Will the federal government force doctors to perform sex reassignment surgeries?

[Michie]

New regulations from the Department of Health and Human Services regarding gender transition procedures could affect as many as 900,000 doctors in the U.S.

Continued below.
http://m.ncregister.com/50664/d#.V7-c9kb3bCQ

 

[Armoured]

New regulations from the Department of Health and Human Services regarding gender transition procedures could affect as many as 900,000 doctors in the U.S.

Continued below.
http://m.ncregister.com/50664/d#.V7-c9kb3bCQ

Short answer? No. It's a HIGHLY specialised suite of therapies involved in GRT which means specialists, which means people who've gone out of their way to train in the relevent procedures. You can't just grab any general practitioner and "force" them to perform heart surgery. Same deal.

 

[Michie]

Exactly what I thought. Can you imagine?! Scary thought!

Short answer? No. It's a HIGHLY specialised suite of therapies involved in GRT which means specialists, which means people who've gone out of their way to train in the delevent procedures. You can't just grab any general practitioner and "force" them to perform heart surgery. Same deal.

 

[imind]

Short answer? No. It's a HIGHLY specialised suite of therapies involved in GRT which means specialists, which means people who've gone out of their way to train in the delevent procedures. You can't just grab any general practitioner and "force" them to perform heart surgery. Same deal.

i would think this correct and would love to know where the 900,000 figure comes from.

Following the federal government stating that doctors cannot decline performing sex reassignment surgeries, a group of states, doctors, and hospitals are suing in the name of medical ethics.

when did this happen?

this article seems to mislead and i find that troubling. especially to note that doctors will be required to perform this on children but most doctors don't recommend this to begin with except in the most extreme cases where, for example, the child has two sets of reproductive organs.

 

[Armoured]

i would think this correct and would love to know where the 900,000 figure comes from.


when did this happen?

this article seems to mislead and i find that troubling. especially to note that doctors will be required to perform this on children but most doctors don't recommend this to begin with except in the most extreme cases where, for example, the child has two sets of reproductive organs.

Without direct link to government legislation explicitly stating this, I'm pretty happy to write this off as anti government /anti transgender scaremongering. Happy to be shown I'm wrong, but it will require direct evidence.

 

[Armoured]

Note the use of weasel words in the article. "Could," "may", "up to", and my personal favourite red flag, ."article title in the form of a question".

 

[MelanieG]

Pretty soon doctors can probably be fired for refusing to acknowledge that a pregnant woman is a father though.
Those of us with foresight see these things coming.

The moment we validate the false reality of Transgender individuals using bathrooms, that opens a can of worms for the next service of identification. All it takes is for this pseudo-science to creep in a legal loophole like the bathroom issue.

As a I recall, midwives were and are already being trained under one organization to obliterate any references to mothers or women being pregnant. They say "birthing individuals" instead. Crazy.

Smh.

 

[Armoured]

Pretty soon doctors can probably be fired for refusing to acknowledge that a pregnant woman is a father though.
Those of us with foresight see these things coming.

Nonsense.

The moment we validate the false reality of Transgender individuals using bathrooms, that opens a can of worms for the next service of identification. All it takes is for this pseudo-science to creep in a legal loophole like the bathroom issue.

Just because you wish facts were different, doesn't make the existence of transgender individuals "pseudoscience"

As a I recall, midwives were and are already being trained under one organization to obliterate any references to mothers or women being pregnant. They say "birthing individuals" instead. Crazy.

Smh.

The lack of a link or citation is noted.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

The federal government will probably do this if Hillary Clinton gets elected since she promises to be a third Obama term.

 

[Armoured]

The federal government will probably do this if Hillary Clinton gets elected since she promises to be a third Obama term.

Based on what? "Probably" has a definition, you know? And you're using it wrong.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Based on what?

The Democratic party's LGBT agenda.

 

[Armoured]

The Democratic party's LGBT agenda.

Which is?

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Which is?

The Democratic party's LGBT agenda is to aggressively promote homosexuality and gender confusion.

 

[Armoured]

The Democratic party's LGBT agenda is to aggressively promote homosexuality and gender confusion.

Nonsense. But even if it were, as has been explained to you repeatedly, transgenderism isn't homosexuality. And even if it were, that still doesn't suggest GPs are going to be forced to perform GRT at gunpoint.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Nonsense. But even if it were, as has been explained to you repeatedly, transgenderism isn't homosexuality. And even if it were, that still doesn't suggest GPs are going to be forced to perform GRT at gunpoint.

Right after getting elected as POTUS, Obama declared June "Gay Pride Month" and forced the military to be more accepting of homosexuality, and he announced that he was for changing the definition of marriage to include so-called "same-sex marriage". On the day the SCOTUS announced that the marriage law would be changed, the White House was lit up with the colors of the LGBT flag. And, most recently, Obama issued a federal "transgender" bathroom directive to force everyone to allow men to go into women's bathrooms if they claim to be a woman. And Hillary promises to continue down the same road.

 

[Armoured]

Right after getting elected as POTUS, Obama declared June "Gay Pride Month" and forced the military to be more accepting of homosexuality, and he announce that he was for changing the definition of marriage to include so-called "same-sex marriage". On the day the SCOTUS announced that the marriage law would be changed, the White House was lit up with the colors of the LGBT flag. And, most recently, Obama issued a federal "transgender" bathroom directive to force everyone to allow men to go into women's bathrooms if they claim to be a woman.

