Dr. Duran must go

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

PP here. Also given the title of the thread, wanted to throw in my two cents and say I like Dr Durán. I don’t want to see him go. I think APS’ policy is misguided and Youngkin’s policy goes too far. But parents should know if their child is trans - that is the part I agree with. I like what dr Durán did with the English curriculum and how he cares about improving the writing curriculum. It’s a vast improvement over what we had before. I kept my kids home during Covid even after schools opened in March. They wore masks the entire year after. They only stopped wearing masks this year. I know it’s hard for you to understand but people don’t fit into boxes. I am not right wing. I’m anti trump. Pro vax. Believe in Medicare for all, free college, unions, and a host of progressive causes. I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren’s regulatory positions and I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Biden in the elections. Yet at the same time I believe that the trans rights movement is misguided and dangerous and the medical establishment in the US has been ideologically captured. The medical establishment in the UK and Europe were the same way but thankfully realized their mistake and are moving to a different direction. The difference is that Europeans have government healthcare (of different types). But what that means is they collect better data than the US for profit healthcare system and follow up on what happens (there were failures in this regard but over all the government has an incentive to know whether certain treatments are working or not). After following up on kids who went through the Dutch protocol and the more expansive gender affirming care, and collecting data in general, they realized there is no evidence to back up this type of care and that they are doing more harm than good. That’s why they abandoned it. In the US, we aren’t collecting data so the debate, on both sides, is driven by ideology.

It sounds like your problem is with medical treatment for trans kids which is an entirely different animal than school policies.

I thought I was. But then after reading a lot of what was going on in Europe, my understanding now is the process of socially transitioning a child is considered a clinical treatment that has its risks and benefits. If a child wants to present as a different gender socially then it should happen under the direction of a mental health professional because it is a psychological treatment for gender dysphoria. As a result, it should only happen with the knowledge of the parents who are the only people that can consent to a child’s medical treatment (whether mental or otherwise). I have also come to believe that social transition is not a benign, neutral act and puts a child on the path of medicalization. Therefore it must be considered carefully and after a thorough evaluation. I believe that there is a percentage of children who would benefit from transitioning to a different gender (whether only socially or both medically and socially) but I believe that that decision must be made after a careful evaluation. I am not in support of the approach that the right is pushing in the US. But more in support of the conclusion that they have reached in the Netherlands with the data they have.

Like many people reading about this I went through stages. I initially thought it was harmless an

You will be very happy to hear that this is how the majority of transitions are accomplished. Except, of course, where the child in question has bad parents who are incapable of attending to their needs. Ideally there wouldn’t be bad parents, but there are, and so school needs to be a safe place for them for their own health and safety.

You are judging them to be bad parents but in European countries, social transition is no longer viewed as benign or neutral act. It is recommended for some children, but for others, watchful waiting is recommended. It depends on the child and the specific circumstances. It’s not black or white. You can’t make the blanket assumption that what is good for one child is good for another. The Economist has an entire issue devoted to this which I urge you to read. America is now an outlier amongst western nations when it comes to the treatment of gender dysphoria. My personal theory is it’s because we don’t have a government run healthcare program (whether it’s through insurance or provided by the government like the UK). So we don’t collect enough data here or do enough follow up studies.

Are the Europeans forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

PP here. Also given the title of the thread, wanted to throw in my two cents and say I like Dr Durán. I don’t want to see him go. I think APS’ policy is misguided and Youngkin’s policy goes too far. But parents should know if their child is trans - that is the part I agree with. I like what dr Durán did with the English curriculum and how he cares about improving the writing curriculum. It’s a vast improvement over what we had before. I kept my kids home during Covid even after schools opened in March. They wore masks the entire year after. They only stopped wearing masks this year. I know it’s hard for you to understand but people don’t fit into boxes. I am not right wing. I’m anti trump. Pro vax. Believe in Medicare for all, free college, unions, and a host of progressive causes. I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren’s regulatory positions and I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Biden in the elections. Yet at the same time I believe that the trans rights movement is misguided and dangerous and the medical establishment in the US has been ideologically captured. The medical establishment in the UK and Europe were the same way but thankfully realized their mistake and are moving to a different direction. The difference is that Europeans have government healthcare (of different types). But what that means is they collect better data than the US for profit healthcare system and follow up on what happens (there were failures in this regard but over all the government has an incentive to know whether certain treatments are working or not). After following up on kids who went through the Dutch protocol and the more expansive gender affirming care, and collecting data in general, they realized there is no evidence to back up this type of care and that they are doing more harm than good. That’s why they abandoned it. In the US, we aren’t collecting data so the debate, on both sides, is driven by ideology.

It sounds like your problem is with medical treatment for trans kids which is an entirely different animal than school policies.

I thought I was. But then after reading a lot of what was going on in Europe, my understanding now is the process of socially transitioning a child is considered a clinical treatment that has its risks and benefits. If a child wants to present as a different gender socially then it should happen under the direction of a mental health professional because it is a psychological treatment for gender dysphoria. As a result, it should only happen with the knowledge of the parents who are the only people that can consent to a child’s medical treatment (whether mental or otherwise). I have also come to believe that social transition is not a benign, neutral act and puts a child on the path of medicalization. Therefore it must be considered carefully and after a thorough evaluation. I believe that there is a percentage of children who would benefit from transitioning to a different gender (whether only socially or both medically and socially) but I believe that that decision must be made after a careful evaluation. I am not in support of the approach that the right is pushing in the US. But more in support of the conclusion that they have reached in the Netherlands with the data they have.

Like many people reading about this I went through stages. I initially thought it was harmless an

You will be very happy to hear that this is how the majority of transitions are accomplished. Except, of course, where the child in question has bad parents who are incapable of attending to their needs. Ideally there wouldn’t be bad parents, but there are, and so school needs to be a safe place for them for their own health and safety.

You are judging them to be bad parents but in European countries, social transition is no longer viewed as benign or neutral act. It is recommended for some children, but for others, watchful waiting is recommended. It depends on the child and the specific circumstances. It’s not black or white. You can’t make the blanket assumption that what is good for one child is good for another. The Economist has an entire issue devoted to this which I urge you to read. America is now an outlier amongst western nations when it comes to the treatment of gender dysphoria. My personal theory is it’s because we don’t have a government run healthcare program (whether it’s through insurance or provided by the government like the UK). So we don’t collect enough data here or do enough follow up studies.

Are the Europeans forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission?

They aren’t recommending social transition for the majority of children. They are recommending watchful waiting. The recommendation of what path a child undertakes comes after a thorough evaluation by a mental health professional specializing in gender dysphoria (obviously in most circumstances this would involve the parents). When I say European countries, I specifically am familiar with what is happening in Scandinavian countries which are the ones who first instituted the Dutch protocol which begins with social transition and puberty blockers for a certain subset of the population they see (have to meet certain criteria). Gender affirming care in America goes beyond that because the criteria isn’t there or isn’t as strict. Now Scandinavian countries have abandoned the Dutch protocol one after the other and now are in favor of watchful waiting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

PP here. Also given the title of the thread, wanted to throw in my two cents and say I like Dr Durán. I don’t want to see him go. I think APS’ policy is misguided and Youngkin’s policy goes too far. But parents should know if their child is trans - that is the part I agree with. I like what dr Durán did with the English curriculum and how he cares about improving the writing curriculum. It’s a vast improvement over what we had before. I kept my kids home during Covid even after schools opened in March. They wore masks the entire year after. They only stopped wearing masks this year. I know it’s hard for you to understand but people don’t fit into boxes. I am not right wing. I’m anti trump. Pro vax. Believe in Medicare for all, free college, unions, and a host of progressive causes. I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren’s regulatory positions and I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Biden in the elections. Yet at the same time I believe that the trans rights movement is misguided and dangerous and the medical establishment in the US has been ideologically captured. The medical establishment in the UK and Europe were the same way but thankfully realized their mistake and are moving to a different direction. The difference is that Europeans have government healthcare (of different types). But what that means is they collect better data than the US for profit healthcare system and follow up on what happens (there were failures in this regard but over all the government has an incentive to know whether certain treatments are working or not). After following up on kids who went through the Dutch protocol and the more expansive gender affirming care, and collecting data in general, they realized there is no evidence to back up this type of care and that they are doing more harm than good. That’s why they abandoned it. In the US, we aren’t collecting data so the debate, on both sides, is driven by ideology.

It sounds like your problem is with medical treatment for trans kids which is an entirely different animal than school policies.

I thought I was. But then after reading a lot of what was going on in Europe, my understanding now is the process of socially transitioning a child is considered a clinical treatment that has its risks and benefits. If a child wants to present as a different gender socially then it should happen under the direction of a mental health professional because it is a psychological treatment for gender dysphoria. As a result, it should only happen with the knowledge of the parents who are the only people that can consent to a child’s medical treatment (whether mental or otherwise). I have also come to believe that social transition is not a benign, neutral act and puts a child on the path of medicalization. Therefore it must be considered carefully and after a thorough evaluation. I believe that there is a percentage of children who would benefit from transitioning to a different gender (whether only socially or both medically and socially) but I believe that that decision must be made after a careful evaluation. I am not in support of the approach that the right is pushing in the US. But more in support of the conclusion that they have reached in the Netherlands with the data they have.

