Children with Gender Dysphoria Receive State Protection

 

Treating child gender dysphoria with hormones and surgery is risky health care from which the state can provide protection. This is according to the Sixth Circuit federal court in an opinion issued last night which upheld a child’s protection by the state from risky medical procedures. Children deserve help, not harm, when facing gender dysphoria. 

According to the National Law Review, “the Sixth Circuit issued a blockbuster decision in consolidated cases addressing the constitutionality of Tennessee’s and Kentucky’s laws limiting minors experiencing gender dysphoria from certain sex-transition treatments.” Both the Tennessee and Kentucky laws were upheld as constitutional protection of children. See L.W. ex rel. Williams v. Skrmetti, 73 F.4th 408 (6th Cir. 2023) and Doe 1 v. Thornbury, 75 F.4th 655, 656–57 (6th Cir. 2023) (per curiam). Read the ruling here. 

The federal court opined clearly on this new area of medical treatment for minors as risky health care, stating that when new rights are not found to be “deeply rooted in our nation’s history or traditions” (Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, No. 19-1392, 597 U.S. ___, (2022)), “constitutionalizing new areas of American life is not something federal courts should do lightly, particularly when ‘the States are currently engaged in serious, thoughtful’ debates about the issue (Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702, 719 (1997)).”

The court listed the States that are indeed engaged in thoughtful debates over this issue, referring to “the recent proliferation of legislative activity across the country,” writing:

By our count, nineteen States have laws similar to those in Tennessee and Kentucky, all of recent vintage. See Ala. Code § 26-26-4; Ark. Code Ann. § 20-9-1502(a); Fla. Admin. Code Ann. R.64B8-9.019; Ga. Code Ann. § 31-7-3.5; Idaho Code § 18-1506C; Ind. Code § 25-1-22-13; Iowa Code § 147.164; La. Stat. Ann. § 40:1098 (effective Jan. 1, 2024); Miss. Code Ann. § 41-141-1-9; Mo. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 191.1720; S.B. 99, 68th Leg., 2023 Sess. (Mont. 2023); Neb. Rev. Stat. § 72-7301-07; H.B. 808, 2023 Sess. (N.C. 2023); N.D. Cent. Code. § 12.1-36.1-02; Okla. Stat. tit. 63, § 2607.1; H.B. 1080, 98th Leg. Sess. (S.D. 2023); S.B. 14, 88th Leg. Sess. (Tex. 2023); Utah Code Ann. § 58-68-502(1)(g); W. Va. Code § 30-3-20 (effective Jan. 1, 2024). At least fourteen other States, meanwhile, provide various protections for those seeking treatments for gender dysphoria, all too of recent vintage. See Ariz. Exec. Order No. 2023-12; Cal. Penal Code § 819; Colo. Rev. Stat. § 12-30-121(1)(d); Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 52-571n, 54-155b; 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. 40/28-10; Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 12, § 11 et seq.; Md. Exec. Order No. 01.01.2023.08; Minn. Stat. § 260.925; N.J. Exec. Order No. 326; N.M. Stat. Ann. § 24-34-4; N.Y. Educ. § 6531-b(2); H.B. 2002, 82nd Leg., 2023 Reg. Sess. (Or. 2023); Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 15, § 150; Wash. Rev. Code § 7.002.002.

 

Most of this legislative activity occurred within the last two years. Failure to allow these laws to go into effect would start to grind these all-over-the-map gears to a halt. Given the high stakes of these nascent policy deliberations—the long-term health of children facing gender dysphoria—sound government usually benefits from more rather than less debate, more rather than less input, more rather than less consideration of fair-minded policy approaches. To permit legislatures on one side of the debate to have their say while silencing legislatures on the other side of the debate under the Constitution does not further these goals.

 

That is all the more critical in view of two realities looming over both cases—the concept of gender dysphoria as a medical condition is relatively new and the use of drug treatments that change or modify a child’s sex characteristics is even more recent. Prohibiting citizens and legislatures from offering their perspectives on high-stakes medical policies, in which compassion for the child points in both directions, is not something life-tenured federal judges should do without a clear warrant in the Constitution (at pages 12-13).

Children deserve protection from risky medical procedures. Read more about this at Gender Identity Ideology: The Totalitarian, Unconstitutional Takeover of America’s Public Schools.

Parents need to know how to proceed legally when a state not only refuses to protect a child from these dangerous trends, but encourages it and hides information from parents on their child’s gender dysphoria.  Learn about these legal protections by downloading Examining Jurisdictional Child Protections in Gender Dysphoria Contexts.

Children need help, not harm, when facing gender dysphoria.  Find out how you can help your child handle this at Family Policy Alliance. 

FamilyRestoration has discussed the contagion of gender dysphoria previously. Be wise and be prepared to help your child. Family awareness of these matters is foundational to family restoration.