Judge Finds Father Guilty of ‘Family Violence’ for Not Using Transgender Teen’s Preferred Pronouns - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

News stories of lesser political significance, but still of international interest.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

Forum rules: Please include a source with news articles. No stupid or joke stories. The usual forum rules also still apply.
#15001723
Judge Finds Father Guilty of ‘Family Violence’ for Not Using Transgender Teen’s Preferred Pronouns


A British Columbia (BC) Supreme Court judge has found the father of a 14-year-old girl claiming to be transgender guilty of “family violence” because he continued to refer to his daughter as “she.”

An order of protection issued by Justice Francesca Marzari states the father, known as “Clark,” is subject to arrest if he attempts to “persuade” his daughter, known as “Maxine,” to “abandon treatment for gender dysphoria,” to call her by her birth name, or to refer to her “as a girl or with female pronouns,” either “directly or to third parties.”

The court order states the father’s arrest may occur “immediately” and “without warrant” by a police officer “who has reasonable and probable grounds” to enforce the order.

Jeremiah Keenan reported at The Federalist Marzari’s ruling that the father had engaged in “expressions of rejection of [his daughter’s] gender identity.” The girl’s father would not refer to his daughter as “he,” and he continued to affirm publicly that his daughter is a biological female.

The report continued:

What Marzari found particularly egregious, however, was not Clark’s private interactions with his daughter but his “continued willingness to provide interviews to the media … in which he identifies [Maxine] as female, uses a female name for [Maxine] … and expresses his opposition to the therapies [Maxine] has chosen.” According to the court, this willingness placed Maxine at “a significant risk of harm.”

In February, the BC Supreme Court ordered that Maxine undergo hormone treatments, against the consent of her father. As a result, the teen has since begun regular testosterone injections at BC Children’s Hospital.

The teen’s school counselor reportedly urged her to identify as a boy while in seventh grade. When she was 13, Dr. Brenden Hursh at BC Children’s Hospital encouraged her to begin the injections to enable her to gain a more masculine appearance.

“[These injections] will completely disrupt her puberty,” the father told The Federalist. “Her bones will stop growing, her brain will stop developing … and she’s not gonna be a boy. She won’t even have the bone-strength left to be a girl anymore.”

Justice Bowden, however, said Maxine was “exclusively entitled to consent to medical treatment for gender dysphoria,” regardless of the opposition her parents expressed.

“The government has taken over my parental rights,” the father said. “They’re using [Maxine] like she’s a guinea pig in an experiment … Is BC Children’s Hospital going to be there in five years when she rejects [her male identity]? No they’re not. They don’t care. They want numbers.”

Additionally, the judge said he gave testimony of pediatric endocrinologist Dr. Quentin Van Meter and psychiatrist Dr. Miriam Grossman – both who apparently warned of the dangers of transgender hormone treatments – “little weight” because of a risk of Maxine “attempting suicide.”

LGBT activist groups continue to claim children and teens who say they want to transition to the opposite sex and are not supported by parents in that endeavor are more likely to make threats of suicide.

“These activists are taking over,” Maxine’s father said, “and it’s not in the interests of our kids. It’s in the interests of self-promotion and the things that they want to do and accomplish.”

According to a report at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 35 percent of teens now claiming to be transgender have attempted suicide.

Dr. Michelle Cretella, executive director of the American College of Pediatricians, explained to The Federalist that transgender activists are currently engaged in the “second wave” of their strategy, which is to report parents who “refuse to affirm their child’s false gender” to Child Protective Services.

Cretella said parents contacted her about having sought treatment for their 14-year-old son’s suicidal thoughts. Though the boy had no sign of gender confusion in the past, the emergency room physician diagnosed the boy as clearly transgender because he claims he is and that he is suicidal because his parents do not accept his identity. The emergency room physician then recommended the boy be started on puberty blockers and estrogen.

As a result of the doctor’s prescription, the children’s hospital labeled the parents “abusive and unsupportive.”

In 2018, Ohio parents of a 17-year-old girl lost custody of their daughter for opposing her wish for transgender hormone treatments.

The parents reportedly continued to call their daughter by her given name, rather than a male name and refused to consent to hormone treatments that her medical team recommended. The girl claimed she became suicidal as a result of her parents’ refusal to accept that she wanted to transition to a male.

