Family Court assessed gender dysphoria in a child, indicating concerns about gender-affirming care practices.
In Re Devin [2025] the Family Court of Australia considered a case of an 11-year old biologically male child whose mother argued was gender dysphoric and should be prescribed puberty blockers. Strum J found that despite the child attending for six years, the gender clinic failed to make a diagnosis of gender dysphoria until court proceedings had commenced. He also raised concerns about the Australian Standards of Care and Treatment Guidelines of the Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne which endorsed a gender-affirming model of care. In finding that gender dysphoria could be influenced by external factors, Strum J was critical of the expert witnesses called by the mother whose model of care to gender affirm "unreservedly" was an "oddly binary approach." Strum J held that in exercising its jurisdiction, the Family Court was not concerned with the cause of transgender people, but only with what was in the best interests of the child.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Russ Scott (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: