Health
Coalition of doctors warns Supreme Court ‘transitioning’ children causes ‘significant’ damage
From LifeSiteNews
The American College of Pediatricians, Catholic Medical Association, and other pro-family medical groups are defending Tennessee’s ban on ‘gender transitions’ for children and stressing to the Supreme Court that the ban is vital to their patients’ health and welfare.
A coalition of pro-family medical organizations has submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court urging it to uphold Tennessee’s ban on surgically and chemically “transitioning” gender-confused minors, presenting a comprehensive case against the practice as contrary to both science and health.
In March 2023, Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee signed SB1, which forbids subjecting minors to surgical or chemical “sex change” interventions, such as puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and mutilating surgeries.
LGBT activists sued, and last September a three-judge panel of the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the law could be enforced, finding sufficient evidence linking puberty blockers to harmful effects. The Biden administration appealed the ruling to the nation’s highest court, which confirmed earlier this month it will begin hearing oral arguments on the matter in December.
Among several interested parties to weigh in on both sides of the case, on October 15 an amicus brief was filed on behalf of the American College of Pediatricians, Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, American Association of Christian Counselors, Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, Catholic Medical Association, and Christian Medical & Dental Association in support of Tennessee and SB1, citing their “direct interest in the outcome of this case because it affects the vulnerable population” they serve as medical providers.
“Scientific research shows that children with gender incongruence or dysphoria almost always have significant mental health struggles and adverse childhood events that contribute to if not cause their dysphoria,” the brief states. “And multiple studies show that these children almost always grow out of or desist from such gender incongruity while going through puberty. Yet when children are placed on puberty blockers and/or cross-sex hormones, they almost always proceed to ‘gender transition’ surgeries with life-long adverse consequences.”
It goes on to note that, despite gender activists’ insistence that the evidence for “affirming” transgenderism is so clear as to make opposition “cruel,” in reality, “there are no long-term, reliable studies on the benefits from starting a child on” the pathway of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgical mutilation. While failing to improve children’s mental health, “transitioning” also leads to “significant mental health issues in the long-term” and does “nothing to treat the underlying mental health struggles” they face, according to the available evidence.
SB1, the doctors write, is “consistent with sound medical practice: Rather than push a pre-teen to drugs and permanent body-altering surgery, the appropriate medical treatment is to address the child’s underlying mental health issues while allowing the child to go through natural puberty […] upon reaching adulthood, the vast majority of children who were not ‘affirmed’ in a gender-incongruent identity will no longer feel any distress in their sex.”
The amicus brief by medical experts in support of Tennessee follows similar briefs presented to the nation’s highest court by Partners for Ethical Care, representing parents whose children suffered from being misled into “transitioning,” and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, which makes the moral case against “transitioning” minors and warns of potential dangers to the freedoms of those who object should the Tennessee law be struck down.
A significant body of evidence shows that “affirming” gender confusion carries serious harms, especially when done with impressionable children who lack the mental development, emotional maturity, and life experience to consider the long-term ramifications of the decisions being pushed on them, or full knowledge about the long-term effects of life-altering, physically transformative, and often irreversible surgical and chemical procedures.
Studies find that more than 80 percent of children suffering gender dysphoria outgrow it on their own by late adolescence and that “transition” procedures, including “reassignment” surgery, fail to resolve gender-confused individuals’ heightened tendency to engage in self-harm and suicide – and even exacerbate it, including by reinforcing their confusion and neglecting the actual root causes of their mental strife.
Many oft-ignored “detransitioners,” individuals who attempted to live under a different “gender identity” before embracing their sex, attest to the physical and mental harm of reinforcing gender confusion, as well as to the bias and negligence of the medical establishment on the subject, many of whom take an activist approach to their profession and begin cases with a predetermined conclusion in favor of “transitioning.”