Like many people reading about this I went through stages. I initially thought it was harmless an

You will be very happy to hear that this is how the majority of transitions are accomplished. Except, of course, where the child in question has bad parents who are incapable of attending to their needs. Ideally there wouldn’t be bad parents, but there are, and so school needs to be a safe place for them for their own health and safety.

You are judging them to be bad parents but in European countries, social transition is no longer viewed as benign or neutral act. It is recommended for some children, but for others, watchful waiting is recommended. It depends on the child and the specific circumstances. It’s not black or white. You can’t make the blanket assumption that what is good for one child is good for another. The Economist has an entire issue devoted to this which I urge you to read. America is now an outlier amongst western nations when it comes to the treatment of gender dysphoria. My personal theory is it’s because we don’t have a government run healthcare program (whether it’s through insurance or provided by the government like the UK). So we don’t collect enough data here or do enough follow up studies.

Are the Europeans forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission?

They aren’t recommending social transition for the majority of children. They are recommending watchful waiting. The recommendation of what path a child undertakes comes after a thorough evaluation by a mental health professional specializing in gender dysphoria (obviously in most circumstances this would involve the parents). When I say European countries, I specifically am familiar with what is happening in Scandinavian countries which are the ones who first instituted the Dutch protocol which begins with social transition and puberty blockers for a certain subset of the population they see (have to meet certain criteria). Gender affirming care in America goes beyond that because the criteria isn’t there or isn’t as strict. Now Scandinavian countries have abandoned the Dutch protocol one after the other and now are in favor of watchful waiting.

I will add again that the Economist devoted an entire issue to this. It is worth reading to understand the different approaches. Also the BBC investigative journalist, Hannah Barnes wrote a good book which dives into the Tavistock scandal and why it was shut down. Tavistock was England’s only gender clinic and was run by the NHS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

PP here. Also given the title of the thread, wanted to throw in my two cents and say I like Dr Durán. I don’t want to see him go. I think APS’ policy is misguided and Youngkin’s policy goes too far. But parents should know if their child is trans - that is the part I agree with. I like what dr Durán did with the English curriculum and how he cares about improving the writing curriculum. It’s a vast improvement over what we had before. I kept my kids home during Covid even after schools opened in March. They wore masks the entire year after. They only stopped wearing masks this year. I know it’s hard for you to understand but people don’t fit into boxes. I am not right wing. I’m anti trump. Pro vax. Believe in Medicare for all, free college, unions, and a host of progressive causes. I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren’s regulatory positions and I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Biden in the elections. Yet at the same time I believe that the trans rights movement is misguided and dangerous and the medical establishment in the US has been ideologically captured. The medical establishment in the UK and Europe were the same way but thankfully realized their mistake and are moving to a different direction. The difference is that Europeans have government healthcare (of different types). But what that means is they collect better data than the US for profit healthcare system and follow up on what happens (there were failures in this regard but over all the government has an incentive to know whether certain treatments are working or not). After following up on kids who went through the Dutch protocol and the more expansive gender affirming care, and collecting data in general, they realized there is no evidence to back up this type of care and that they are doing more harm than good. That’s why they abandoned it. In the US, we aren’t collecting data so the debate, on both sides, is driven by ideology.

It sounds like your problem is with medical treatment for trans kids which is an entirely different animal than school policies.

I thought I was. But then after reading a lot of what was going on in Europe, my understanding now is the process of socially transitioning a child is considered a clinical treatment that has its risks and benefits. If a child wants to present as a different gender socially then it should happen under the direction of a mental health professional because it is a psychological treatment for gender dysphoria. As a result, it should only happen with the knowledge of the parents who are the only people that can consent to a child’s medical treatment (whether mental or otherwise). I have also come to believe that social transition is not a benign, neutral act and puts a child on the path of medicalization. Therefore it must be considered carefully and after a thorough evaluation. I believe that there is a percentage of children who would benefit from transitioning to a different gender (whether only socially or both medically and socially) but I believe that that decision must be made after a careful evaluation. I am not in support of the approach that the right is pushing in the US. But more in support of the conclusion that they have reached in the Netherlands with the data they have.

Like many people reading about this I went through stages. I initially thought it was harmless an

You will be very happy to hear that this is how the majority of transitions are accomplished. Except, of course, where the child in question has bad parents who are incapable of attending to their needs. Ideally there wouldn’t be bad parents, but there are, and so school needs to be a safe place for them for their own health and safety.

You are judging them to be bad parents but in European countries, social transition is no longer viewed as benign or neutral act. It is recommended for some children, but for others, watchful waiting is recommended. It depends on the child and the specific circumstances. It’s not black or white. You can’t make the blanket assumption that what is good for one child is good for another. The Economist has an entire issue devoted to this which I urge you to read. America is now an outlier amongst western nations when it comes to the treatment of gender dysphoria. My personal theory is it’s because we don’t have a government run healthcare program (whether it’s through insurance or provided by the government like the UK). So we don’t collect enough data here or do enough follow up studies.

Are the Europeans forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission?

They aren’t recommending social transition for the majority of children. They are recommending watchful waiting. The recommendation of what path a child undertakes comes after a thorough evaluation by a mental health professional specializing in gender dysphoria (obviously in most circumstances this would involve the parents). When I say European countries, I specifically am familiar with what is happening in Scandinavian countries which are the ones who first instituted the Dutch protocol which begins with social transition and puberty blockers for a certain subset of the population they see (have to meet certain criteria). Gender affirming care in America goes beyond that because the criteria isn’t there or isn’t as strict. Now Scandinavian countries have abandoned the Dutch protocol one after the other and now are in favor of watchful waiting.

So are they forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission or not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

PP here. Also given the title of the thread, wanted to throw in my two cents and say I like Dr Durán. I don’t want to see him go. I think APS’ policy is misguided and Youngkin’s policy goes too far. But parents should know if their child is trans - that is the part I agree with. I like what dr Durán did with the English curriculum and how he cares about improving the writing curriculum. It’s a vast improvement over what we had before. I kept my kids home during Covid even after schools opened in March. They wore masks the entire year after. They only stopped wearing masks this year. I know it’s hard for you to understand but people don’t fit into boxes. I am not right wing. I’m anti trump. Pro vax. Believe in Medicare for all, free college, unions, and a host of progressive causes. I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren’s regulatory positions and I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Biden in the elections. Yet at the same time I believe that the trans rights movement is misguided and dangerous and the medical establishment in the US has been ideologically captured. The medical establishment in the UK and Europe were the same way but thankfully realized their mistake and are moving to a different direction. The difference is that Europeans have government healthcare (of different types). But what that means is they collect better data than the US for profit healthcare system and follow up on what happens (there were failures in this regard but over all the government has an incentive to know whether certain treatments are working or not). After following up on kids who went through the Dutch protocol and the more expansive gender affirming care, and collecting data in general, they realized there is no evidence to back up this type of care and that they are doing more harm than good. That’s why they abandoned it. In the US, we aren’t collecting data so the debate, on both sides, is driven by ideology.

It sounds like your problem is with medical treatment for trans kids which is an entirely different animal than school policies.

I thought I was. But then after reading a lot of what was going on in Europe, my understanding now is the process of socially transitioning a child is considered a clinical treatment that has its risks and benefits. If a child wants to present as a different gender socially then it should happen under the direction of a mental health professional because it is a psychological treatment for gender dysphoria. As a result, it should only happen with the knowledge of the parents who are the only people that can consent to a child’s medical treatment (whether mental or otherwise). I have also come to believe that social transition is not a benign, neutral act and puts a child on the path of medicalization. Therefore it must be considered carefully and after a thorough evaluation. I believe that there is a percentage of children who would benefit from transitioning to a different gender (whether only socially or both medically and socially) but I believe that that decision must be made after a careful evaluation. I am not in support of the approach that the right is pushing in the US. But more in support of the conclusion that they have reached in the Netherlands with the data they have.

Like many people reading about this I went through stages. I initially thought it was harmless an

You will be very happy to hear that this is how the majority of transitions are accomplished. Except, of course, where the child in question has bad parents who are incapable of attending to their needs. Ideally there wouldn’t be bad parents, but there are, and so school needs to be a safe place for them for their own health and safety.

You are judging them to be bad parents but in European countries, social transition is no longer viewed as benign or neutral act. It is recommended for some children, but for others, watchful waiting is recommended. It depends on the child and the specific circumstances. It’s not black or white. You can’t make the blanket assumption that what is good for one child is good for another. The Economist has an entire issue devoted to this which I urge you to read. America is now an outlier amongst western nations when it comes to the treatment of gender dysphoria. My personal theory is it’s because we don’t have a government run healthcare program (whether it’s through insurance or provided by the government like the UK). So we don’t collect enough data here or do enough follow up studies.

Are the Europeans forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission?