Nevertheless, in October, Van Meter told Beitbart News that children who claim to be transgender are experiencing other significant traumas in their environments.

“There’s nothing normal about the environment where these children are brought up,” he said. “There are emotional traumas left and right. It is so obvious that what we’re doing is painting over the trauma.”

Van Meter said transgender activists want to keep buried the serious mental health issues within their community.

“This is the recruitment of a cult,” Van Meter said. “It is so scary, and I am so overwhelmingly worried about the welfare of this population of people 30 years out.”

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019 ... -pronouns/

So this is what it has come to.
I seem to remember that we were told this new law about the pronouns would not have grave consequences for the "offenders".
#15001741
Pants-of-dog wrote:Do you have an article from an actual newspaper or other objective source?

https://www.faithwire.com/2019/04/24/da ... ter-a-boy/
https://www.thepostmillennial.com/b-c-j ... s-son-she/
https://www.abbynews.com/news/anti-sogi ... sons-case/
https://winteryknight.com/2019/04/27/fa ... nd-speech/
https://thefederalist.com/2019/04/24/fa ... -daughter/
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/dad-c ... udge-rules

I doubt any of the cited sources will satisfy your parameters for what you call objective journalism but even so I am pretty sure that the facts are true.
#15001751
Ter wrote:https://www.faithwire.com/2019/04/24/dad-convicted-of-family-violence-after-refusing-to-call-his-daughter-a-boy/
https://www.thepostmillennial.com/b-c-j ... s-son-she/
https://www.abbynews.com/news/anti-sogi ... sons-case/
https://winteryknight.com/2019/04/27/fa ... nd-speech/
https://thefederalist.com/2019/04/24/fa ... -daughter/
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/dad-c ... udge-rules

I doubt any of the cited sources will satisfy your parameters for what you call objective journalism but even so I am pretty sure that the facts are true.


So, no.

If your only source is people with obvious political biases, would that make you wonder about the veracity of the story?
#15001757
Pants-of-dog wrote:If your only source is people with obvious political biases, would that make you wonder about the veracity of the story?


You refuse to accept the veracity of this news because it was not reported in the liberal news.
Since the name of the judge and the geographic area were reported, it would not likely be a hoax.

So as far as you are concerned, it didn't happen.
OK, got it.
#15001762
Ter wrote:You refuse to accept the veracity of this news because it was not reported in the liberal news.


I refuse to accept the veracity of the headline, which incorrectly implies that his only fault was not using the pronouns,, when even your biased account clearly shows how he was discussing his child’s personal information in the media.

And since this makes trans kids into targets from transphobes, this is arguably child endangerment.

Since the name of the judge and the geographic area were reported, it would not likely be a hoax.

So as far as you are concerned, it didn't happen.
OK, got it.


It almost certainly did not happen as your biased account tells us.

But you never answered my question:

If your only source is people with obvious political biases, would that make you wonder about the veracity of the story?

For example, if the only stories of a hate crime came from openly LGBTQ sites, and not a single other source mentioned it, would you assume that everything in the openly biased stories are true?
#15001784
AFAIK wrote:The father violated his daughter's right to medical confidentiality by blabbing about it to the media repeatedly. I'm glad a court intervened to protect her.


Yes, I agree.
But what happened earlier ?

In February, the BC Supreme Court ordered that Maxine undergo hormone treatments, against the consent of her father.


So the rights of the father were already overruled by a liberal court.

And, more importantly,

article wrote:An order of protection issued by Justice Francesca Marzari states the father, known as “Clark,” is subject to arrest if he attempts to “persuade” his daughter, known as “Maxine,” to “abandon treatment for gender dysphoria,” to call her by her birth name, or to refer to her “as a girl or with female pronouns,” either “directly or to third parties.”



So it is not just a case of medical confidentiality.
Use of the wrong pronouns can lead to imprisonment, just like Professor Jordan Peterson predicted.
#15001786
AFAIK wrote:The father violated his daughter's right to medical confidentiality by blabbing about it to the media repeatedly. I'm glad a court intervened to protect her.


No he didn't.

She told him directly, signed for him to know and or he was aware from the ex-wife(emotional revenge "informing" is pretty common in these situations). She technically legally broke it herself when it was communicated outside the Doctor-Patient privilege seal.

He only broke her trust by voicing his personal opinion publically. He didn't break her medical confidentiality. She did that herself, or her mother did it to her. Maybe even not directly to him, but maybe on Facebook, Twitter or YouTube.

