Victoria, Australia-parents: consent to puberty blockers or be prosecuted

[NZdad]

Hi all,
I'm a dad from NZ. Hope that's OK on mumsnet?

Anyway, I have 2 little daughters who will be going to school soon. I've followed the puberty blockers / child transition issue for awhile and am pretty concerned, although I try to dismiss anything that seems like right-wing fever dreams.

But yesterday I saw this this is on an official governmental webpage of the Australian state of Victoria (southeast Australia) specifically their Human Rights Commission:

"Examples of illegal practices

Practices that would be considered illegal under the Act include:

[...]

a parent refusing to support their child’s request for medical treatment that will enable them to prevent physical changes from puberty that do not align with the child’s gender identity and denying their child access to any health care services that would affirm their child’s gender identity"

Source: "Have you experienced a change or suppression practice?" https://www.humanrights.vic.gov.au/change-or-suppression-practices/have-you-experienced-a-change-or-suppression-practice/

This literally says parents must provide consent, on pain of prosecution, to give their kids with puberty blockers, if the kid claims they want it. Normally parents are asked for consent even for field trips and the like! I've read about the health damage from Lupron etc. How can a government Human Rights Commission come up with a consent-or-jail policy - what does "consent" even mean here?

I know I'm in NZ, but my partner is from Victoria and we could move back to be closer to her family. Or a similar law could be passed here. I just keep telling myself it's low odds this would happen in my family, but who knows? There are a million stories of parents blind-sided by this stuff.

Is there something I'm missing that makes this less bad so I can sleep better?

I'm sorry, OP, that makes my blood run cold.

PS: I don't know how that strikeout got in there, just ignore it

genderclinicnews.substack.com/p/overreach-by-conversion-therapy-watchdog?s=r

You might be interested in this substack about this very topic!

The threat of prosecution unless a parent consents on behalf of their child is obviously coercion. Coerced “consent” is NOT consent. I am amazed that no Australian healthcare body is speaking up to point this out, regardless of what their politics are on this issue. Any “consent” that a healthcare professional sought by using coercion tactics would not be admissible in court. This is no different but appears to have the blessing of local government. But then, it’s quite likely that this example of coerced “consent” is just well hidden enough to suit the TRAs.

This needs to be brought to the attention of parents everywhere, especially in Australia. It has made my blood run cold too @MagnoliaTaint. Thank you @NZdad for bringing this to our attention.

Vitsyra, if you are a real poster, please get some help and perhaps go on a parenting course to get practical support as it seems that paranoia is affecting your parenting.

NZdad I'm aware that Australia can be an intensely religious society with a lot of churches that seem very extreme to me - i had a colleague here that went to a Hillsong church in the UK which I think is originally an Australian movement, and I find what they do worrying. I'd be more concerned that my child would be converted to this sort of religion than about puberty blockers. I'm not sure if NZ is the same?

Looking at the website I would put the Act into that context - that there is a lot of organised homophobic action taken against individuals in religious movements. I'd also agree with the 'not broken and don't need fixing' message.

Having said that - i also agree that it is outrageous for a parent to be prosecutable if they are saying their child is not sick and does not need invasive medical treatment - that doesn't fit at all with the 'not broken' message. It's quite jarring to see them put together, in fact.

It is pretty rare to be faced with this to such an extreme extent - puberty blockers remain a very minority treatment, and I hope soon will stop being used. I wouldn't take it into account if deciding where to live but I would want to keep my child's Internet use under review and talk about what they are seeing. Essentially aim to head off any medicalising voices.

I understand that drugs can be directly advertised to consumers in NZ, do you see any of that?

@NZdad Thank you for sharing this here. We need to remind doctors what informed consent is and what competance to make informed consent looks like.

I wonder of there are civil rights organisations who would be able to supoort parents in these situations.

@Vitsyra I believe that if we have open and honest communication with our children, we can nurture them to love the bodies they are born in. I do know that parents all over the world have challenging situations with their children but the vast majority of parents do not face this question. In my opinion we should not be complicit in restriciting the growth of our children by imposing sex based stereotypes upon them. Allowing your daughter to play with dinosaurs or to wear suitable clothing for play will not result in her wanting to be a boy. In fact, the very opposite could indeed be true. Find some like minded people, be the positive force and role model your child needs.

