Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Ethical analysis reveals harm from denying puberty-blocking treatment in transgender youth, suggesting adolescents require independent legal access and state-supported health education.
In this article, I argue that (1) transgender adolescents should have the legal right to access puberty-blocking treatment (PBT) without parental approval, and (2) the state has a role to play in publicizing information about gender dysphoria. Not only are transgender children harmed psychologically and physically via lack of access to PBT, but PBT is the established standard of care. Given that we generally think that parental authority should not go so far as to (1) severally and permanently harm a child and (2) prevent a child from access to standard physical care, then it follows that parental authority should not encompass denying gender-dysphoric children access to PBT. Moreover, transgender children without supportive parents cannot be helped without access to health care clinics and counseling to facilitate the transition. Hence there is an additional duty of the state to help facilitate sharing this information with vulnerable teens.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Maura Priest (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: