Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine announced proposals this month that transgender advocates say could block access to gender-affirming care provided by independent clinics and general practitioners, leaving thousands of adults scrambling for treatment and facing health risks.

They would require psychiatrists, endocrinologists and medical ethicists to have roles in creating facility-wide gender-affirming care plans for patients of all ages. Patients under 21 would have to receive at least six months of mental health counseling before starting gender-affirming medication or surgery. Providers would be barred from referring minors to treatment elsewhere, such as clinics in other states.

I am fairly pro-transgender rights with some exceptions.

If anyone has read my prior post, I have always said a psychiatrist or endocrinologist should be involved with transgender people.

The law to me is a good thing. I don’t agree with the below 21, it should be 18.

I also don’t agree with the referring clause. That is good medicine to refer people to other doctors and sometimes they are outside your state.

    • Bongo_Stryker@lemmy.ca
      11·
      5 months ago

      Wow, Interesting stuff! I am also told bilateral cingulotomy is the treatment of last resort for people suffering from obsessive-compulsive disorder, when medication doesn’t work.

      The point here is the question: how far does parental authority go, before it’s reasonable for the State to step in? I think most sensible people would agree that society as a whole benefits when there is some mechanism to protect children from parents who are abusive or have harmful ideas that will negatively impact the child/children.

      Where do you draw that line? It is suggested that letting kids decide their own gender and supporting them in that is a kind of abuse, and government intervention is necessary. I don’t think the reasoning behind this assertion is very strong.

      The often repeated notion that there is an insidious liberal woke gender ideology intent on converting all the girls in America into rugged truck drivers and oil-rig workers, and all the boys in America into docile feminine sissies (who are also somehow predators let into the girl’s locker rooms and restrooms of the nation) is played up so much and given so much attention for two reasons. The reasons are to distract from economic issues, and to shock and outrage gullible people into voting against their best interests.

      Because it’s so easy to negate complicated truths with simple dumb lies and innuendo it’s easy to distract people from simple and harder to wave away facts like republican counties are among the poorest in the nation, and the great red state of Mississippi has a shockingly high maternal mortality rate.

      Gay marriage, welfare queens, crisis at the border and now trans people are the hot button issues used to keep people voting for low wages, expensive and poor healthcare, corporate subsidies and environmental deregulation among other things. The people that benefit from these iniquities want to keep em going. Therefore OMG biological males in the girls room!

      • NeuromancerOPM
        13·
        5 months ago

        The point here is the question: how far does parental authority go, before it’s reasonable for the State to step in? I think most sensible people would agree that society as a whole benefits when there is some mechanism to protect children from parents who are abusive or have harmful ideas that will negatively impact the child/children.

        I am assuming you think not allowing a kid to transition is the same as child abuse.

        What we have to do is look at the body of evidence to help make these decisions. Should an adult be allowed to transition? I would say yes. Body autonomy. I still think therapy should be required to make sure we are treating the right problem but I do not think they should have excessive burdens to transition.

        Children? The state has a vested interest in protecting children from harm. So let’s look at other countries like Sweden which overall is one of the most progressive countries in the world. They have long accepted social deviance in their society and have worked hard to create a country of equality for all genders/sexes. Their view on women are where I wish we would be in this country.

        Yet, they will not allow children to transition. They used to do it, looked at the research and said the risk is not worth the reward. They still allow exceptional cases and they are doing some more research to see what the best forward is.

        They are using logic and science to figure it out.

        Now the difference is most of ours is driven by religion (My opinion) and not science. That is the difference between the two models.

        • Bongo_Stryker@lemmy.ca
          2·
          5 months ago

          1. You should not make such assumptions.

          2. As you often say, “you got a cite for that?” Can you produce this Swedish research? Have you read this Swedish research? Have you read the recent German Bundesministerium für Gesundheit report that seems to mostly contradict the Swedes?

          They still allow exceptional cases

          So Sweden the country you hold up as a model that we should emulate does allow it, sometimes.

          1. I still think it is a distraction from the growing inequality in America. The danger of " woke gender ideology" is a Trojan horse filled with policies to extract the wealth of the nation into the coffers of the already rich and powerful.