Alberta Judge gewährt vorübergehend einstweilige Verfügung, die eine Transgender-Gesundheitsvorlage blockieren

>Premier Danielle Smith has said she believes the legislation is needed to protect young people from making permanent, life-altering decisions.

>Smith has said it’s about „upholding the rights of parents to care for, teach and protect their children.“

Not that I expect any kind of intellectual honesty or consistency from Smith, but the bill actually *stripped parents of the right to care for, teach and protect their children* by supplanting their autonomy with that of the province.

At the end of the day, whether you are for or against gender affirming healthcare for children, you are subjecting a population of children to permanent, life altering changes. The changes she is worried about regretful cis children experiencing are what regretful trans children are looking to avoid by obtaining said care. If you’re worried about one group, you should be equally worried about the other.

Obviously this is an incredibly emotional, high stakes issue for parents who want to do right by their children, and even the most supportive and affirming parents will have concerns. These are decisions that should be made in concert between patient, parent and caregiver, through much deliberation, caution and diligence. At absolutely no junction along the way does it benefit anyone for the government to put their thumb on the scale in the interest of capitalizing on a lurid culture war issue in an act of cynical political calculus. Those who claim to care so deeply about children’s welfare seem curiously content to gamble on the lives of the children seeking this care.