The suit is the first by an attorney general against an individual doctor for allegedly violating a restriction on gender-affirming care for minors.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued a Dallas doctor Thursday accusing her of providing transition-related care to nearly two dozen minors in violation of state law.
Paxton alleged that Dr. May Chi Lau, who specializes in adolescent medicine, provided hormone replacement therapy to 21 minors between October 2023 and August for the purpose of transitioning genders. In 2023, Texas enacted a law, Senate Bill 14, banning hormone replacement therapy and other forms of gender-affirming care for minors.
To add to the pile of evidence that this is all just hateful bigotry and has nothing to do with children’s safety, cisgender children can still legally access these drugs, but not for the purpose of transitioning genders. The same drugs can still be used to delay aggressive puberty, which is a standard and relatively common usage, as well as other conditions that might affect a cisgender child. But a trans child who needs the same drugs for a different reason, will be told too bad, you’re out of luck. So two children could walk into the same doctor’s office and one will be turned away and forced to suffer through their gender dysphoria, with permanent repercussions for their mental health and body, and the other child will be treated with the drugs they need to be treated with. It’s absurdly unfair, unequal, and purposefully harmful to a vulnerable population.
Tbf there are all kinds of medicine that are ok for one thing but not another, cocaine for instance.
Except we don’t have any widespread evidence for cocaine being taken outside of highly specific medicinal cases being helpful to the health and wellbeing of the individual.
When it comes to gender affirming care, we have substantial evidence that proves it is safe and effective, as even a cursory glance at medical research on the topic will show:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanam/article/PIIS2667-193X(23)00118-7/fulltext
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.3109/09540261.2015.1115753
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/article-abstract/2789423
https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/trgh.2015.0008
HRT and puberty blockers are preventative medicine. Specifically, they prevent that incurable disease known as suicide.
Didn’t disagree
Yeah. Cocaine is ok if you’re trying to get an edge on the competition as a stock trader. But, not ok if you’re black.
Really? That’s gonna be the argument you go with?
If I actually wanted I could have just deleted it and not have to deal with this, I don’t have a horse in this race.
There will be side effects from everything, who am I to judge how medications should be used.
Are you implying that it’s okay for cisgender folks to get HRT and gender-affirming care, but it’s not okay if for transgender folks to seek the same care? Explain to me how your assertion here applies to what we’re talking about.
Not even a little bit
I feel so enlightened to your point then. /s
I’m confused, do you want me to be against her for trans people?
I’m not cool with that, trans people are people and their health care is just as important as ours
Then what was your point with your original comment? It came across as exclusionary to trans folks.
The difference being, in this case, that this type of hormone treatment is a medically responsible and widely accepted treatment for both things.
I don’t disagree with you at all.
It wasn’t me arguing against the post, just thinking out loud basically.
I like the philosophy aspect of finding where the line is.
I do it with like everything.
Figure this one out, usually people find things that are fluffier less edible, but a squirrel and a rat are essentially the same animal but people will totally eat squirrel, but I don’t ever hear of people commonly eating rat even when other food is available.
The fluffiness actually works against it.
A pigeon and a dove are the same damn thing only differently colored.
Most people wouldn’t eat a pigeon, but they would eat a dove or a squab
The problem is that you’re not the one deciding what drug to prescribe. The government is.
And even if you were, shouldn’t the decision on “where to draw the line” be made by the parent, the child, and their doctor?
We can have all the philosophical conversations you want but we have people who are being affected by this right now.
And I’m not against your conversations, or your goals.
We can do both
Yeah, this is why I downvoted the original “cocaine” comment.
Even if it was “thinking out loud,” it’s just an absurd thing to say when we are talking about children’s lives here.
The fluffiness of the animal is kind of irrelevant? Rats and pigeons are generally perceived as potential disease carriers, regardless if they are more likely than squirrels or doves to carry.
!delta
YSK, squirrels carry the Black Death.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/squirrel-tests-positive-bubonic-plague-colorado/story?id=71769840
Doctors aren’t prescribing cocaine for the hell of it, though. Same thing with puberty blockers. Think we can trust doctors’ judgment when it comes to the drugs they prescribe.
Worked with fentanyl, right?
Doctors aren’t prescribing, nor are they they source of, illicit fentanyl. The ease of synthesis means that clandestine labs can make a shit ton of the stuff, it’s that simple.