There is a real war going on in the United States over the ideology of gender identity and its promotion in schools. A 'culture war' pitting the elites, who finance and promote gender ideology, and ordinary people who oppose it (see here the Disney case).
While Biden since first day has made many legislative concessions to trans activism at the federal level, Republicans have intercepted the discontent of the citizenry with several counter-legislations at the state level, such as those for "Saving women's sport" and those to protect children from medical transition, which often starts at school and without their parents' knowledge.
Today California, 'woke' state par excellence, try to counterattack using the same weapons: a lstate law that would circumvent laws protecting children from trans ideology in other states, creating a new form of health tourism for trans children. If the law is passed could be used when one of the parents opposes the transition medical treatment of the child, as in the case of the Canadian father imprisoned and fined for opposing his daughter's transition. Independent journalist Lisa Selin Davis explains:
"The Bill 107 [SB107], known simply as 'Gender Affirming Health Care', would allow children who are denied puberty blockers, hormones for the opposite sex, or gender-sensitive surgeries in one state to come to California to receive such surgeries, in defiance of parental or medical opposition, custody agreements or laws prohibiting their access in their home states.
The SB107 essentially transforms California into a 'sanctuary state' for children with trans identities, allowing them access to medical transition without a mental health evaluation or even a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. The law openly flouts several key provisions of the US Constitution; eliminates all controls for those seeking medical interventions for gender dysphoria or to affirm a trans identity; and nullifies the authority of any parent who objects. Written in response to laws in several conservative states banning what its supporters call 'gender affirming care', SB107 is a far-reaching law that will unleash a barrage of civil lawsuits and could pose a danger to young people seeking medical transition in environments lacking basic standards that guarantee access to such intensive interventions only to those who truly need them.
SB107 seems to have been written in response to laws in several conservative states prohibiting such medical interventions, such as Arkansas's HB1570, the Save Adolescents From Experimentation (SAFE) Act. This law, which has been passed but is still being debated in the courts, delays any surgical or medical intervention for gender dysphoria until after the age of 18. And it seems at odds with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's recommendation that the medical gender transition of children be considered child abuse. [...]
The bill probably also responds to Idaho's H065, which criminalises the provision of gender-affirming treatment and adopts what critics have deemed an unusually draconian measure, making it a crime for anyone to travel out of state to obtain it. SB107 is a kind of pre-emptive strike against the Protecting Minors from Malpractice Act, a bill introduced in the US House and Senate that would extend to 30 years the period in which a former patient who regrets the transition can sue a doctor or gender clinic.
SB107, on the other hand, essentially absolves all care providers of any responsibility for the gender claim. The bill prohibits health workers, or anyone working for a health care plan, from releasing a child's medical records, even if they have been subpoenaed, to the home state. Medical records must also be kept from parents, which could create an insurmountable obstacle for the plaintiff for negligence to medical providers. Arrest warrants for parents who brought their children to California for treatment in violation of their home state's laws or custody agreements, and for the gender-based doctors who provided such treatment, would become unenforceable, with extradition prohibited"
full article here (translation by Maria Celeste)
Meanwhile in the UK David Bell, the psychiatrist who first denounced the negligence of the Tavistock children's gender clinic, called for the immediate closure of the equivalent clinic in Scotland.
In an interview with The Times (full article here), David Bell stated that the services offered to minors who say they suffer from gender dysphoria of the Sandyford clinic in Glasgow is based on the so-called 'affirmative model'. -or immediate initiation of medical transition without a thorough psychological assessment- as well as the Tavistock being closed for security reasons following the evaluation of the commission headed by paediatrician Hillary Cass (see here e here).
Bell explained that children visited by gender clinics tend to have other problems, including autism, depression, dysfunctional families and a history of sexual abuseproblems that the 'affirmative model', heavily influenced by ideology, tends to ignore in order to push them hastily towards drugs and surgery causing irreversible damage to their bodies without resolving gender dysphoria (see the painful testimonies of the detransitioner).
"These children have been disadvantaged by being sent to a gender-only service," David Bell told The Times. "These children must be treated like all other children who have psychological problems.
"The other specific problem is the puberty-blocking drugs. In my opinion," Bell argues, "the blockage of a child's puberty should be an extremely rare occurrence. I still consider it an experimental treatment because the Gids (Gender Identity Development Service, Ed.) did not follow up these patients, and I expect the same in Scotland'.
In the wake of Dr Cass's recommendations, research was commissioned in England to follow up Gids patients and collect information on their long-term outcomes. Bell said this should also be done for former Sandyford patients, but added that "no child should have to go through that model'.
"There are many studies showing that if these children are helped in a different way, with expert attention and gender neutrality, abandon their desire [to make the transition],' he added. "Growing up, many of them do coming out as young gays and lesbians...".
Finally, Bell sounded the alarm on the ideological position of the current Scottish government, led by the SNP (Scottish National Party), which 'is likely to make it more difficult to see the harm being done to children by inappropriate and experimental treatment'. In fact, the SNP intends to amend the law to make it even easier to change the sex on documents, effectively introducing a 'super Self-ID', as we told you here.