What liability will there be for transgender treatments on minors?

California recently passed a law that allows government-funded transgender treatments on minors without parental consent. It came over the objections of the American College of Pediatricians:

The American College of Pediatricians cited a number of statistics in favor of their position against the bill, including the fact that roughly 88 percent of gender dsyphoric girls and 98 percent of gender dysphoric boys will, if given time, go on to identify with their biological sex by late adolescence.

Those statistics agree with this report from Britain:

My opinion is that malpractice suits related to sex reassignment surgery and related treatments will be the next big growth industry.

What liability should doctors and other professionals have when they make permanent changes to a teenager’s anatomy?

What requirements should there be to confirm a gender identity is really permanent before surgery?

Without parental consent? Who is consenting?

1 Like

The minor is consenting.

Note they are not responsible enough to order a beer at a bar or do any number of other things.

They are too young to make important decisions regarding the purchase of alcohol or cigarettes or to join the military but…they aren’t too young to make a life altering decision that will severely impact them for the rest of their life and one in which the suicide rate is one of the highest? This is beyond sick and only being done to perpetuate an agenda. Love for the child doesn’t even enter into this and again…it’s both sick and evil.

There are some sick people running that state.

Tax-payer-funded child abuse in my opinion.

I suspect that there will be a lot of regrets and legal problems for those who have benefited financially from this law.

What scenarios do you envision?

Doctors who have encouraged premature surgery could face malpractice suits when patients later regret what happened to them. Damages could easily be in the millions for just one patient.

Of course, California tax payers will probably end up paying for the damages as well.

Is that legally malpractice?

Growth industry? Just how many of these do you think there will be? I don’t think you considered the likely numbers too good before saying that. How many minors are going through this and what percentage of them would be involved in a malpractice suit? I kinda doubt the numbers will be staggering.

I am not a lawyer. Time will tell what the legal implications will be.

California may end up paying damages even if the government is not legally required to.


Other than malpractice damages that we can only speculate on, is there any other problem with this bill?

You left out an important point in the OP, the bill only applies to minors in Foster Care. It is not a general law applicable to the population at large.

When in Foster Care the Department of Social Services (or whatever they call it in California) is acting in loco parentis

Just noting for clarity.

(Personally, not a fan of the idea of gender reassignment surgery prior to the age of maturity.)

1 Like

3000 sex reassignment surgeries in the US in 2016 and the number is increasing rapidly.

Vermont appears to following California’s lead:

When this can be done, outside of parental consent…it’s malpractice for all those involved…besides the parents.

Correct. On the other hand, realize that the government can end parental rights for children if parents refuse “required medical care”.

And the law only applies to minors in Foster care, who often have to fend for themselves. How many of those surgeries apply now?

The point is that if you refuse to “transition” your child, the state will put the child into foster care or force treatment.

Please read the link in the last post. Here is an excerpt:

Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy, a California physician who specializes in transgendering youth, concurred. “We work really hard to bring both parents in and bring them both on board,” Olson-Kennedy told the questioner, “so it’s not my first line to go to court to get somebody what they need. But it is my second line and I will do it.”

From your link

Health and Human Services committee of the South Dakota House killed a bill that would have protected the right of parents to refuse to consent to medical or psychological treatment for a child suffering from gender dysphoria if the treatment “would induce, confirm, or promote the child’s belief that the child’s sex or gender identity is different from the child’s sex presented at birth.”

That such a simple affirmation of parental rights could not clear a committee in this solidly red state should terrify parents

Sounds like a pretty narrow parental right.

Why not just protect the rights of parents to refuse to consent to medical or psychological treatment for a child in general?

The American College of Pediatricians are not the American Academy of Pediatrics. They are a conservative advocacy group. They are vehemently anti gay. They don’t want gay people to marry or be parents. They want conversion therapy for gay teens. And on and on.