And since this makes trans kids into targets from transphobes, this is arguably child endangerment


But it is not a breech of medical confidentiality laws. She broke her legal protection herself when she(or her mother) choose to break Doctor-Patient privilege and inform him(and/or others) of this information. Nevertheless the fact he can be arrested for expressing his personal discontent at how his daughter is being raised by her mother is disgusting. He shouldn't do it all the time in public in the media and whatnot(maybe he was doing that too much and maybe the decision is understandable, but not the punishment), but he should be free to hold his own opinions and if people ask him he should be free to say his opinion.

Yes he was probably arguing it very very publically. But your an idiot if you don't think they broke the Doctor-Patient privilege themselves on Social Media or directly to him over the phone.
#15001901
Ter wrote:Yes, I agree.
But what happened earlier ?

So the rights of the father were already overruled by a liberal court.


Yes, the father shared the child's confidential medical information with the public.

He also tried to prevent the child from seeking medical treatment, despite the opinion of medical professionals, the child, and the child's other parent. So much so that the child and mother were forced to go to court.

And, more importantly,

So it is not just a case of medical confidentiality.
Use of the wrong pronouns can lead to imprisonment, just like Professor Jordan Peterson predicted.


Only if you pretend that sharing medical information, potentially endangering the child, preventing the child from accessing medical treatment, and depriving the other parent of their rights is somehow not part of the case. Which they are. So it is definitely not just about pronouns.

-------------------

colliric wrote:But it is not a breech of medical confidentiality laws.


1. This has nothing to do with breach of medical confidentiality. Mind you, the father did breach this.

2. Turning your own child into a target for transphobes, including the risk of violent assault, is even worse.

She broke her legal protection herself when she(or her mother) choose to break Doctor-Patient privilege and inform him(and/or others) of this information.


No. The law requires that the parents be informed of their child's medical treatments.

The parents have the obligation to not use this information for their own gain like this man tried to do.

Nevertheless the fact he can be arrested for expressing his personal discontent at how his daughter is being raised by her mother is disgusting. He shouldn't do it all the time in public in the media and whatnot(maybe he was doing that too much and maybe the decision is understandable, but not the punishment), but he should be free to hold his own opinions and if people ask him he should be free to say his opinion.

Yes he was probably arguing it very very publically. But your an idiot if you don't think they broke the Doctor-Patient privilege themselves on Social Media or directly to him over the phone.


    The 14-year-old, identified as AB in court documents to maintain anonymity, asked the court to prevent his father, identified as CD, from giving interviews or speaking to social media groups about the case.

    In an April 15 ruling, Justice Francesca Marzari agreed with AB and issued a protection order.

The child expressly forbade the father from sharing the information, yet the father ignored the wishes of his own child.

It restrains CD, the father, from attempting to persuade his son from abandoning ongoing hormone therapy, addressing AB by his birth name, or referring to AB as a girl or with female pronouns – either directly or to other people.

CD is also banned from directly, or through others, publicly sharing information about AB’s sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or medical status, except with lawyers involved in the case or doctors involved with AB’s care.


Yeah, sharing medical information is a big no no.

Still, here is the judge's reasoning:

    “In those interviews, CD refers to AB as female, and expresses both his rejection of the permanence of AB’s gender identity and his opposition to AB’s chosen course of treatment,” the judge explained in her ruling.

    “CD expresses pleasure at the breadth of attention and publication his story is getting, and expresses hope that Breitbart and Fox News might also cover his story.”

    The judge pointed to comments on one Culture Guard story included suggesting the abduction or disowning of AB. In another media outlet, commenters on a different article encouraged AB to kill himself.

It seems that the judge thinks the father cares more about media exposure than he cares about the safety of his own kid.

The above passages were quoted from this news article:

https://www.abbynews.com/news/anti-sogi ... sons-case/
#15001908
When it comes to treating young people who believe they are the opposite sex, who either suffer from gender dysphoria or self-identify as transgender, physicians have been instructed by their professional associations to provide "affirmative care." Transition-affirming therapies are virtually untested and inflict lasting harms: decreased sexual function, increased health risks, and sterility, just to name a few. Instead of providing parents with medical information and evidence-based studies, parents are told that these risky treatments will prevent their child from committing suicide, blurring the line between “informed consent” and “coercion.”