They aren’t recommending social transition for the majority of children. They are recommending watchful waiting. The recommendation of what path a child undertakes comes after a thorough evaluation by a mental health professional specializing in gender dysphoria (obviously in most circumstances this would involve the parents). When I say European countries, I specifically am familiar with what is happening in Scandinavian countries which are the ones who first instituted the Dutch protocol which begins with social transition and puberty blockers for a certain subset of the population they see (have to meet certain criteria). Gender affirming care in America goes beyond that because the criteria isn’t there or isn’t as strict. Now Scandinavian countries have abandoned the Dutch protocol one after the other and now are in favor of watchful waiting.

So are they forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission or not?

I’m not sure what every single school district in Scandinavia is doing. I only say what I know and what I know is what is happening from the clinical perspective and in the medical field. Before there was a push towards puberty blockers and social transition. Both were viewed as neutral and giving the child time to think. Now the evidence shows otherwise. That for most children, “watching waiting,” is considered the better form treatment. Obviously it differs by kid. This is a fast changing field. We don’t have a lot of data. That’s why it’s better for parents to make such decisions with the help of a trusted doctor and for parents to be involved in the process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

PP here. Also given the title of the thread, wanted to throw in my two cents and say I like Dr Durán. I don’t want to see him go. I think APS’ policy is misguided and Youngkin’s policy goes too far. But parents should know if their child is trans - that is the part I agree with. I like what dr Durán did with the English curriculum and how he cares about improving the writing curriculum. It’s a vast improvement over what we had before. I kept my kids home during Covid even after schools opened in March. They wore masks the entire year after. They only stopped wearing masks this year. I know it’s hard for you to understand but people don’t fit into boxes. I am not right wing. I’m anti trump. Pro vax. Believe in Medicare for all, free college, unions, and a host of progressive causes. I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren’s regulatory positions and I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Biden in the elections. Yet at the same time I believe that the trans rights movement is misguided and dangerous and the medical establishment in the US has been ideologically captured. The medical establishment in the UK and Europe were the same way but thankfully realized their mistake and are moving to a different direction. The difference is that Europeans have government healthcare (of different types). But what that means is they collect better data than the US for profit healthcare system and follow up on what happens (there were failures in this regard but over all the government has an incentive to know whether certain treatments are working or not). After following up on kids who went through the Dutch protocol and the more expansive gender affirming care, and collecting data in general, they realized there is no evidence to back up this type of care and that they are doing more harm than good. That’s why they abandoned it. In the US, we aren’t collecting data so the debate, on both sides, is driven by ideology.

It sounds like your problem is with medical treatment for trans kids which is an entirely different animal than school policies.

I thought I was. But then after reading a lot of what was going on in Europe, my understanding now is the process of socially transitioning a child is considered a clinical treatment that has its risks and benefits. If a child wants to present as a different gender socially then it should happen under the direction of a mental health professional because it is a psychological treatment for gender dysphoria. As a result, it should only happen with the knowledge of the parents who are the only people that can consent to a child’s medical treatment (whether mental or otherwise). I have also come to believe that social transition is not a benign, neutral act and puts a child on the path of medicalization. Therefore it must be considered carefully and after a thorough evaluation. I believe that there is a percentage of children who would benefit from transitioning to a different gender (whether only socially or both medically and socially) but I believe that that decision must be made after a careful evaluation. I am not in support of the approach that the right is pushing in the US. But more in support of the conclusion that they have reached in the Netherlands with the data they have.

Like many people reading about this I went through stages. I initially thought it was harmless an

You will be very happy to hear that this is how the majority of transitions are accomplished. Except, of course, where the child in question has bad parents who are incapable of attending to their needs. Ideally there wouldn’t be bad parents, but there are, and so school needs to be a safe place for them for their own health and safety.

You are judging them to be bad parents but in European countries, social transition is no longer viewed as benign or neutral act. It is recommended for some children, but for others, watchful waiting is recommended. It depends on the child and the specific circumstances. It’s not black or white. You can’t make the blanket assumption that what is good for one child is good for another. The Economist has an entire issue devoted to this which I urge you to read. America is now an outlier amongst western nations when it comes to the treatment of gender dysphoria. My personal theory is it’s because we don’t have a government run healthcare program (whether it’s through insurance or provided by the government like the UK). So we don’t collect enough data here or do enough follow up studies.

Are the Europeans forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission?

They aren’t recommending social transition for the majority of children. They are recommending watchful waiting. The recommendation of what path a child undertakes comes after a thorough evaluation by a mental health professional specializing in gender dysphoria (obviously in most circumstances this would involve the parents). When I say European countries, I specifically am familiar with what is happening in Scandinavian countries which are the ones who first instituted the Dutch protocol which begins with social transition and puberty blockers for a certain subset of the population they see (have to meet certain criteria). Gender affirming care in America goes beyond that because the criteria isn’t there or isn’t as strict. Now Scandinavian countries have abandoned the Dutch protocol one after the other and now are in favor of watchful waiting.

So are they forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission or not?

I’m not sure what every single school district in Scandinavia is doing. I only say what I know and what I know is what is happening from the clinical perspective and in the medical field. Before there was a push towards puberty blockers and social transition. Both were viewed as neutral and giving the child time to think. Now the evidence shows otherwise. That for most children, “watching waiting,” is considered the better form treatment. Obviously it differs by kid. This is a fast changing field. We don’t have a lot of data. That’s why it’s better for parents to make such decisions with the help of a trusted doctor and for parents to be involved in the process.

Schools aren’t doling out puberty blockers. Are the European studies showing irreversible harm from children socially transitioning? Are the European studies showing the impacts of not having supportive parents or a supportive healthcare system? Are the European studies reflecting the harm that comes from being targeted as children by right wing American extremists?

Just curious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

PP here. Also given the title of the thread, wanted to throw in my two cents and say I like Dr Durán. I don’t want to see him go. I think APS’ policy is misguided and Youngkin’s policy goes too far. But parents should know if their child is trans - that is the part I agree with. I like what dr Durán did with the English curriculum and how he cares about improving the writing curriculum. It’s a vast improvement over what we had before. I kept my kids home during Covid even after schools opened in March. They wore masks the entire year after. They only stopped wearing masks this year. I know it’s hard for you to understand but people don’t fit into boxes. I am not right wing. I’m anti trump. Pro vax. Believe in Medicare for all, free college, unions, and a host of progressive causes. I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren’s regulatory positions and I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Biden in the elections. Yet at the same time I believe that the trans rights movement is misguided and dangerous and the medical establishment in the US has been ideologically captured. The medical establishment in the UK and Europe were the same way but thankfully realized their mistake and are moving to a different direction. The difference is that Europeans have government healthcare (of different types). But what that means is they collect better data than the US for profit healthcare system and follow up on what happens (there were failures in this regard but over all the government has an incentive to know whether certain treatments are working or not). After following up on kids who went through the Dutch protocol and the more expansive gender affirming care, and collecting data in general, they realized there is no evidence to back up this type of care and that they are doing more harm than good. That’s why they abandoned it. In the US, we aren’t collecting data so the debate, on both sides, is driven by ideology.

It sounds like your problem is with medical treatment for trans kids which is an entirely different animal than school policies.

I thought I was. But then after reading a lot of what was going on in Europe, my understanding now is the process of socially transitioning a child is considered a clinical treatment that has its risks and benefits. If a child wants to present as a different gender socially then it should happen under the direction of a mental health professional because it is a psychological treatment for gender dysphoria. As a result, it should only happen with the knowledge of the parents who are the only people that can consent to a child’s medical treatment (whether mental or otherwise). I have also come to believe that social transition is not a benign, neutral act and puts a child on the path of medicalization. Therefore it must be considered carefully and after a thorough evaluation. I believe that there is a percentage of children who would benefit from transitioning to a different gender (whether only socially or both medically and socially) but I believe that that decision must be made after a careful evaluation. I am not in support of the approach that the right is pushing in the US. But more in support of the conclusion that they have reached in the Netherlands with the data they have.

Like many people reading about this I went through stages. I initially thought it was harmless an

You will be very happy to hear that this is how the majority of transitions are accomplished. Except, of course, where the child in question has bad parents who are incapable of attending to their needs. Ideally there wouldn’t be bad parents, but there are, and so school needs to be a safe place for them for their own health and safety.

You are judging them to be bad parents but in European countries, social transition is no longer viewed as benign or neutral act. It is recommended for some children, but for others, watchful waiting is recommended. It depends on the child and the specific circumstances. It’s not black or white. You can’t make the blanket assumption that what is good for one child is good for another. The Economist has an entire issue devoted to this which I urge you to read. America is now an outlier amongst western nations when it comes to the treatment of gender dysphoria. My personal theory is it’s because we don’t have a government run healthcare program (whether it’s through insurance or provided by the government like the UK). So we don’t collect enough data here or do enough follow up studies.

Are the Europeans forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission?

They aren’t recommending social transition for the majority of children. They are recommending watchful waiting. The recommendation of what path a child undertakes comes after a thorough evaluation by a mental health professional specializing in gender dysphoria (obviously in most circumstances this would involve the parents). When I say European countries, I specifically am familiar with what is happening in Scandinavian countries which are the ones who first instituted the Dutch protocol which begins with social transition and puberty blockers for a certain subset of the population they see (have to meet certain criteria). Gender affirming care in America goes beyond that because the criteria isn’t there or isn’t as strict. Now Scandinavian countries have abandoned the Dutch protocol one after the other and now are in favor of watchful waiting.