This is a rather extreme way to deal with a situation that hasn't happened yet. I feel sad you've taken her dinosaurs away! The toys won't make her feel masculine - and as long as you just teach her factual biology from an early age she is going to be fine. Another thing to remember is that the backlash to this is going to be breathtakingly swift when it finally takes hold so it might not even be a social contagion issue by the time she's 10. Just raise her as drama free as you can, keep her away from the internet for as long as possible and keep an eye on her friends.

Allowing your daughter to play with dinosaurs or to wear suitable clothing for play will not result in her wanting to be a boy. In fact, the very opposite could indeed be true.

This sort of thing crops up very regularly in stories of "trans kids", like Susie Green's TED Talk - boys being punished for playing with girly toys, or vice versa. Unsurprisingly, this leads the child to the conclusion "if I was a girl, I would be allowed to play with the toys I like", hence leading to some sort of declaration of desire to be or actually being a girl.

Which then hits some adult stupid enough to excitedly latch onto that and declare that child a "trans kid".

Everyone's spotted this pattern now, so it's unsurprising some might want to do some DARVO to make out it's gender-critical people doing that. Laughably transparent if you're even vaguely aware of who we are (the people that brought you "Let Toys Be Toys"), but worth a try, I guess.

The document contradicts itself. It starts by saying that medical interventions are conversion practices:

Change or suppression (also known as conversion) practices are teachings, counselling, spiritual care activities, or other psychological or medical interventions based on the ideology that there is something wrong with or broken about people with diverse sexualities or gender identities.

You are not broken or damaged, and you do not need to be fixed.

Then in the section about illegal practices:

a parent refusing to support their child’s request for medical treatment that will enable them to prevent physical changes from puberty that do not align with the child’s gender identity and denying their child access to any health care services that would affirm their child’s gender identity

Surely this medical treatment is based on the idea that there is something wrong with the child, which makes this medical treatment an illegal conversion practice.

Is it still illegal for women who have been raped to talk about it in Victoria?

"Consent: that is illegal to withhold" is not consent. It makes a mockery of the very idea of consent. This needs a judicial review. With this law in place, effectively they are saying that for every other possible medical treatment or intervention, the parents should have the right to weigh the risks of treatment (which is rarely risk-free) against the risk of not treating or pursuing different treatment options, and deciding what is in the best interests of the child. But somehow for this one kind of treatment the parent cannot have this role and are not allowed to consider the balance of risks and benefits as they affect any specific individual, but any child can just have the treatment on demand. That is perverse. It needs a legal challenge and that shouldn't wait for a specific case to be appealed, that would be too traumatising for an individual family.

I assume that Australian parents have to be ready to crowdfund the defence of any parent who is caught by this.

This shouldn't be necessary. What is happening to our agreement of what a democracy is.

You'd think that people would pause for thought about the homophobia of the trans movement when they realise that the preferred treatment for transgenderism is the same as that which was used in the past as a conversion 'treatment' for gay men.

Or have they not realised that chemical castration with drugs like puberty blockers is what used to be done to gay men to try to stop them from being gay?

Or have they not realised that chemical castration with drugs like puberty blockers is what used to be done to gay men to try to stop them from being gay?

No it's just that "gender-affirming care" is obviously totally different from "conversion therapy".

Look at the names!

I have made a point to make her extra girly, she now wears jewellery and pretty dresses, she plays with dolls and her pink kitchen. I got rid of her dinosaurs and basically anything seen as too masculine.

You are obviously being flippant but there is an interesting point within your comment. When listening to the stories of trans people (and detransitioners) they often report that they come from families where their parents had forced them to be gender conforming. Young girls not allowed to get their hair cut short and forced to wear dresses until they said they thought they were a boy. Boys who were bullied by their parents for being effeminate until they claimed girlhood. It is quite clear that enforcement of gender roles does not keep gender ideology at bay and there are some pretty high profile examples of this such as Susie Green's (of Mermaids) child who was clearly given a hard time as a child by their parents when they weren't behaving in the way their parents expected a little boy to behave.

Where is this coming from as legislation?

Is it the Victorian state government

I could be wrong, but one of the reasons professionals are not speaking out is that the Victorian government also has harsh laws around ‘hate’ that could be twisted here too.

