It doesn’t matter. 18 should be the minimum. She was clearly mentally ill and instead of helping her they mutilated her. Those physicians should be hung.
Should parents have to wait until 18 to have their son circumcised? It is the removal of otherwise healthy tissue from the child's genitalia. Some misguided souls even classify it as a mutilation.
I would prefer no cosmetic surgery on anyone under 18. But what would we do with these 200,000 teens? And their parents. More than 200,000 teens had plastic surgery last year, and social media had a lot to do with it
It their parents are in full agreement, then I don't have a problem with it. Their mutual decision so they live with the consequences, good or bad.
My point is why are they ignoring the other 200K mutilations going on to our children? Or are we only focused on trans folk again?
I woul My guess is that most of those 200,000 cosmetic surgeries are breast augmentations. And they are done with the consent of the partents, probably in many cases the parents are paying for them.
I'll skip all the replies and guess that 90% of them were apologists for the doctors. It isn't even necessary to paint an 11 year old as mentally incompetent. She was a child.
Sad story, though we have only heard their version so far, and what about the parents responsibility here?
I hope she gets a billion dollars... more worthy than a person getting that much for burning herself with hot coffee from McDonald's.
It's mentioned in the Bible. Further reason the Bible should be banned in schools. It encourages genital mutilation.
LOL, that's a big negatory there...on ALL points. Stick to plaque. The American Medical Association's Association's position.: "CHICAGO — The American Medical Association (AMA) today urged governors to oppose state legislation that would prohibit medically necessary gender transition-related care for minor patients, calling such efforts “a dangerous intrusion into the practice of medicine.” In a letter to the National Governors Association (NGA), the AMA cited evidence that trans and non-binary gender identities are normal variations of human identity and expression, and that forgoing gender-affirming care can have tragic health consequences, both mental and physical. “Decisions about medical care belong within the sanctity of the patient-physician relationship,” the AMA wrote in its letter. “As with all medical interventions, physicians are guided by their ethical duty to act in the best interest of their patients and must tailor recommendations about specific interventions and the timing of those interventions to each patient’s unique circumstances. Such decisions must be sensitive to the child’s clinical situation, nurture the child’s short and long-term development, and balance the need to preserve the child’s opportunity to make important life choices autonomously in the future. We believe it is inappropriate and harmful for any state to legislatively dictate that certain transition-related services are never appropriate and limit the range of options physicians and families may consider when making decisions for pediatric patients.” AMA to states: Stop interfering in health care of transgender children The American Academy of Pediatrics: "AAP chapters have argued that the bills discriminate against transgender youths. Pediatricians testifying against the legislation said it is based on myths and misinformation about transgender children and adolescents and a misunderstanding about medical and surgical aspects of gender-affirmative care. They are presenting science, explaining policies of national and international medical and athletic organizations and describing harms the bills would cause. “As experts, pediatricians are uniquely positioned to advocate for and support these young people. Politics has no place here. These are individual conversations between clinicians, patients and families about what’s best. The AAP applauds the hard work of our chapters focused on protecting transgender youth at the state level,” said AAP CEO/Executive Vice President Mark Del Monte, J.D." The American Psychological Association: "WHEREAS it may be medically and therapeutically indicated for some transgender and other gender diverse children and adolescents to transition from one gender to another using any of the following: change of name, pronouns, hairstyle, clothing, pubertal suppression, cross-sex hormone treatment, and surgical treatment (Coleman et al., 2011; Forcier & Johnson, 2012; Olson, Forbes, & Belzer, 2011);" https://www.apa.org/about/policy/resolution-supporting-gender-diverse-children.pdf
I see you got a "come on man" as did I. They are utterly incapable of recognizing and identifying issues, "nuance" isn't in their dictionaries. They are opposed to a transgender boy seeking to have his penis surgically removed until the person is 18, but chopping off part of an infant's penis is fine. I hasten to add I am pro circumcision, I just asked the question above to expose their hypocrisy and inability to think things though...they can't, but they certainly do have strong opinions. A constant source of amusement.
Winner. They want to have part of the conversation but not the whole thing. Hell, at least the girl is this OP story had a voice in the decision, even if it was misguided or whatever. A baby has no voice in getting a circumcision. But yeah, they'll drop a drive by negative rating without actually commenting on the nuance. Way easier to have surface level opinions on things and not challenge your thinking.
Spoken like someone that fails to realize that most physicians have left the AMA due to their political views of medicine. It’s a trash organization.
Coming from the guy that thinks a 10 year old rape victim should have to carry the fetus to term? You'll excuse me if I don't pay much attention to your takes.