So are they forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission or not?

I’m not sure what every single school district in Scandinavia is doing. I only say what I know and what I know is what is happening from the clinical perspective and in the medical field. Before there was a push towards puberty blockers and social transition. Both were viewed as neutral and giving the child time to think. Now the evidence shows otherwise. That for most children, “watching waiting,” is considered the better form treatment. Obviously it differs by kid. This is a fast changing field. We don’t have a lot of data. That’s why it’s better for parents to make such decisions with the help of a trusted doctor and for parents to be involved in the process.

Schools aren’t doling out puberty blockers. Are the European studies showing irreversible harm from children socially transitioning? Are the European studies showing the impacts of not having supportive parents or a supportive healthcare system? Are the European studies reflecting the harm that comes from being targeted as children by right wing American extremists?

Just curious.

+1

Have they studied the impacts of "outing" someone against their will?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

PP here. Also given the title of the thread, wanted to throw in my two cents and say I like Dr Durán. I don’t want to see him go. I think APS’ policy is misguided and Youngkin’s policy goes too far. But parents should know if their child is trans - that is the part I agree with. I like what dr Durán did with the English curriculum and how he cares about improving the writing curriculum. It’s a vast improvement over what we had before. I kept my kids home during Covid even after schools opened in March. They wore masks the entire year after. They only stopped wearing masks this year. I know it’s hard for you to understand but people don’t fit into boxes. I am not right wing. I’m anti trump. Pro vax. Believe in Medicare for all, free college, unions, and a host of progressive causes. I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren’s regulatory positions and I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Biden in the elections. Yet at the same time I believe that the trans rights movement is misguided and dangerous and the medical establishment in the US has been ideologically captured. The medical establishment in the UK and Europe were the same way but thankfully realized their mistake and are moving to a different direction. The difference is that Europeans have government healthcare (of different types). But what that means is they collect better data than the US for profit healthcare system and follow up on what happens (there were failures in this regard but over all the government has an incentive to know whether certain treatments are working or not). After following up on kids who went through the Dutch protocol and the more expansive gender affirming care, and collecting data in general, they realized there is no evidence to back up this type of care and that they are doing more harm than good. That’s why they abandoned it. In the US, we aren’t collecting data so the debate, on both sides, is driven by ideology.

It sounds like your problem is with medical treatment for trans kids which is an entirely different animal than school policies.

I thought I was. But then after reading a lot of what was going on in Europe, my understanding now is the process of socially transitioning a child is considered a clinical treatment that has its risks and benefits. If a child wants to present as a different gender socially then it should happen under the direction of a mental health professional because it is a psychological treatment for gender dysphoria. As a result, it should only happen with the knowledge of the parents who are the only people that can consent to a child’s medical treatment (whether mental or otherwise). I have also come to believe that social transition is not a benign, neutral act and puts a child on the path of medicalization. Therefore it must be considered carefully and after a thorough evaluation. I believe that there is a percentage of children who would benefit from transitioning to a different gender (whether only socially or both medically and socially) but I believe that that decision must be made after a careful evaluation. I am not in support of the approach that the right is pushing in the US. But more in support of the conclusion that they have reached in the Netherlands with the data they have.

Like many people reading about this I went through stages. I initially thought it was harmless an

You will be very happy to hear that this is how the majority of transitions are accomplished. Except, of course, where the child in question has bad parents who are incapable of attending to their needs. Ideally there wouldn’t be bad parents, but there are, and so school needs to be a safe place for them for their own health and safety.

You are judging them to be bad parents but in European countries, social transition is no longer viewed as benign or neutral act. It is recommended for some children, but for others, watchful waiting is recommended. It depends on the child and the specific circumstances. It’s not black or white. You can’t make the blanket assumption that what is good for one child is good for another. The Economist has an entire issue devoted to this which I urge you to read. America is now an outlier amongst western nations when it comes to the treatment of gender dysphoria. My personal theory is it’s because we don’t have a government run healthcare program (whether it’s through insurance or provided by the government like the UK). So we don’t collect enough data here or do enough follow up studies.

Are the Europeans forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission?

They aren’t recommending social transition for the majority of children. They are recommending watchful waiting. The recommendation of what path a child undertakes comes after a thorough evaluation by a mental health professional specializing in gender dysphoria (obviously in most circumstances this would involve the parents). When I say European countries, I specifically am familiar with what is happening in Scandinavian countries which are the ones who first instituted the Dutch protocol which begins with social transition and puberty blockers for a certain subset of the population they see (have to meet certain criteria). Gender affirming care in America goes beyond that because the criteria isn’t there or isn’t as strict. Now Scandinavian countries have abandoned the Dutch protocol one after the other and now are in favor of watchful waiting.

So are they forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission or not?

I’m not sure what every single school district in Scandinavia is doing. I only say what I know and what I know is what is happening from the clinical perspective and in the medical field. Before there was a push towards puberty blockers and social transition. Both were viewed as neutral and giving the child time to think. Now the evidence shows otherwise. That for most children, “watching waiting,” is considered the better form treatment. Obviously it differs by kid. This is a fast changing field. We don’t have a lot of data. That’s why it’s better for parents to make such decisions with the help of a trusted doctor and for parents to be involved in the process.

Schools aren’t doling out puberty blockers. Are the European studies showing irreversible harm from children socially transitioning? Are the European studies showing the impacts of not having supportive parents or a supportive healthcare system? Are the European studies reflecting the harm that comes from being targeted as children by right wing American extremists?

Just curious.

+1

Have they studied the impacts of "outing" someone against their will?

By definition, you cannot “out” a person who is attempting to socially transition. There is nothing secret about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

PP here. Also given the title of the thread, wanted to throw in my two cents and say I like Dr Durán. I don’t want to see him go. I think APS’ policy is misguided and Youngkin’s policy goes too far. But parents should know if their child is trans - that is the part I agree with. I like what dr Durán did with the English curriculum and how he cares about improving the writing curriculum. It’s a vast improvement over what we had before. I kept my kids home during Covid even after schools opened in March. They wore masks the entire year after. They only stopped wearing masks this year. I know it’s hard for you to understand but people don’t fit into boxes. I am not right wing. I’m anti trump. Pro vax. Believe in Medicare for all, free college, unions, and a host of progressive causes. I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren’s regulatory positions and I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Biden in the elections. Yet at the same time I believe that the trans rights movement is misguided and dangerous and the medical establishment in the US has been ideologically captured. The medical establishment in the UK and Europe were the same way but thankfully realized their mistake and are moving to a different direction. The difference is that Europeans have government healthcare (of different types). But what that means is they collect better data than the US for profit healthcare system and follow up on what happens (there were failures in this regard but over all the government has an incentive to know whether certain treatments are working or not). After following up on kids who went through the Dutch protocol and the more expansive gender affirming care, and collecting data in general, they realized there is no evidence to back up this type of care and that they are doing more harm than good. That’s why they abandoned it. In the US, we aren’t collecting data so the debate, on both sides, is driven by ideology.

It sounds like your problem is with medical treatment for trans kids which is an entirely different animal than school policies.

I thought I was. But then after reading a lot of what was going on in Europe, my understanding now is the process of socially transitioning a child is considered a clinical treatment that has its risks and benefits. If a child wants to present as a different gender socially then it should happen under the direction of a mental health professional because it is a psychological treatment for gender dysphoria. As a result, it should only happen with the knowledge of the parents who are the only people that can consent to a child’s medical treatment (whether mental or otherwise). I have also come to believe that social transition is not a benign, neutral act and puts a child on the path of medicalization. Therefore it must be considered carefully and after a thorough evaluation. I believe that there is a percentage of children who would benefit from transitioning to a different gender (whether only socially or both medically and socially) but I believe that that decision must be made after a careful evaluation. I am not in support of the approach that the right is pushing in the US. But more in support of the conclusion that they have reached in the Netherlands with the data they have.

Like many people reading about this I went through stages. I initially thought it was harmless an

You will be very happy to hear that this is how the majority of transitions are accomplished. Except, of course, where the child in question has bad parents who are incapable of attending to their needs. Ideally there wouldn’t be bad parents, but there are, and so school needs to be a safe place for them for their own health and safety.

You are judging them to be bad parents but in European countries, social transition is no longer viewed as benign or neutral act. It is recommended for some children, but for others, watchful waiting is recommended. It depends on the child and the specific circumstances. It’s not black or white. You can’t make the blanket assumption that what is good for one child is good for another. The Economist has an entire issue devoted to this which I urge you to read. America is now an outlier amongst western nations when it comes to the treatment of gender dysphoria. My personal theory is it’s because we don’t have a government run healthcare program (whether it’s through insurance or provided by the government like the UK). So we don’t collect enough data here or do enough follow up studies.

Are the Europeans forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission?

They aren’t recommending social transition for the majority of children. They are recommending watchful waiting. The recommendation of what path a child undertakes comes after a thorough evaluation by a mental health professional specializing in gender dysphoria (obviously in most circumstances this would involve the parents). When I say European countries, I specifically am familiar with what is happening in Scandinavian countries which are the ones who first instituted the Dutch protocol which begins with social transition and puberty blockers for a certain subset of the population they see (have to meet certain criteria). Gender affirming care in America goes beyond that because the criteria isn’t there or isn’t as strict. Now Scandinavian countries have abandoned the Dutch protocol one after the other and now are in favor of watchful waiting.