None of which is "aggressively promote(ing) homosexuality and gender confusion", it's basic equality. And I see nothing there to suggest anything about doctor being "forced" to perform procedures they are unwilling to do.

I get it. you think democrats are bad. But just swallowing ANY claim about them is ridiculous.

 

[MelanieG]

Nonsense.Just because you wish facts were different, doesn't make the existence of transgender individuals "pseudoscience"The lack of a link or citation is noted.

There actually is no real science that proves trans folks are what they say they are.

Transgenderism is simply an ideology masked with pseudo-science and backed by political groups with financial and social power.

Your individual feelings don't trump what chromosomes state you are. Trans folks aren't simply asking to be referred to using their desired pronoun. They are being asked to literally be declared a man or woman.

Yet those of us who defend scientific integrity, and common sense, know that your chromosomes determine if you are a man or woman.

If your chromosomes state you are male, you are born a boy and grow into a man. If they state you are female you are born a girl and grow into a woman.


And yes because of legal loopholes, doctors or nurses or midwives for instance, can soon be fired for refusing to refer to a pregnant patient as a father or "pregnant man". Think about another Thomas Beatie.

And there already is one organization that teaches its midwives to say "birthing individuals" instead of acknowledging the truth of maternity. They are trained to be "inclusive" by removing any reference to "mothers" or pregnant women.

If the Supreme Court decides to settle transgender "civil rights", then yes we have our legal loophole

 

[MelanieG]

Even if Doctors aren't currently being forced to perform sex assignment surgeries, they and others will still be forced to attack scientific integrity if the Supreme Court decides to settle once and for all, the matter of Transgender "civil rights". The bathroom issue, for example, is just the beginning.

Those who ignore the matter of legal loopholes just won't grasp why this whole Transconundrum is a heavily convoluted problem.

--Whats going to happen when someone sues a Doctor, nurse, or midwife for refusing to document or state that they are a "pregnant man"?
--Whats going to happen when a Trans student sues a School District for not being "trans-inclusive" in Biology coursework? --Whats going to happen when a Trans group or individual petitions to have Roe V. Wade revised in language to include "men"?
--Whats going to happen when a Trans individual sues "Men's" and "Women's" Department clothing separation or shoes?

By the logic of Trans supporters, that would also be segregation or discrimination. And we know that crowd would argue that being equal to "whites and colored clothing separation"

--Whats going to happen when a Trans group demands to change the definition of mother and father? And petition that the dictionaries are "outdated"? By the "logic" of Trans supports, they should join in the fight to say:
"a woman can be a father and a man a mother".

The examples go on.

 

[Armoured]

There actually is no real science that proves trans folks are what they say they are.

Transgenderism is simply an ideology masked with pseudo-science and backed by political groups with financial and social power.

Your individual feelings don't trump what chromosomes state you are. Trans folks aren't simply asking to be referred to using their desired pronoun. They are being asked to literally be declared a man or woman.

Yet those of us who defend scientific integrity, and common sense, know that your chromosomes determine if you are a man or woman.

If your chromosomes state you are male, you are born a boy and grow into a man. If they state you are female you are born a girl and grow into a woman.


And yes because of legal loopholes, doctors or nurses or midwives for instance, can soon be fired for refusing to refer to a pregnant patient as a father or "pregnant man". Think about another Thomas Beatie.

And there already is one organization that teaches its midwives to say "birthing individuals" instead of acknowledging the truth of maternity. They are trained to be "inclusive" by removing any reference to "mothers" or pregnant women.

If the Supreme Court decides to settle transgender "civil rights", then yes we have our legal loophole

Yeah, I'll go with the current medical consensus rather than what some random person types in BOLD ALL CAPS online.

But hey, maybe if you type in a bigger font, the facts will change.

 

[Armoured]

Even if Doctors aren't currently being forced to perform sex assignment surgeries, they and others will still be forced to attack scientific integrity if the Supreme Court decides to settle once and for all, the matter of Transgender "civil rights". The bathroom issue, for example, is just the beginning.

Those who ignore the matter of legal loopholes just won't grasp why this whole Transconundrum is a heavily convoluted problem.

--Whats going to happen when someone sues a Doctor, nurse, or midwife for refusing to document or state that they are a "pregnant man"?
--Whats going to happen when a Trans student sues a School District for not being "trans-inclusive" in Biology coursework? --Whats going to happen when a Trans group or individual petitions to have Roe V. Wade revised in language to include "men"?
--Whats going to happen when a Trans individual sues "Men's" and "Women's" Department clothing separation or shoes?

By the logic of Trans supporters, that would also be segregation or discrimination. And we know that crowd would argue that being equal to "whites and colored clothing separation"

--Whats going to happen when a Trans group demands to change the definition of mother and father? And petition that the dictionaries are "outdated"? By the "logic" of Trans supports, they should join in the fight to say:
"a woman can be a father and a man a mother".

The examples go on.

The "examples" are spurious and made up. If you have a case study of anything remotely like the above happening, I'd welcome the opportunity to discuss it. But I doubt you have.