Canadian Medical Association, um eine rechtliche Herausforderung gegenüber dem Gesetz von Alberta einzureichen, die den Zugang zur Behandlung von Transgender -Jugendlichen einschränken
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-canadian-medical-association-to-file-legal-challenge-over-alberta-law/
5 Kommentare
>I have a non-binary family member, and I believe these decisions are very personal, and it should not be debated in public. We shouldn’t be making any child feel like the issues they’re struggling with are something that’s a political football.
There’s many a slip ‚twixt the vow and the writ.
Don’t think Danielle Smith won’t sell out your whole Province the same way she did her own family.
This is just plain cruelty. I am „Lucky“ in the sense that my gender dysphoria was accompanied by a congenital intersex condition that made me have elevated estrogen since forever that I can still „pass“ despite transition in my mid 20s. Withholding trans care for teens mean for the vast majority who had otherwise normal dimorphic development will have irreversible damage from the wrong puberty that will be costly to fix with plastic surgery or worst, irreversible like height.
I find it interesting that countries like Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and the UK have all restricted the use of puberty blockers on minors and Austria, Czechia, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden, explicitly set the minimum age for requesting sex reassignment surgery at 18. Most of these countries are respected for their medical care and ethical standards so it’s weird to see people supporting Canada going against them in this case
>The Premier has said she would be willing to invoke the notwithstanding clause, which is a rarely used mechanism that allows government to override certain sections of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms for up to five years, as a “last resort.”
> This could shield Alberta from legal action, though Ms. Smith has said she is confident it won’t be necessary, **arguing the legislation is reasonable, proportionate and evidence-based.**
Ooof. The fact that the CMA is taking you to court would suggest that the law is the very opposite of being reasonable, proportionate, or evidence-based.
I’m of two minds.
The part of my that likes philosophy thinks this is a socially bound syndrome, and the proper course isn’t medically invasive.
The part of me that cares for individual liberty thinks there are doctors and parents who can make these judgment calls, and the rest of our opinions are functionally irrelevant.