A federal appeals court on Tuesday allowed Indiana’s ban on gender-affirming care to go into effect, removing a temporary injunction a judge issued last year.
The ruling was handed down by a panel of justices on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago. It marked the latest decision in a legal challenge the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana filed against the ban, enacted last spring amid a national push by GOP-led legislatures to curb LGBTQ+ rights.
I’m in Indiana. One of my daughter’s closest friends is a 13-year-old boy who is trans. His parents support him, let him wear chest binders, but I don’t think he’s taking hormones and now it sounds like he won’t be able to.
So thanks, 7th Circuit and fuck you.
That’s an odd take. Courts interpret laws. What law or constitutional measures forces them to ban healthcare?
Yes, they interpret what the lawmakers have written. If lawmakers made a law saying minors shouldn’t receive healthcare, that’s what the court should say.
Not taking sides btw, if I was I’d just get mad at the state of US politics
Because laws tell them what to decide. The courts are there to make sure the laws don’t infringe on constitutional rights, on federal laws etc., but they don’t create rules.
The Cruelty is the point
Excuse my ignorance, and not trying to offend just asking a question.
Why is it a bad thing to wait till kids are 18 before allowing them this care? Kids make rash decisions all the time, and something that seems difficult to reverse should be a decision when they are at a more mature age.
and something that seems difficult to reverse should be a decision when they are at a more mature age.
-
Gender affirming care covers a broad range of care, not just medical injections and surgery.
-
Puberty blockers are very reversible, its extremely uncommon to have long term affects once someone stops taking them
-
Going through puberty as their assigned gender is difficult to reverse and should be a decision that they make when they’re more mature too right?
-
Detransioners are actually very rare, so its rarely a “rash decision” and to prevent that we should give doctors better training to give these kids better information so they can make good decisions, rather than preventing all of these kids from getting healthcare they need.
Because gender affirming care isn’t just surgeries. It includes things like hormone replacement therapy and especially puberty blockers. By waiting until after 18, they’ve already gone through most of puberty and its damaging effects to their body. If they still want to transition, then that’s tens of thousands of dollars for surgery that might not have been needed if they were allowed to start on puberty blockers at least.
There’s also the fact that banning gender affirming care is banning life saving healthcare. That is years that a person needs to go without receiving proper treatment. It’s wrong for the same reasons that banning any other medication for anyone under 18 would be wrong.
idk why you’re being down voted as if one can’t get plastic surgery till they are 18 this should be the same personally imo because you’re right kids can and do make very rash decisions
That’s because you don’t understand what you’re talking about. These kids are not having plastic surgery. They’re getting care that affirms their gender, and possibly puberty blockers, which are easily reversible.
Four things: 1) cis teenagers can and do have cosmetic surgery 2) they’re very different, cosmetic surgery rarely requires psychological oversight or anything of the sort unlike trans surgeries and cosmetic surgeries don’t treat an underlying condition unlike trans surgeries 3) this isn’t just banning surgery but also hormone treatments 4) this is going against expert opinion and the wishes of the affected to prohibit medical treatments
