Ten of Swords wrote: » A significant number of posts have been deleted, this is the second (and final) reminder that this thread concerns the gender recognition legislation for children under 18. Any more posts conflating trans with pedophilia or mental illness, traveller rights, transgender prisoners, crime from people of a migrant background or any other off topic posting will earn an immediate card and threadban.
suicide_circus wrote: » Wilful naivety, Jack. In politics everything is choreographed, everything is spin.
One eyed Jack wrote: » Politics works exactly like that :pac:
suicide_circus wrote: » so this simply happened to be the first thing on the top of his pile of work left over from the last government? nah, politics dosnt work like that
senordingdong wrote: » No, as has been said several times in the thread, this bill has been in the works for some time, o gorman has simply inherited it from Regina doherty
Dravokivich wrote: » He probably is wrong. He got his vote on the back of the extensive amount of community work he'd been doing around the d15 area over the last number of years.
suicide_circus wrote: » Its his first move because its a pressing issue for the people who voted for him presumably
drunkmonkey wrote: » We can't have a spliff as we'll all be shooting heroin by Thursday, why do gateways apply to some and not others. It's a step in wrong direction.
Eric Cartman wrote: » I hope you're wrong or I now have a lot lower opinions of green voters.
keano_afc wrote: » What surprises me is that people are genuinely gullible enough to believe that this is as far as this ideology will go. The UK is usually a good barometer of whats coming down the line here. And trans activism is out of control over there.https://quillette.com/2020/01/17/why-i-resigned-from-tavistock-trans-identified-children-need-therapy-not-just-affirmation-and-drugs/
Eric Cartman wrote: » But what is it about. Can somebody explain what exactly the minister wants to allow and why its his top priority ?
paw patrol wrote: » i hope you're still in your trolling phase.:eek: yes, because it couldn't be true :rolleyes:
ChikiChiki wrote: » Has that absolute geebag John Connors been triggered yet?
Deleted User wrote: » It's only a legal change, not medical...
Calhoun wrote: » It had to happen eventually, following international norms of targeting kids. The end goal will be getting it to 12/13 year olds before puberty kicks in. The parental consent and GP consent won't last to long either. There is an independent article but it's behind a paywall.https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/new-childrens-minister-to-make-it-easier-for-under-16s-to-change-their-gender-39346464.html
A number of doctors have claimed a service under which adolescents with gender dysphoria can be given puberty-suppressing hormone blockers is "unsafe" and must be immediately stopped, but their concerns were suppressed. ... The doctors who raised concerns are consultant endocrinologist Professor Donal O'Shea and consultant psychiatrists Dr Paul Moran and Dr Ian Schneider. All three are attached to the adult national gender service at St Columcille's Hospital in Loughlinstown, Dublin, which deals with adult referrals, including children previously treated at Crumlin. News of their concerns comes days after it emerged a lawsuit was being taken by a former nurse, a parent, and a former patient against the trust in the London High Court. The action is challenging the clinic's practice of prescribing hormone blockers and cross-sex hormones to children under the age of 18.
Gruffalox wrote: » Anyone can check my post history to see how I feel about this whole issue with kids and medicalisation - ie completely against - but before people say stuff abot this read about it, it is about changing gender on legal documents. It is NOT about surgery or hormones or pubertal blockers. There is plenty of scope to lose the head about stuff that is going on re experimental chemicals being used on children to delay puberty or worse still provide cross sex hormones. But this is not what this is about. I disagree with it. I think it messes with young people's heads before they are capable of making such big decisions. I think it will open up issues like what to do in single sex spaces for under 16s. I wonder why it is necessary. How easy to reverse? Etc etc. But these are all different issues to medicalisation of children.
Eric Cartman wrote: » those services might actually placate the need for these services. It is concerning absolutely alarming that his first issue in the hot seat is a completely abhorrent agenda to allow the (Imo) mutilation of children with drugs and potentially surgery. There is a lot of evidence coming forward that many regret transitioning or that kids are wanting to transition to fit in. Ill try dig it up but I remember reading a shocking article (and it was in a legit news source before the pitchforks come out) about a guidance counsellor in a school noticing that one child on the autistic spectrum transitioned and suddenly many of the others who would have been 'outsiders' and on the ASD started doing the same.
Kivaro wrote: » Yes, it does take money, but why not keep some of that > €1 billion that we send overseas as "aid" and have a system in Ireland where children can avail of mental health services when they need it ........... and not 9 am - 5 pm for children in some counties. To ignore the mental health needs of our children in Ireland is appalling, which the previous Children's minister was guilty of. Her focus was overseas migrants. Jesus, why not start with the basics in the Children's department first before concentrating on your grandiose liberal platform.