So are they forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission or not?

I’m not sure what every single school district in Scandinavia is doing. I only say what I know and what I know is what is happening from the clinical perspective and in the medical field. Before there was a push towards puberty blockers and social transition. Both were viewed as neutral and giving the child time to think. Now the evidence shows otherwise. That for most children, “watching waiting,” is considered the better form treatment. Obviously it differs by kid. This is a fast changing field. We don’t have a lot of data. That’s why it’s better for parents to make such decisions with the help of a trusted doctor and for parents to be involved in the process.

Schools aren’t doling out puberty blockers. Are the European studies showing irreversible harm from children socially transitioning? Are the European studies showing the impacts of not having supportive parents or a supportive healthcare system? Are the European studies reflecting the harm that comes from being targeted as children by right wing American extremists?

Just curious.

+1

Have they studied the impacts of "outing" someone against their will?

By definition, you cannot “out” a person who is attempting to socially transition. There is nothing secret about it.

Outing at home is different than outing at school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

PP here. Also given the title of the thread, wanted to throw in my two cents and say I like Dr Durán. I don’t want to see him go. I think APS’ policy is misguided and Youngkin’s policy goes too far. But parents should know if their child is trans - that is the part I agree with. I like what dr Durán did with the English curriculum and how he cares about improving the writing curriculum. It’s a vast improvement over what we had before. I kept my kids home during Covid even after schools opened in March. They wore masks the entire year after. They only stopped wearing masks this year. I know it’s hard for you to understand but people don’t fit into boxes. I am not right wing. I’m anti trump. Pro vax. Believe in Medicare for all, free college, unions, and a host of progressive causes. I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren’s regulatory positions and I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Biden in the elections. Yet at the same time I believe that the trans rights movement is misguided and dangerous and the medical establishment in the US has been ideologically captured. The medical establishment in the UK and Europe were the same way but thankfully realized their mistake and are moving to a different direction. The difference is that Europeans have government healthcare (of different types). But what that means is they collect better data than the US for profit healthcare system and follow up on what happens (there were failures in this regard but over all the government has an incentive to know whether certain treatments are working or not). After following up on kids who went through the Dutch protocol and the more expansive gender affirming care, and collecting data in general, they realized there is no evidence to back up this type of care and that they are doing more harm than good. That’s why they abandoned it. In the US, we aren’t collecting data so the debate, on both sides, is driven by ideology.

It sounds like your problem is with medical treatment for trans kids which is an entirely different animal than school policies.

I thought I was. But then after reading a lot of what was going on in Europe, my understanding now is the process of socially transitioning a child is considered a clinical treatment that has its risks and benefits. If a child wants to present as a different gender socially then it should happen under the direction of a mental health professional because it is a psychological treatment for gender dysphoria. As a result, it should only happen with the knowledge of the parents who are the only people that can consent to a child’s medical treatment (whether mental or otherwise). I have also come to believe that social transition is not a benign, neutral act and puts a child on the path of medicalization. Therefore it must be considered carefully and after a thorough evaluation. I believe that there is a percentage of children who would benefit from transitioning to a different gender (whether only socially or both medically and socially) but I believe that that decision must be made after a careful evaluation. I am not in support of the approach that the right is pushing in the US. But more in support of the conclusion that they have reached in the Netherlands with the data they have.

Like many people reading about this I went through stages. I initially thought it was harmless an

You will be very happy to hear that this is how the majority of transitions are accomplished. Except, of course, where the child in question has bad parents who are incapable of attending to their needs. Ideally there wouldn’t be bad parents, but there are, and so school needs to be a safe place for them for their own health and safety.

You are judging them to be bad parents but in European countries, social transition is no longer viewed as benign or neutral act. It is recommended for some children, but for others, watchful waiting is recommended. It depends on the child and the specific circumstances. It’s not black or white. You can’t make the blanket assumption that what is good for one child is good for another. The Economist has an entire issue devoted to this which I urge you to read. America is now an outlier amongst western nations when it comes to the treatment of gender dysphoria. My personal theory is it’s because we don’t have a government run healthcare program (whether it’s through insurance or provided by the government like the UK). So we don’t collect enough data here or do enough follow up studies.

Are the Europeans forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission?

They aren’t recommending social transition for the majority of children. They are recommending watchful waiting. The recommendation of what path a child undertakes comes after a thorough evaluation by a mental health professional specializing in gender dysphoria (obviously in most circumstances this would involve the parents). When I say European countries, I specifically am familiar with what is happening in Scandinavian countries which are the ones who first instituted the Dutch protocol which begins with social transition and puberty blockers for a certain subset of the population they see (have to meet certain criteria). Gender affirming care in America goes beyond that because the criteria isn’t there or isn’t as strict. Now Scandinavian countries have abandoned the Dutch protocol one after the other and now are in favor of watchful waiting.

So are they forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission or not?

I’m not sure what every single school district in Scandinavia is doing. I only say what I know and what I know is what is happening from the clinical perspective and in the medical field. Before there was a push towards puberty blockers and social transition. Both were viewed as neutral and giving the child time to think. Now the evidence shows otherwise. That for most children, “watching waiting,” is considered the better form treatment. Obviously it differs by kid. This is a fast changing field. We don’t have a lot of data. That’s why it’s better for parents to make such decisions with the help of a trusted doctor and for parents to be involved in the process.

Schools aren’t doling out puberty blockers. Are the European studies showing irreversible harm from children socially transitioning? Are the European studies showing the impacts of not having supportive parents or a supportive healthcare system? Are the European studies reflecting the harm that comes from being targeted as children by right wing American extremists?

Just curious.

+1

Have they studied the impacts of "outing" someone against their will?

By definition, you cannot “out” a person who is attempting to socially transition. There is nothing secret about it.

Outing at home is different than outing at school.

Doesn’t matter. The school is actively participating in what you call “outing.” The point of social transition is for it to be public and it can’t be public without the active participation of the school. Since the school is an active participant, the school needs permission from the child’s parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

PP here. Also given the title of the thread, wanted to throw in my two cents and say I like Dr Durán. I don’t want to see him go. I think APS’ policy is misguided and Youngkin’s policy goes too far. But parents should know if their child is trans - that is the part I agree with. I like what dr Durán did with the English curriculum and how he cares about improving the writing curriculum. It’s a vast improvement over what we had before. I kept my kids home during Covid even after schools opened in March. They wore masks the entire year after. They only stopped wearing masks this year. I know it’s hard for you to understand but people don’t fit into boxes. I am not right wing. I’m anti trump. Pro vax. Believe in Medicare for all, free college, unions, and a host of progressive causes. I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren’s regulatory positions and I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Biden in the elections. Yet at the same time I believe that the trans rights movement is misguided and dangerous and the medical establishment in the US has been ideologically captured. The medical establishment in the UK and Europe were the same way but thankfully realized their mistake and are moving to a different direction. The difference is that Europeans have government healthcare (of different types). But what that means is they collect better data than the US for profit healthcare system and follow up on what happens (there were failures in this regard but over all the government has an incentive to know whether certain treatments are working or not). After following up on kids who went through the Dutch protocol and the more expansive gender affirming care, and collecting data in general, they realized there is no evidence to back up this type of care and that they are doing more harm than good. That’s why they abandoned it. In the US, we aren’t collecting data so the debate, on both sides, is driven by ideology.

It sounds like your problem is with medical treatment for trans kids which is an entirely different animal than school policies.

I thought I was. But then after reading a lot of what was going on in Europe, my understanding now is the process of socially transitioning a child is considered a clinical treatment that has its risks and benefits. If a child wants to present as a different gender socially then it should happen under the direction of a mental health professional because it is a psychological treatment for gender dysphoria. As a result, it should only happen with the knowledge of the parents who are the only people that can consent to a child’s medical treatment (whether mental or otherwise). I have also come to believe that social transition is not a benign, neutral act and puts a child on the path of medicalization. Therefore it must be considered carefully and after a thorough evaluation. I believe that there is a percentage of children who would benefit from transitioning to a different gender (whether only socially or both medically and socially) but I believe that that decision must be made after a careful evaluation. I am not in support of the approach that the right is pushing in the US. But more in support of the conclusion that they have reached in the Netherlands with the data they have.

Like many people reading about this I went through stages. I initially thought it was harmless an

You will be very happy to hear that this is how the majority of transitions are accomplished. Except, of course, where the child in question has bad parents who are incapable of attending to their needs. Ideally there wouldn’t be bad parents, but there are, and so school needs to be a safe place for them for their own health and safety.

You are judging them to be bad parents but in European countries, social transition is no longer viewed as benign or neutral act. It is recommended for some children, but for others, watchful waiting is recommended. It depends on the child and the specific circumstances. It’s not black or white. You can’t make the blanket assumption that what is good for one child is good for another. The Economist has an entire issue devoted to this which I urge you to read. America is now an outlier amongst western nations when it comes to the treatment of gender dysphoria. My personal theory is it’s because we don’t have a government run healthcare program (whether it’s through insurance or provided by the government like the UK). So we don’t collect enough data here or do enough follow up studies.