“Gender-affirming” physicians have also been caught on video admitting to more old-fashioned motives for such procedures, as with an 2022 exposé about Vanderbilt University Medical Center’s Clinic for Transgender Health, where Dr. Shayne Sebold Taylor said outright that “these surgeries make a lot of money.”
Opponents of transgender ideology are hopeful that the Supreme Court will rule in Tennessee’s favor and set a nationwide precedent protecting every state’s right to make the same decision.
Aristotle Foundation
The Canadian Medical Association’s inexplicable stance on pediatric gender medicine
By Dr. J. Edward Les
The thalidomide saga is particularly instructive: Canada was the last developed country to pull thalidomide from its shelves — three months during which babies continued to be born in this country with absent or deformed limbs
Physicians have a duty to put forward the best possible evidence, not ideology, based treatments
Late last month, the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) announced that it, along with three Alberta doctors, had filed a constitutional challenge to Alberta’s Bill 26 “to protect the relationship between patients, their families and doctors when it comes to making treatment decisions.”
Bill 26, which became law last December, prohibits doctors in the province from prescribing puberty blockers and hormone therapies for those under 16; it also bans doctors from performing gender-reassignment surgeries on minors (those under 18).
The unprecedented CMA action follows its strongly worded response in February 2024 to Alberta’s (at the time) proposed legislation:
“The CMA is deeply concerned about any government proposal that restricts access to evidence-based medical care, including the Alberta government’s proposed restrictions on gender-affirming treatments for pediatric transgender patients.”
But here’s the problem with that statement, and with the CMA’s position: the evidence supporting the “gender affirmation” model of care — which propels minors onto puberty blockers, cross-gender hormones, and in some cases, surgery — is essentially non-existent. That’s why the United Kingdom’s Conservative government, in the aftermath of the exhaustive four-year-long Cass Review, which laid bare the lack of evidence for that model, and which shone a light on the deeply troubling potential for the model’s irreversible harm to youth, initiated a temporary ban on puberty blockers — a ban made permanent last December by the subsequent Labour government. And that’s why other European jurisdictions like Finland and Sweden, after reviews of gender affirming care practices in their countries, have similarly slammed the brakes on the administration of puberty blockers and cross-gender hormones to minors.
It’s not only the Europeans who have raised concerns. The alarm bells are ringing loudly within our own borders: earlier this year, a group at McMaster University, headed by none other than Dr. Gordon Guyatt, one of the founding gurus of the “evidence-based care” construct that rightfully underpins modern medical practice, issued a pair of exhaustive systematic reviews and meta analyses that cast grave doubts on the wisdom of prescribing these drugs to youth.
And yet, the CMA purports to be “deeply concerned about any government proposal that restricts access to evidence-based medical care,” which begs the obvious question: Where, exactly, is the evidence for the benefits of the “gender affirming” model of care? The answer is that it’s scant at best. Worse, the evidence that does exist, points, on balance, to infliction of harm, rather than provision of benefit.
CMA President Joss Reimer, in the group’s announcement of the organization’s legal action, said:
“Medicine is a calling. Doctors pursue it because they are compelled to care for and promote the well-being of patients. When a government bans specific treatments, it interferes with a doctor’s ability to empower patients to choose the best care possible.”
Indeed, we physicians have a sacred duty to pursue the well-being of our patients. But that means that we should be putting forward the best possible treatments based on actual evidence.
When Dr. Reimer states that a government that bans specific treatments is interfering with medical care, she displays a woeful ignorance of medical history. Because doctors don’t always get things right: look to the sad narratives of frontal lobotomies, the oxycontin crisis, thalidomide, to name a few.
The thalidomide saga is particularly instructive: it illustrates what happens when a government drags its heels on necessary action. Canada was the last developed country to pull thalidomide, given to pregnant women for morning sickness, from its shelves, three months after it had been banned everywhere else — three months during which babies continued to be born in this country with absent or deformed limbs, along with other severe anomalies. It’s a shameful chapter in our medical past, but it pales in comparison to the astonishing intransigence our medical leaders have displayed — and continue to display — on the youth gender care file.
