control our own lives.

There IS a way to have a productive discussion on this topic - it starts with recognizing what you don't know and saying to someone who does "Help me understand"

That ain't what this is.

The point of circumcision is too many ignorant assholes (including me when my kids were born) think the only thing you need in life is "Because GAWD SAID!"

Turns out that too is bullshit.

Well, you've already shut that shit down by saying it's none of our business. How are you going to convince anyone of jack or shit while denying them the ability to ask qestions?

little more than a hundred years ago, the kids we think are unable to decide basically anything now days were seasoned veterans of dangerous factory or farm work that they didn't consent to either.

Good old days, eh?

He's not a good faith actor here. If YOU had ask, or say OTC, or Demi, or almost anyone else, I've got all night long to be a teacher. I don't have time to answer 500 "yeah but..." from a skeptic who still thinks Joe Rogan is a go to source to inform his views.

I am not a doctor.

My understanding is that hormone blockers don’t cancel puberty (unless you decide to continue) but only delay.

So if later you change your mind you can and no harm no foul.

As someone that believes in keeping your options open, if my understanding is correct, then I don’t see the problem.

I mean if your argument is teenagers are too young to decide this kind of stuff, what is the issue with delaying the decision point until they are older?

I must be misunderstanding the question then. Is the question about whether or not children can ask their parents to get the drugs prescribed, or is it about whether or not they can ask their doctor to get drugs prescribed without their parent's input? Because, full disclosure, I don't have any kids, but how is the latter even legal?

My understanding here is that Federal Farmer objects to the minors having access to the drugs at all.


And I'm pretty sure I went to the doctor as a kid, described my symptoms, got a prescription, and went to the pharmacist to have it filled. My mother might driven me there and been present in the examination room and been the one to pay the pharmacist, but it wasn't a case of "Ray needs antibiotics, but let's see what Rays mom thinks first."

Well, that's a horse of a different color.

That "brain fully formed" thing is why some legislators tried to get away with bills banning any medical treatment for trans kids until TWENTY ONE after all the damage is done.

Here's the problem with that, sincere answer for a presumably sincere participant here:
The only "non-decision" ***IS*** puberty suppression.
If you are not allowed this, natural puberty ensues by default and brings with it a lifetime of pain, distress, and expense.

The whole purpose of blockers is to give the child MORE TIME to make the most well informed, thoroughly considered, professionally supervised decision about what comes next. It is the compassionate choice for kids who are dealing with shit you can't imagine.

Without it, around half of them will try to take their own lives and more than that will suffer other social problems like drinking, drug abuse, self harm, anger issues, even criminality.

In any case, saying "we can't do blockers too soon" is a willfully bad faith argument because without them, the damage is done b the time they hit 15 or 16 and then the critic just goes "oh well" and moves on having fucked over the lives of who knows how many kids.

The latter is not generally legal except when the parent is an untrustworthy actor for some reason.

for example (these are based on actual cases)
*child declares themselves trans at, say, 8. Mom is supportive, dad is not, parents split and fight over what's best for the child, courts end up involved over whether one parent consent is enough when puberty arrives (and sometimes before, the case I have in mind, the dad fought tooth and nail against non-medical social transition, kept shaving the kids head and shit)
*both parents disapprove, kick the kid out and the kid goes to live with a grandparent or an aunt, then the parent shows up wanting a veto when the kid seeks treatment with their guardian's support
*the child presents as outright suicidal in the absence of treatment but the parent still won't consent

It's actually pretty damned rare, but it happens. Somewhat more in the UK and other places with public medicine because they have even more gatekeepers than we do so when it happens it's throughly vetted. As an aside, a "smooth" approval for trans care there can take YEARS because of the combination of gatekeeping and few qualified providers.

Yeah, sorry but I have a hard time believing all that happened without a parent signing off on something.

This is what I'm talking about MAOHS - this is not a "help me understand" discussion, this is an "I'ma tell you why you're identity is not legitimate" deceleration.

dude literally cited a religious outfit (masquerading as medical science as they are wont to do) in one of this links here.

And he seems to be using the final quote in exactly the opposite context of the original intent - it's not saying the blockers are irreversible but the effects of NOT using them are irreversible (or painful and costly to attempt to remedy)

The Dutch study was a mess (as the Pharisees use it)

But the main thing that's missing here?
There are millions of transitioned trans people - of both genders - of al ages, who received medical intervention in their youth and who did not.

It is BEYOND simple to simple study this cohort and see the derivative effect of the medical intervention or lack thereof in their lives. It's not ideal because you cannot ethically construct a significant control group (because that would involve denying treatment to those who want it) but all this blather about how "dangerous" it is? Comes from folks who can't be bothered to consider those of us who have lived through it.

go out and fine someone in their 20's who had puberty blockers and regrets it now, if you can, and see how many they are as a proportion of all the kids who got them and are thriving now. For just one example.

The thing that sets my hair on fire here is that people who have nothing to do with any of this feel entitled to have a veto on our lives. And the whole "we're just worried about the kids" thing is very much bullshit. I mean maybe the buffaloed FF into thinking there's a real reason to worry about the kids, but the people who pedal anti-trans bullshit to politicians and media - like that one site he linked - they know very well what they are doing: setting up an emotional wedge issue whereby they lead the public to believe that ALL trans people are less legitimate, less deserving of their own bodily autonomy, less worthy of respect from others, subject to the veto of our betters who feel obliged to save us from ourselves.

This is the BEGINNING, just like the stupid sports bills, just like the failed bathroom bill campaign, to increase their political power and influence at our expense. People like FF are simply the marks in this con, and if we - who's lives are literally on the line - don't raise hell, they'll win.

Nope!

You completely misunderstood the quote - literally 180 degrees opposite of what it said.

Blockers have NO significant long term impact (there is some theorizing that you might, for example, have a boy that when he comes off only grows to 5'9" instead of 6'1" but that's entirely speculative because there's no way to study it objectively)

HORMONES have permanent effect (as do the ones puberty produces) and can cause infertility, but those come after blockers, almost always after the 16th birthday (if at all)
Blockers are not hormones.