Are the Europeans forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission?

They aren’t recommending social transition for the majority of children. They are recommending watchful waiting. The recommendation of what path a child undertakes comes after a thorough evaluation by a mental health professional specializing in gender dysphoria (obviously in most circumstances this would involve the parents). When I say European countries, I specifically am familiar with what is happening in Scandinavian countries which are the ones who first instituted the Dutch protocol which begins with social transition and puberty blockers for a certain subset of the population they see (have to meet certain criteria). Gender affirming care in America goes beyond that because the criteria isn’t there or isn’t as strict. Now Scandinavian countries have abandoned the Dutch protocol one after the other and now are in favor of watchful waiting.

So are they forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission or not?

I’m not sure what every single school district in Scandinavia is doing. I only say what I know and what I know is what is happening from the clinical perspective and in the medical field. Before there was a push towards puberty blockers and social transition. Both were viewed as neutral and giving the child time to think. Now the evidence shows otherwise. That for most children, “watching waiting,” is considered the better form treatment. Obviously it differs by kid. This is a fast changing field. We don’t have a lot of data. That’s why it’s better for parents to make such decisions with the help of a trusted doctor and for parents to be involved in the process.

Schools aren’t doling out puberty blockers. Are the European studies showing irreversible harm from children socially transitioning? Are the European studies showing the impacts of not having supportive parents or a supportive healthcare system? Are the European studies reflecting the harm that comes from being targeted as children by right wing American extremists?

Just curious.

+1

Have they studied the impacts of "outing" someone against their will?

By definition, you cannot “out” a person who is attempting to socially transition. There is nothing secret about it.

Outing at home is different than outing at school.

Doesn’t matter. The school is actively participating in what you call “outing.” The point of social transition is for it to be public and it can’t be public without the active participation of the school. Since the school is an active participant, the school needs permission from the child’s parents.

From the UK's Cass Report, a systematic, evidence-based assessment of youth gender medicine: "it is important to view it [social transition] as an active intervention because it may have significant effects on the child or young person...Whatever position one takes, it is important to acknowledge that it [social transition], is not a neutral act, and better information is needed about outcomes."

https://cass.independent-review.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Cass-Review-Interim-Report-Final-Web-Accessible.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

PP here. Also given the title of the thread, wanted to throw in my two cents and say I like Dr Durán. I don’t want to see him go. I think APS’ policy is misguided and Youngkin’s policy goes too far. But parents should know if their child is trans - that is the part I agree with. I like what dr Durán did with the English curriculum and how he cares about improving the writing curriculum. It’s a vast improvement over what we had before. I kept my kids home during Covid even after schools opened in March. They wore masks the entire year after. They only stopped wearing masks this year. I know it’s hard for you to understand but people don’t fit into boxes. I am not right wing. I’m anti trump. Pro vax. Believe in Medicare for all, free college, unions, and a host of progressive causes. I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren’s regulatory positions and I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Biden in the elections. Yet at the same time I believe that the trans rights movement is misguided and dangerous and the medical establishment in the US has been ideologically captured. The medical establishment in the UK and Europe were the same way but thankfully realized their mistake and are moving to a different direction. The difference is that Europeans have government healthcare (of different types). But what that means is they collect better data than the US for profit healthcare system and follow up on what happens (there were failures in this regard but over all the government has an incentive to know whether certain treatments are working or not). After following up on kids who went through the Dutch protocol and the more expansive gender affirming care, and collecting data in general, they realized there is no evidence to back up this type of care and that they are doing more harm than good. That’s why they abandoned it. In the US, we aren’t collecting data so the debate, on both sides, is driven by ideology.

It sounds like your problem is with medical treatment for trans kids which is an entirely different animal than school policies.

I thought I was. But then after reading a lot of what was going on in Europe, my understanding now is the process of socially transitioning a child is considered a clinical treatment that has its risks and benefits. If a child wants to present as a different gender socially then it should happen under the direction of a mental health professional because it is a psychological treatment for gender dysphoria. As a result, it should only happen with the knowledge of the parents who are the only people that can consent to a child’s medical treatment (whether mental or otherwise). I have also come to believe that social transition is not a benign, neutral act and puts a child on the path of medicalization. Therefore it must be considered carefully and after a thorough evaluation. I believe that there is a percentage of children who would benefit from transitioning to a different gender (whether only socially or both medically and socially) but I believe that that decision must be made after a careful evaluation. I am not in support of the approach that the right is pushing in the US. But more in support of the conclusion that they have reached in the Netherlands with the data they have.

Like many people reading about this I went through stages. I initially thought it was harmless an

You will be very happy to hear that this is how the majority of transitions are accomplished. Except, of course, where the child in question has bad parents who are incapable of attending to their needs. Ideally there wouldn’t be bad parents, but there are, and so school needs to be a safe place for them for their own health and safety.

You are judging them to be bad parents but in European countries, social transition is no longer viewed as benign or neutral act. It is recommended for some children, but for others, watchful waiting is recommended. It depends on the child and the specific circumstances. It’s not black or white. You can’t make the blanket assumption that what is good for one child is good for another. The Economist has an entire issue devoted to this which I urge you to read. America is now an outlier amongst western nations when it comes to the treatment of gender dysphoria. My personal theory is it’s because we don’t have a government run healthcare program (whether it’s through insurance or provided by the government like the UK). So we don’t collect enough data here or do enough follow up studies.

Are the Europeans forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission?

They aren’t recommending social transition for the majority of children. They are recommending watchful waiting. The recommendation of what path a child undertakes comes after a thorough evaluation by a mental health professional specializing in gender dysphoria (obviously in most circumstances this would involve the parents). When I say European countries, I specifically am familiar with what is happening in Scandinavian countries which are the ones who first instituted the Dutch protocol which begins with social transition and puberty blockers for a certain subset of the population they see (have to meet certain criteria). Gender affirming care in America goes beyond that because the criteria isn’t there or isn’t as strict. Now Scandinavian countries have abandoned the Dutch protocol one after the other and now are in favor of watchful waiting.

So are they forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission or not?

I’m not sure what every single school district in Scandinavia is doing. I only say what I know and what I know is what is happening from the clinical perspective and in the medical field. Before there was a push towards puberty blockers and social transition. Both were viewed as neutral and giving the child time to think. Now the evidence shows otherwise. That for most children, “watching waiting,” is considered the better form treatment. Obviously it differs by kid. This is a fast changing field. We don’t have a lot of data. That’s why it’s better for parents to make such decisions with the help of a trusted doctor and for parents to be involved in the process.

Schools aren’t doling out puberty blockers. Are the European studies showing irreversible harm from children socially transitioning? Are the European studies showing the impacts of not having supportive parents or a supportive healthcare system? Are the European studies reflecting the harm that comes from being targeted as children by right wing American extremists?

Just curious.

+1

Have they studied the impacts of "outing" someone against their will?

By definition, you cannot “out” a person who is attempting to socially transition. There is nothing secret about it.

Outing at home is different than outing at school.

Doesn’t matter. The school is actively participating in what you call “outing.” The point of social transition is for it to be public and it can’t be public without the active participation of the school. Since the school is an active participant, the school needs permission from the child’s parents.

From the UK's Cass Report, a systematic, evidence-based assessment of youth gender medicine: "it is important to view it [social transition] as an active intervention because it may have significant effects on the child or young person...Whatever position one takes, it is important to acknowledge that it [social transition], is not a neutral act, and better information is needed about outcomes."

https://cass.independent-review.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Cass-Review-Interim-Report-Final-Web-Accessible.pdf

Thanks PP. For those of you who don’t know, the Cass report, commissioned by the NHS is what lead to the recommendation to close Tavistock, England’s only gender clinic. If you google BBC news night and Hannah Barnes you will see how the BBC uncovered what is happening in Tavistock which caused a huge scandal leading to the Cass investigation. At least with a national healthcare system you can’t escape accountability. In the US, there is no review of what’s happening, no follow up, and no accountability. Then you have schools coming out in support of a certain clinical pathway (yes social transition falls under gender affirming care) that has no evidence base and may actually be harmful. Parents should be able to make the decision of whether their child should go on this path or not. It’s not for the school to decide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

PP here. Also given the title of the thread, wanted to throw in my two cents and say I like Dr Durán. I don’t want to see him go. I think APS’ policy is misguided and Youngkin’s policy goes too far. But parents should know if their child is trans - that is the part I agree with. I like what dr Durán did with the English curriculum and how he cares about improving the writing curriculum. It’s a vast improvement over what we had before. I kept my kids home during Covid even after schools opened in March. They wore masks the entire year after. They only stopped wearing masks this year. I know it’s hard for you to understand but people don’t fit into boxes. I am not right wing. I’m anti trump. Pro vax. Believe in Medicare for all, free college, unions, and a host of progressive causes. I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren’s regulatory positions and I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Biden in the elections. Yet at the same time I believe that the trans rights movement is misguided and dangerous and the medical establishment in the US has been ideologically captured. The medical establishment in the UK and Europe were the same way but thankfully realized their mistake and are moving to a different direction. The difference is that Europeans have government healthcare (of different types). But what that means is they collect better data than the US for profit healthcare system and follow up on what happens (there were failures in this regard but over all the government has an incentive to know whether certain treatments are working or not). After following up on kids who went through the Dutch protocol and the more expansive gender affirming care, and collecting data in general, they realized there is no evidence to back up this type of care and that they are doing more harm than good. That’s why they abandoned it. In the US, we aren’t collecting data so the debate, on both sides, is driven by ideology.