A final note (prompted by thalidomide’s history), to speak to a significant quibble I have with Alberta’s Bill 26 legislation: as much as I admire Premier Danielle Smith’s courage in bringing it forward, the law contains a loophole allowing minors already on puberty blockers and cross-gender hormones to continue to take them. Imagine if, after it was removed from the shelves in 1962, government had allowed pregnant women already on the drug to continue to take thalidomide. Would that have made any sense? Of course not. And the same applies to puberty blockers and cross-gender hormones: they should be banned outright for all youth.
That argument is the kind our medical associations should be making — and would be making, if they weren’t so firmly in the grasp, seemingly, of ideologues who have abandoned evidence-based medical care for our youth.
J. Edward Les is a Calgary pediatrician, a senior fellow with the Aristotle Foundation for Public Policy, and co-author of “Teenagers, Children, and Gender Transition Policy: A Comparison of Transgender Medical Policy for Minors in Canada, the United States, and Europe.”
Health
Last day and last chance to win this dream home! Support the 2025 Red Deer Hospital Lottery before midnight!
Deadline: June 16, 2025
Draw: June 26, 2025
|
|
|
The 2025 Red Deer Hospital Lottery Dream Home, designed by Sorento Custom Homes, continues Sorento’s tradition of award-winning designs. This gorgeous bungalow features 2,824 sq ft of developed living space and showcases a tall, vaulted ceiling.
Located at 128 Emmett Crescent in the neighbourhood of Evergreen, this outstanding home features a screened deck off the dining room, a large family room on the lower level, and of course, a beautiful primary suite. Sorento’s ensuites are always something to behold, and this one features a claw foot tub. There’s an office on the main level, two bedrooms below, and a large fitness room that includes a two-person infrared sauna. Enjoy the convenience of a walk-in pantry, main floor laundry, and chef quality appliances. The design of this unique home is complemented by gorgeous furnishings by Urban Barn.
Our Grand Prize Dream Home package is valued at $1,074,472! You won’t want to miss seeing this outstanding home or your chance to live in it.
Main Lottery
8 FOR $100
15 FOR $150
30 FOR $250
Mega Bucks 50
1 FOR $10
10 FOR $25
25 FOR $50
50 FOR $75
Make a Difference
Right Here in Red Deer
Proceeds from Red Deer Hospital Lottery and Mega Bucks 50 are urgently needed for state-of-the-art equipment that helps doctors and nurses provide exceptional care today. While the hospital expansion is on the horizon, healthcare can’t wait.
Your support is as critical as the equipment you will help fund.
How Chinese State-Linked Networks Replaced the Medellín Model with Global Logistics and Political Protection
New RCMP program steering opioid addicted towards treatment and recovery
We need an immigration policy that will serve all Canadians
RFK Jr. purges CDC vaccine panel, citing decades of ‘skewed science’
-
Canadian Energy Centre2 days agoCross-Canada economic benefits of the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline project
-
Economy2 days agoCarney’s Promise of Expediting Resource Projects Feels Like a Modern Version of the Wicked Stepmother from Disney’s Cinderella
-
Alberta2 days agoAlbertans need clarity on prime minister’s incoherent energy policy
-
conflict20 hours ago“Evacuate”: Netanyahu Warns Tehran as Israel Expands Strikes on Iran’s Military Command
-
Health24 hours ago
Last day and last chance to win this dream home! Support the 2025 Red Deer Hospital Lottery before midnight!
-
Energy20 hours agoCould the G7 Summit in Alberta be a historic moment for Canadian energy?
-
Alberta1 day agoAlberta’s grand bargain with Canada includes a new pipeline to Prince Rupert
-
Crime2 days agoManhunt on for suspect in shooting deaths of Minnesota House speaker, husband