The laws of the United States and many other nations mandate that a minor is anyone under the age of eighteen, and thereby subject to the guidance of their parent or legal guardian.
Teens cannot vote, establish a residency on their own, or enter military service before this milestone, and other laws prohibit teens from adult activities like drinking alcohol until they turn 21.
So why is it that progressives seem to think that children who have barely started puberty can make life-changing decisions – like in this shocking case in Canada?
Earlier this month in Vancouver, a Court of Appeals ruled against a father’s objections that his 15-year-old daughter be able to proceed with gender reassignment.
When the case first went to court, the girl was all of 13 years old, barely beginning puberty and at one of the most vulnerable ages for any young teen.
The father, whose name is being withheld from the media, decided to fight in court to protect his daughter.
He and his wife, the child’s mother, had separated, and he was vehemently opposed to allowing his daughter to start dangerous hormonal treatments at such a young age.
The girl’s mother supported her daughter’s decision to transition, as did a psychologist who was later found to be a transgender rights activist.
Without the father’s knowledge, the child had several meetings with school staffers and the biased psychologist at the mother’s request. In fact, the psychologist recommended the child begin hormonal therapies without ever speaking to her father.
Following the breakup of her parents’ marriage, the young girl exhibited behavioral issues at school, including threats of self-harm and suicide.
She was described as very vulnerable and her father believes she lacks the maturity and understanding – as would any 13-year-old – to make such a drastic decision.
The child saw a pediatric endocrinologist, who took her willingness and the mother’s agreement as the only consent needed to begin transition therapies.
The father filed a complaint against the College of Psychologists in British Columbia, and headed to court to defend his daughter.
The case has sparked outrage and international attention over the callous disregard for the parental rights of this father.
In February of last year, a British Columbia Superior Court Justice ruled that the father was inciting “family violence” by opposing his child’s gender transition.
He was also threatened with arrest if he tried to talk his daughter out of the procedures she wished, or if he called his daughter by her given name instead of her newly-adopted boy’s name.
There were minor victories when he took the case to the Court of Appeals, but not the outcome that this father so desperately hoped for.
Although the “conduct orders” threatening arrest and suggesting “family violence” in his opposition to his daughter’s treatments were thrown out in appeal, in the end, the appeals court upheld the ruling that his young daughter could consent to gender transition treatments.
Under Canada’s Infants Act – an ironic name for the power it gives children – judges rely on the opinions and “good faith” of medical professionals and the minor’s level of “maturity and autonomy” to decide on medical care.
In this case, that meant that a biased “medical professional” – the transgender activist psychologist — and a vulnerable, confused child could make a drastic, life-changing decision, supported by a mother who was likely also biased against the child’s father due to their impending divorce.
And it gets worse from there.
The child was represented in court by another biased individual – an attorney who had long worked as an activist for the LGBTQ community.
It’s obvious that the father in this case stood little chance of saving his daughter from a permanent and life-threatening decision.
The cards were stacked against him from the beginning – from medical “professionals” working to spread the progressive agenda, to the courts, to a culture that encourages children to be something they’re not.
What’s even more frightening is that gender transition has been linked to depression and suicide later in life, risk factors that this young girl was already exhibiting.
Following the ruling of the appeals court, the child’s father was back in court facing a petition that would force him to support his daughter’s transition or risk losing visitation, and also a gag order of sorts to prohibit him from speaking publicly about the case.
This tragic course of events is playing out all over the world, and while it’s most prevalent in already socialist-leaning nations, the U.S. is not far behind in the path we’re on.
Parental rights are being infringed upon time and time again by overreaching medical personnel and government agencies.
The sanctity of parental authority and the health and safety of our children are on the line.
There is a reason that we have a legal indication for age of maturity, especially when it comes to life-changing decisions.
Why should gender transition – one of the most dangerous decisions of all – be exempt from a law in place to prevent rash decisions by children who are not mature enough to understand the consequences?