So this guy desperately tried to rescue his daughter from the clutches of the demented babbitt quacks and their "treatments" and "therapies" and the state threw him in jail for it, that sounds about right.
#15001930
Pants-of-dog wrote:So it is definitely not just about pronouns.


Right. So the use of the wrong pronouns are part of the reason the man risks prison.
Thank you for confirming at least part of Jordan Peterson's thesis.
#15001940
Pants-of-dog wrote:1. This has nothing to do with breach of medical confidentiality. Mind you, the father did breach this.


Nothing in the Judgement states explicitly so. He clearly broke her trust, but nothing in the Judgement indicates anything you are saying explicitly.

2. Turning your own child into a target for transphobes, including the risk of violent assault, is even worse.

In the era of Facebook, Twitter and YouTube your comments are absurd and TOTALLY OUTDATED. I have absolutely no doubt at all this person has informed people of the transition themselves on the Internet already. This is the kind of thing people usually publish themselves on Social Media now, and her mother probably did too. I find your statement is just plain moronic. Transphobes use Facebook and Twitter too you know!


No. The law requires that the parents be informed of their child's medical treatments.

Not if they are not the Parent in custody, at least in my country. He is not the custodial parent or guardian.

The parents have the obligation to not use this information for their own gain like this man tried to do.

Unless he was offered a paycheck and shopped it around, he did not do that. Fox News and all do not always pay to interview people. He may have tried though, you may be correct on this point, but there's no way to tell.

The child expressly forbade the father from sharing the information, yet the father ignored the wishes of his own child.

Yeah, sharing medical information is a big no no.


It looks to me like this was part of the final decision if only decided on April 15 and he probably hasn't broken it. You make it sound as if he "most likely" broke the April 15th ruling, but that is so recent that it looks like it was applied AFTER he did what he did, not beforehand. So you've proven yourself wrong. This is called a gag order and has nothing to do if he did anything actually Illegal or not.

“In those interviews, CD refers to AB as female, and expresses both his rejection of the permanence of AB’s gender identity and his opposition to AB’s chosen course of treatment,” the judge explained in her ruling.

Those interviews prior to April 15th's gag order.

“CD expresses pleasure at the breadth of attention and publication his story is getting, and expresses hope that Breitbart and Fox News might also cover his story.”

Prior to April 15.

The judge pointed to comments on one Culture Guard story included suggesting the abduction or disowning of AB. In another media outlet, commenters on a different article encouraged AB to kill himself.


His comments or the comments of another unrelated person who may be a total stranger? Not made clear of cause!

It seems that the judge thinks the father cares more about media exposure than he cares about the safety of his own kid.

In which case the Judge applied a gag order. He didn't break the law or confidentiality, but he is gagged because of the Judge thinking he is not just expressing his natural opinion. You have proven my point.
#15001952
The claim that this guy maliciously outed his daughter is baseless, he was obviously trying to bring public attention to the state's intrusion into private family affairs, the state's violation of his parental rights, and the utter asinine insanity of administering sex change hormones to a 14 year old child.
#15002084
Sivad wrote:When it comes to treating young people who believe they are the opposite sex, who either suffer from gender dysphoria or self-identify as transgender, physicians have been instructed by their professional associations to provide "affirmative care." Transition-affirming therapies are virtually untested and inflict lasting harms: decreased sexual function, increased health risks, and sterility, just to name a few. Instead of providing parents with medical information and evidence-based studies, parents are told that these risky treatments will prevent their child from committing suicide, blurring the line between “informed consent” and “coercion.”


https://www.sheila.media/doctors-are-no ... ansgender/

This is a link for the text that you quoted and did not cite.

This text is from a panel put together by the Heritage Foundation.

This group is a conservative think tank and not medival professionals.

You often cite conservatively biased sites instead of objective sources.

So this guy desperately tried to rescue his daughter from the clutches of the demented babbitt quacks and their "treatments" and "therapies" and the state threw him in jail for it, that sounds about right.


Yes, white guys are so oppressed.

Sivad wrote:The claim that this guy maliciously outed his daughter is baseless, he was obviously trying to bring public attention to the state's intrusion into private family affairs, the state's violation of his parental rights, and the utter asinine insanity of administering sex change hormones to a 14 year old child.


I doubt it.

I also doubt you will support these claims.