It sounds like your problem is with medical treatment for trans kids which is an entirely different animal than school policies.

I thought I was. But then after reading a lot of what was going on in Europe, my understanding now is the process of socially transitioning a child is considered a clinical treatment that has its risks and benefits. If a child wants to present as a different gender socially then it should happen under the direction of a mental health professional because it is a psychological treatment for gender dysphoria. As a result, it should only happen with the knowledge of the parents who are the only people that can consent to a child’s medical treatment (whether mental or otherwise). I have also come to believe that social transition is not a benign, neutral act and puts a child on the path of medicalization. Therefore it must be considered carefully and after a thorough evaluation. I believe that there is a percentage of children who would benefit from transitioning to a different gender (whether only socially or both medically and socially) but I believe that that decision must be made after a careful evaluation. I am not in support of the approach that the right is pushing in the US. But more in support of the conclusion that they have reached in the Netherlands with the data they have.

Like many people reading about this I went through stages. I initially thought it was harmless an

You will be very happy to hear that this is how the majority of transitions are accomplished. Except, of course, where the child in question has bad parents who are incapable of attending to their needs. Ideally there wouldn’t be bad parents, but there are, and so school needs to be a safe place for them for their own health and safety.

You are judging them to be bad parents but in European countries, social transition is no longer viewed as benign or neutral act. It is recommended for some children, but for others, watchful waiting is recommended. It depends on the child and the specific circumstances. It’s not black or white. You can’t make the blanket assumption that what is good for one child is good for another. The Economist has an entire issue devoted to this which I urge you to read. America is now an outlier amongst western nations when it comes to the treatment of gender dysphoria. My personal theory is it’s because we don’t have a government run healthcare program (whether it’s through insurance or provided by the government like the UK). So we don’t collect enough data here or do enough follow up studies.

Are the Europeans forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission?

They aren’t recommending social transition for the majority of children. They are recommending watchful waiting. The recommendation of what path a child undertakes comes after a thorough evaluation by a mental health professional specializing in gender dysphoria (obviously in most circumstances this would involve the parents). When I say European countries, I specifically am familiar with what is happening in Scandinavian countries which are the ones who first instituted the Dutch protocol which begins with social transition and puberty blockers for a certain subset of the population they see (have to meet certain criteria). Gender affirming care in America goes beyond that because the criteria isn’t there or isn’t as strict. Now Scandinavian countries have abandoned the Dutch protocol one after the other and now are in favor of watchful waiting.

So are they forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission or not?

I’m not sure what every single school district in Scandinavia is doing. I only say what I know and what I know is what is happening from the clinical perspective and in the medical field. Before there was a push towards puberty blockers and social transition. Both were viewed as neutral and giving the child time to think. Now the evidence shows otherwise. That for most children, “watching waiting,” is considered the better form treatment. Obviously it differs by kid. This is a fast changing field. We don’t have a lot of data. That’s why it’s better for parents to make such decisions with the help of a trusted doctor and for parents to be involved in the process.

Schools aren’t doling out puberty blockers. Are the European studies showing irreversible harm from children socially transitioning? Are the European studies showing the impacts of not having supportive parents or a supportive healthcare system? Are the European studies reflecting the harm that comes from being targeted as children by right wing American extremists?

Just curious.

+1

Have they studied the impacts of "outing" someone against their will?

By definition, you cannot “out” a person who is attempting to socially transition. There is nothing secret about it.

Outing at home is different than outing at school.

Doesn’t matter. The school is actively participating in what you call “outing.” The point of social transition is for it to be public and it can’t be public without the active participation of the school. Since the school is an active participant, the school needs permission from the child’s parents.

From the UK's Cass Report, a systematic, evidence-based assessment of youth gender medicine: "it is important to view it [social transition] as an active intervention because it may have significant effects on the child or young person...Whatever position one takes, it is important to acknowledge that it [social transition], is not a neutral act, and better information is needed about outcomes."

https://cass.independent-review.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Cass-Review-Interim-Report-Final-Web-Accessible.pdf

Thanks PP. For those of you who don’t know, the Cass report, commissioned by the NHS is what lead to the recommendation to close Tavistock, England’s only gender clinic. If you google BBC news night and Hannah Barnes you will see how the BBC uncovered what is happening in Tavistock which caused a huge scandal leading to the Cass investigation. At least with a national healthcare system you can’t escape accountability. In the US, there is no review of what’s happening, no follow up, and no accountability. Then you have schools coming out in support of a certain clinical pathway (yes social transition falls under gender affirming care) that has no evidence base and may actually be harmful. Parents should be able to make the decision of whether their child should go on this path or not. It’s not for the school to decide.

It’s for *the student* to decide. Schools have no place outing them to their parents without their consent. It’s potentially much more harmful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

PP here. Also given the title of the thread, wanted to throw in my two cents and say I like Dr Durán. I don’t want to see him go. I think APS’ policy is misguided and Youngkin’s policy goes too far. But parents should know if their child is trans - that is the part I agree with. I like what dr Durán did with the English curriculum and how he cares about improving the writing curriculum. It’s a vast improvement over what we had before. I kept my kids home during Covid even after schools opened in March. They wore masks the entire year after. They only stopped wearing masks this year. I know it’s hard for you to understand but people don’t fit into boxes. I am not right wing. I’m anti trump. Pro vax. Believe in Medicare for all, free college, unions, and a host of progressive causes. I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren’s regulatory positions and I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Biden in the elections. Yet at the same time I believe that the trans rights movement is misguided and dangerous and the medical establishment in the US has been ideologically captured. The medical establishment in the UK and Europe were the same way but thankfully realized their mistake and are moving to a different direction. The difference is that Europeans have government healthcare (of different types). But what that means is they collect better data than the US for profit healthcare system and follow up on what happens (there were failures in this regard but over all the government has an incentive to know whether certain treatments are working or not). After following up on kids who went through the Dutch protocol and the more expansive gender affirming care, and collecting data in general, they realized there is no evidence to back up this type of care and that they are doing more harm than good. That’s why they abandoned it. In the US, we aren’t collecting data so the debate, on both sides, is driven by ideology.

It sounds like your problem is with medical treatment for trans kids which is an entirely different animal than school policies.

I thought I was. But then after reading a lot of what was going on in Europe, my understanding now is the process of socially transitioning a child is considered a clinical treatment that has its risks and benefits. If a child wants to present as a different gender socially then it should happen under the direction of a mental health professional because it is a psychological treatment for gender dysphoria. As a result, it should only happen with the knowledge of the parents who are the only people that can consent to a child’s medical treatment (whether mental or otherwise). I have also come to believe that social transition is not a benign, neutral act and puts a child on the path of medicalization. Therefore it must be considered carefully and after a thorough evaluation. I believe that there is a percentage of children who would benefit from transitioning to a different gender (whether only socially or both medically and socially) but I believe that that decision must be made after a careful evaluation. I am not in support of the approach that the right is pushing in the US. But more in support of the conclusion that they have reached in the Netherlands with the data they have.

Like many people reading about this I went through stages. I initially thought it was harmless an

You will be very happy to hear that this is how the majority of transitions are accomplished. Except, of course, where the child in question has bad parents who are incapable of attending to their needs. Ideally there wouldn’t be bad parents, but there are, and so school needs to be a safe place for them for their own health and safety.

You are judging them to be bad parents but in European countries, social transition is no longer viewed as benign or neutral act. It is recommended for some children, but for others, watchful waiting is recommended. It depends on the child and the specific circumstances. It’s not black or white. You can’t make the blanket assumption that what is good for one child is good for another. The Economist has an entire issue devoted to this which I urge you to read. America is now an outlier amongst western nations when it comes to the treatment of gender dysphoria. My personal theory is it’s because we don’t have a government run healthcare program (whether it’s through insurance or provided by the government like the UK). So we don’t collect enough data here or do enough follow up studies.

Are the Europeans forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission?

They aren’t recommending social transition for the majority of children. They are recommending watchful waiting. The recommendation of what path a child undertakes comes after a thorough evaluation by a mental health professional specializing in gender dysphoria (obviously in most circumstances this would involve the parents). When I say European countries, I specifically am familiar with what is happening in Scandinavian countries which are the ones who first instituted the Dutch protocol which begins with social transition and puberty blockers for a certain subset of the population they see (have to meet certain criteria). Gender affirming care in America goes beyond that because the criteria isn’t there or isn’t as strict. Now Scandinavian countries have abandoned the Dutch protocol one after the other and now are in favor of watchful waiting.

So are they forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission or not?