There are professionals in other states speaking out though. There is apparently studies underway as well if I have read this correctly.

www.ranzcp.org/news-policy/policy-and-advocacy/position-statements/gender-dysphoria

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists updated their guidance last year.

They are now warning that there is not enough evidence to recommend affirming only treatments or indeed any particular treatment plan. They now say that underlying health issues should be treated at the same time. And warn that medicalisation of children and teens be very careful and thoroughly explored considering the ‘paucity’ of evidence at this time.

Other states have also slipped through bans on conversion therapy that may be problematic but may not have the extreme position that Victoria has. QLD got conversion therapy laws through during covid. ACT has conversion therapy laws too (and ACT women’s rights campaigners do have to be extra careful in their activity. www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8712169/amp/Canberra-radio-broadcaster-Beth-Rep-pay-10-000-transgender-activist-Bridget-Clinch.html )

Gender Identity legislation has become a politically hot topic in Victoria particularly. There is a state MP, Andrew Meddick, who has a transitioned male adult child. That ‘child’ seems well known as an extreme trans activist and not a stranger to perpetuating violence but that is often overlooked and selectively reported for sympathy.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10226895/amp/Victorian-MPs-daughter-seeks-refuge-bar-hit-head-spray-can.html (the actual story seems to be quite unclear here but Meddick junior was caught spraying graffiti, passerby told them to stop, Meddick threw can intending to harm/scare passerby and passerby threw it back. Scomo told it was ‘politically motivated’ and all confusion breaks loose.)

Either way, the Victoria government has indeed brought in laws that have made it very hard to ensure children and teens are receiving appropriate health care for their long term future health.

I live in Victoria. Ever since I learned about this it keeps me up at night. I live in fear of my DD telling me she believes she is a boy. She is only 3yo, so I have some time still. To combat her thinking she is a boy, I have made a point to make her extra girly, she now wears jewellery and pretty dresses, she plays with dolls and her pink kitchen. I got rid of her dinosaurs and basically anything seen as too masculine.

How does it combating her thinking to impose gender ideology on her? To insist she must conform to gendered stereotypes of sex in order to be a girl? Surely if you embed this thinking in her then you are setting up the circumstances whereby when she wants to play with garages or soldiers or football like many many girls do then she will either decide she must be a boy or wish she was one because then she could play with them? Why not teach her that girls can play with any toys, dress in traditionally boys clothes, have short hair and still be a brilliant girl because girls aren't defined by their toys or clothes or feelings.

I cannot remember, but Grace Tame got the Tasmanian bill changed.

Australia can be an intensely religious society with a lot of churches that seem very extreme to me

I do not recognise this as being the case at all. Hillsong is small despite its loud voice. The dominant religions are very mainstream.

The Catholic Church is a powerful government lobby group however. That would be true to say.

Or have they not realised that chemical castration with drugs like puberty blockers is what used to be done to gay men to try to stop them from being gay?

Blog post that explores the idea of transing the dead as an extension of baptism of the dead:

williamaferguson.substack.com/p/trans-out-your-dead?s=r

That's a particular horrible example and the author correctly identifies that one enthusiastic baptiser of the dead describes Turing as "one of the first Gay men to go on estrogen."

Turing was given DES as a form of chemical castration - and that was presented as an option to imprisonment.

Alan was prosecuted under the Labouchere Amendment of 1855, a law that made homosexuality (“gross indecency”) a crime. In an arranged plea deal, Alan accepted chemical castration by way of Diethylstilbestrol (DES) in lieu of prison and upon conviction he was stripped of all security clearances and forbidden entry into the United States.

The ignorance and indifference to the reality of history is breathtaking.

I'd be more concerned that my child would be converted to this sort of religion than about puberty blockers.

Why? Do you fear for their immortal soul if they join the wrong religion? Because it seems very strange that you would rather they joined the evangelical religion of genderism and be less worried about them taking medication that would leave them sterile, unable to experience sexual pleasure as an adult, unmatured brains, isolated from their peers, osteopenia, no improvement in mental health etc, than you would be about them attending a Bible study.

Victoria is a Labor state is that right

I wonder if the new Labor federal government will start implementing more on same lines

I don’t think Victoria is particularly religious on balance

Melbourne is more creative and culturally mixed, farming communities to the west might be light touch

Just speaking from being there in university days