------------------

Ter wrote:Right. So the use of the wrong pronouns are part of the reason the man risks prison.
Thank you for confirming at least part of Jordan Peterson's thesis.


This actually disproves JP's idiotic musings, since this man has not been sent to jail even though he has used the wrong pronouns, and also done much worse.

-----------------

colliric wrote:Nothing in the Judgement states explicitly so. He clearly broke her trust, but nothing in the Judgement indicates anything you are saying explicitly.


Yes, it is pretty clear.

In the era of Facebook, Twitter and YouTube your comments are absurd and TOTALLY OUTDATED. I have absolutely no doubt at all this person has informed people of the transition themselves on the Internet already. This is the kind of thing people usually publish themselves on Social Media now, and her mother probably did too. I find your statement is just plain moronic. Transphobes use Facebook and Twitter too you know!


That does not make it all right for the father to use his own child as a target for bigotry, inviting others to tell his child to kill themselves, or suggesting the father abduct the child.

Anyone who exposes his chilsren to people who would threaten thise kids is a bad parent.

Not if they are not the Parent in custody, at least in my country. He is not the custodial parent or guardian.


He was at the time.

Unless he was offered a paycheck and shopped it around, he did not do that. Fox News and all do not always pay to interview people. He may have tried though, you may be correct on this point, but there's no way to tell.


Since he openly said he was trying to get famous, there is no real doubt.

It looks to me like this was part of the final decision if only decided on April 15 and he probably hasn't broken it. You make it sound as if he "most likely" broke the April 15th ruling, but that is so recent that it looks like it was applied AFTER he did what he did, not beforehand. So you've proven yourself wrong. This is called a gag order and has nothing to do if he did anything actually Illegal or not.

Those interviews prior to April 15th's gag order.

Prior to April 15.


Who cares when it happened?

The child told him not to share personal information and the father did it anyway.

This is unethical and evidence of being a bad parent regardless of whether or not the gag order was in place by then.

The fact that he needed a gag order at all is evidence of the same as well.

His comments or the comments of another unrelated person who may be a total stranger? Not made clear of cause!


Of course, you are incorrect. It is actually quite clear.

In which case the Judge applied a gag order. He didn't break the law or confidentiality, but he is gagged because of the Judge thinking he is not just expressing his natural opinion. You have proven my point.


No, you misunderstood.

He broke the law.

He provided evidence of being an awful parent.

He provided evidence of caring about his fame more than the welfare of his kid.
#15002104
Pants-of-dog wrote:This actually disproves JP's idiotic musings, since this man has not been sent to jail even though he has used the wrong pronouns, and also done much worse.


I said "he risks prison", which is exactly what JP predicted would happen if the wrong pronouns would be used. The judge clearly told him that if he uses the wrong pronouns again, he risks prison.
I support JP in criticizing this law.
#15002108
Ter wrote:I said "he risks prison", which is exactly what JP predicted would happen if the wrong pronouns would be used. The judge clearly told him that if he uses the wrong pronouns again, he risks prison.
I support JP in criticizing this law.


There were people that said that Elvis Presley dancing provocatively on TV in 1956 would result in a massive cultural shift that would destroy American values... I am sure this seemed like a large joke but, their prediction was basically correct. Though perhaps it could be said that this was all in motion even before Elvis went on TV.

Check out the prophetic words of Mahatma Gandhi:

I urge the advocates of artificial methods to consider the consequences. Any large use of the methods is likely to result in the dissolution of the marriage bond and in free love.

If mutual consent makes a sexual act moral whether within marriage or without, and by parity of reasoning, even between members of the same sex, the whole basis of sexual morality is gone and nothing but 'misery and defeat' awaits the youth of the country... Divorce of the sexual act from its natural consequence must lead to hideous promiscuity and condonation, if not endorsement, of unnatural vice.

The reader should know that even persons of note have been known to approve of what is commonly known as sexual perversion. He may be shocked at the statement. But if it somehow or other gains the stamp of respectability, it will be the rage among boys and girls to satisfy their urge among members of their own sex.


Abort73

JBP's prediction about this is... almost mild in comparison.

Just check out the comments that we see in threads here -- we have users that believe it is right and proper to silence people who oppose their radical social agenda.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8

I do if ACTUAL PHYSICAL EVENTS prove I'm right […]

The Irishman...

I don't want to punish anyone. I do believe, how[…]

If your only argument is to double down on the ad[…]