I’m not sure what every single school district in Scandinavia is doing. I only say what I know and what I know is what is happening from the clinical perspective and in the medical field. Before there was a push towards puberty blockers and social transition. Both were viewed as neutral and giving the child time to think. Now the evidence shows otherwise. That for most children, “watching waiting,” is considered the better form treatment. Obviously it differs by kid. This is a fast changing field. We don’t have a lot of data. That’s why it’s better for parents to make such decisions with the help of a trusted doctor and for parents to be involved in the process.

Schools aren’t doling out puberty blockers. Are the European studies showing irreversible harm from children socially transitioning? Are the European studies showing the impacts of not having supportive parents or a supportive healthcare system? Are the European studies reflecting the harm that comes from being targeted as children by right wing American extremists?

Just curious.

+1

Have they studied the impacts of "outing" someone against their will?

By definition, you cannot “out” a person who is attempting to socially transition. There is nothing secret about it.

Outing at home is different than outing at school.

Doesn’t matter. The school is actively participating in what you call “outing.” The point of social transition is for it to be public and it can’t be public without the active participation of the school. Since the school is an active participant, the school needs permission from the child’s parents.

From the UK's Cass Report, a systematic, evidence-based assessment of youth gender medicine: "it is important to view it [social transition] as an active intervention because it may have significant effects on the child or young person...Whatever position one takes, it is important to acknowledge that it [social transition], is not a neutral act, and better information is needed about outcomes."

https://cass.independent-review.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Cass-Review-Interim-Report-Final-Web-Accessible.pdf

Thanks PP. For those of you who don’t know, the Cass report, commissioned by the NHS is what lead to the recommendation to close Tavistock, England’s only gender clinic. If you google BBC news night and Hannah Barnes you will see how the BBC uncovered what is happening in Tavistock which caused a huge scandal leading to the Cass investigation. At least with a national healthcare system you can’t escape accountability. In the US, there is no review of what’s happening, no follow up, and no accountability. Then you have schools coming out in support of a certain clinical pathway (yes social transition falls under gender affirming care) that has no evidence base and may actually be harmful. Parents should be able to make the decision of whether their child should go on this path or not. It’s not for the school to decide.

It’s for *the student* to decide. Schools have no place outing them to their parents without their consent. It’s potentially much more harmful.

You seem to have the inability to address any of the points raised. You keep repeating the same thing and we keep telling you that the student is already out because the entire school is actively involved in their social transition and punishes fellow students for not using the correct pronouns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

PP here. Also given the title of the thread, wanted to throw in my two cents and say I like Dr Durán. I don’t want to see him go. I think APS’ policy is misguided and Youngkin’s policy goes too far. But parents should know if their child is trans - that is the part I agree with. I like what dr Durán did with the English curriculum and how he cares about improving the writing curriculum. It’s a vast improvement over what we had before. I kept my kids home during Covid even after schools opened in March. They wore masks the entire year after. They only stopped wearing masks this year. I know it’s hard for you to understand but people don’t fit into boxes. I am not right wing. I’m anti trump. Pro vax. Believe in Medicare for all, free college, unions, and a host of progressive causes. I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren’s regulatory positions and I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Biden in the elections. Yet at the same time I believe that the trans rights movement is misguided and dangerous and the medical establishment in the US has been ideologically captured. The medical establishment in the UK and Europe were the same way but thankfully realized their mistake and are moving to a different direction. The difference is that Europeans have government healthcare (of different types). But what that means is they collect better data than the US for profit healthcare system and follow up on what happens (there were failures in this regard but over all the government has an incentive to know whether certain treatments are working or not). After following up on kids who went through the Dutch protocol and the more expansive gender affirming care, and collecting data in general, they realized there is no evidence to back up this type of care and that they are doing more harm than good. That’s why they abandoned it. In the US, we aren’t collecting data so the debate, on both sides, is driven by ideology.

It sounds like your problem is with medical treatment for trans kids which is an entirely different animal than school policies.

I thought I was. But then after reading a lot of what was going on in Europe, my understanding now is the process of socially transitioning a child is considered a clinical treatment that has its risks and benefits. If a child wants to present as a different gender socially then it should happen under the direction of a mental health professional because it is a psychological treatment for gender dysphoria. As a result, it should only happen with the knowledge of the parents who are the only people that can consent to a child’s medical treatment (whether mental or otherwise). I have also come to believe that social transition is not a benign, neutral act and puts a child on the path of medicalization. Therefore it must be considered carefully and after a thorough evaluation. I believe that there is a percentage of children who would benefit from transitioning to a different gender (whether only socially or both medically and socially) but I believe that that decision must be made after a careful evaluation. I am not in support of the approach that the right is pushing in the US. But more in support of the conclusion that they have reached in the Netherlands with the data they have.

Like many people reading about this I went through stages. I initially thought it was harmless an

You will be very happy to hear that this is how the majority of transitions are accomplished. Except, of course, where the child in question has bad parents who are incapable of attending to their needs. Ideally there wouldn’t be bad parents, but there are, and so school needs to be a safe place for them for their own health and safety.

You are judging them to be bad parents but in European countries, social transition is no longer viewed as benign or neutral act. It is recommended for some children, but for others, watchful waiting is recommended. It depends on the child and the specific circumstances. It’s not black or white. You can’t make the blanket assumption that what is good for one child is good for another. The Economist has an entire issue devoted to this which I urge you to read. America is now an outlier amongst western nations when it comes to the treatment of gender dysphoria. My personal theory is it’s because we don’t have a government run healthcare program (whether it’s through insurance or provided by the government like the UK). So we don’t collect enough data here or do enough follow up studies.

Are the Europeans forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission?

They aren’t recommending social transition for the majority of children. They are recommending watchful waiting. The recommendation of what path a child undertakes comes after a thorough evaluation by a mental health professional specializing in gender dysphoria (obviously in most circumstances this would involve the parents). When I say European countries, I specifically am familiar with what is happening in Scandinavian countries which are the ones who first instituted the Dutch protocol which begins with social transition and puberty blockers for a certain subset of the population they see (have to meet certain criteria). Gender affirming care in America goes beyond that because the criteria isn’t there or isn’t as strict. Now Scandinavian countries have abandoned the Dutch protocol one after the other and now are in favor of watchful waiting.

So are they forcing schools to “out” kids without their permission or not?

I’m not sure what every single school district in Scandinavia is doing. I only say what I know and what I know is what is happening from the clinical perspective and in the medical field. Before there was a push towards puberty blockers and social transition. Both were viewed as neutral and giving the child time to think. Now the evidence shows otherwise. That for most children, “watching waiting,” is considered the better form treatment. Obviously it differs by kid. This is a fast changing field. We don’t have a lot of data. That’s why it’s better for parents to make such decisions with the help of a trusted doctor and for parents to be involved in the process.

Schools aren’t doling out puberty blockers. Are the European studies showing irreversible harm from children socially transitioning? Are the European studies showing the impacts of not having supportive parents or a supportive healthcare system? Are the European studies reflecting the harm that comes from being targeted as children by right wing American extremists?

Just curious.

+1

Have they studied the impacts of "outing" someone against their will?

By definition, you cannot “out” a person who is attempting to socially transition. There is nothing secret about it.

Outing at home is different than outing at school.

Doesn’t matter. The school is actively participating in what you call “outing.” The point of social transition is for it to be public and it can’t be public without the active participation of the school. Since the school is an active participant, the school needs permission from the child’s parents.

From the UK's Cass Report, a systematic, evidence-based assessment of youth gender medicine: "it is important to view it [social transition] as an active intervention because it may have significant effects on the child or young person...Whatever position one takes, it is important to acknowledge that it [social transition], is not a neutral act, and better information is needed about outcomes."

https://cass.independent-review.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Cass-Review-Interim-Report-Final-Web-Accessible.pdf

Thanks PP. For those of you who don’t know, the Cass report, commissioned by the NHS is what lead to the recommendation to close Tavistock, England’s only gender clinic. If you google BBC news night and Hannah Barnes you will see how the BBC uncovered what is happening in Tavistock which caused a huge scandal leading to the Cass investigation. At least with a national healthcare system you can’t escape accountability. In the US, there is no review of what’s happening, no follow up, and no accountability. Then you have schools coming out in support of a certain clinical pathway (yes social transition falls under gender affirming care) that has no evidence base and may actually be harmful. Parents should be able to make the decision of whether their child should go on this path or not. It’s not for the school to decide.

It’s for *the student* to decide. Schools have no place outing them to their parents without their consent. It’s potentially much more harmful.

You seem to have the inability to address any of the points raised. You keep repeating the same thing and we keep telling you that the student is already out because the entire school is actively involved in their social transition and punishes fellow students for not using the correct pronouns.

You seem to have the inability to address the fact that some students only feel comfortable being out at school and not at home, where they may have garbage parents that would abuse them or toss them out on the streets. It’s really something when a kid feels safer being out to hundreds of people but not the people who raised them, but trash parents are everywhere and no one is doing anything about them.

I have friends who found themselves out on the streets at age 16 because they were outed as gay to their parents and wouldn’t go to conversion therapy. Do you know how awful that is for the child? They were in legal no man’s land. No support, no one to sign anything they needed to access support or healthcare. Couldn’t even go on field trips.

Some kids have to lie in order not to die. It’s awful but I don’t see adults doing any deep diving.