U.K. Suit Demonstrates Legal Jeopardy for Virginia Child Transgender Clinics
Share this article
ADVERTISEMENT
(comments below)
Comments
Comments
36 responses to “U.K. Suit Demonstrates Legal Jeopardy for Virginia Child Transgender Clinics”
-
Anything happening in the Philippines over transgender lawsuits? They much closer to us than the UK.
-
But the flip side will be the local schools and healthcare being sued by every family that has a trans, bi, queer, or homosexual child who commits suicide. The tort liability when it comes to trans is not a one way street.
-
Yep. And homosexual has been around a LONG time. No?
And those who think we did not do what was right with homosexuals and now we should do it different/better with trans as well as prior sexual behaviors.
I just see this as an issue where Conservatives want a “don’t tell” approach and liberals want it all out in the open and policies to address it.
The fact that most insurance WILL PAY for the procedures influences my thinking. Why would they do that is it was REALLY “experimental”?
All kinds of things are NOT reimbursable by insurance but this apparently is.
-
The argument would be not over the experimental part but over the inappropriate part and the failure to explain the risks part.
-
on an industry basis? a class action?
-
On a practitioner basis. Example: a 13 y/o female starts having some gender issues and the parents take their daughter to a specialist. However, if the specialist never discusses doing nothing or the possibility of regrets and depression later in life from going through chemical/surgical transitioning, the female and the parents have a strong case.
Any physician who is a defacto cheerleader for always transitioning could be an easy target for a lawsuit. -
Okay, but that happens with a lot of different medical things and does not implicate everyone doing that procedure.
right?
As long as they follow the standard of care and meet the requirements of insurance reimbursement?
For me, if insurance would not reimburse, a lot of doctors would never do this unless the parents paid for all of it and even then, I can see all kinds of required liability waivers involved.
no?
-
There is no such thing as a liability waiver. One cannot sign away one’s ability to sue under tort law. Look it up.
-
For sure. You can always sue and folks do but those signed waivers are hard to keep out of the proceedings.
But again, are we talking about an entire medical profession where all of them will be found guilty/culpable or are we talking about individuals that varied from what most other doctors were doing?
Doctors are pretty adverse to liability as are the companies that insure them. Most of them are guided by what their own insurance will cover and what the patient’s insurance will pay for.
-
If one is harmed by a breach of duty by someone, it does not matter how many documents one has signed. Look it up. And not all medical professionals will be found liable. Just those who refuse to practice defensive medicine and are cheerleaders for transitioning everyone who expresses any interest.
-
I totally agree but I’m asking is this an individual thing that we’d see across the board but small percentage… or is it industry wide for a given procedure?
Sherlock seems to be arguing that it’s a systemic/industry-wide wrong… I’m not convinced it is especially if insurance will cover it and insurance won’t pay if it is not done according to standard of care policies.
I just don’t see how this procedure gets determined to be an industry-wide liability issue….that then invalidates it as a legitimate procedure.
seems like a stretch…
-
“That then invalidates it as a legitimate procedure (on minors)”. Bingo.
-
Well again – no Doctor is going to do it if his/her insurance does not cover it .
And if insurance won’t reimburse the procedure, most people are not going to have it.
If this is really so terrible, no insurance company would have anything to do with it.
-
-
-
-
-
There used to be a safeguard and vetting process in place called the “The Transgender Standards of Care” that all medical practitioners in the field of gender dysphoria and treatment used to have to abide by. But the radical trans activist pretty much put an end to it…. Claiming that it was “gatekeeping and transphobic” to deny care to anyone who claims that they’re trans. No matter what age they were! Now the doctors feel like their hands are tied for fear of retaliation from the woke mob, and the neo Marxist entity known as the Democratic party. So the doctors have literally become just another rubber stamp. And it’s destroying countless children’s lives.
-
And that’s exactly what they do nowadays! They don’t question and do their due diligence to weed out people who are actually suffering from gender dysphoria… And those that are just having some mental issues. They have all become “De-facto cheerleaders” for full gender transition! 🤦♀️ And it’s the radical activist arm of the neo Marxist Democratic party that has pretty much bullied and shamed these practitioners into not properly vetting each case. The activists claim that it is “gatekeeping and transphobic” to question a child or parents intentions when it comes to gender dysphoria and the proper treatment of it. They pretty much want the doctors to have a one size fits all approach to treatment. And frankly the activists don’t care how many children it ruins….. So long as they’re able to get there narrative and agenda across! They won’t tell you the obscene number of detransitions, regret, and suicides that are occurring as a result of this big push to medicate and surgically alter any boy who wants to play with a Barbie! 🤦♀️ That’s how bad it’s gotten! They have pretty much gotten rid of the vetting process altogether. And the only way to stop this is for the courts to impose some severe material losses on these unethical doctors and the radical Marxist activists that push this nonsense. As a Transwoman myself….. I’ve seen the change in ethics occur first hand! And it all started ever since the trans Community sold its sovereignty to the evil Democratic party
-
Chrissy, you have a different perspective on the transgender issue than most Bacon’s Rebellion readers. Insofar as you are comfortable telling it, I’d be interested to know your story, how active you are in transgender issues, and with what authority you make statements about the excesses in treating young people for gender dysphoria. — Jim Bacon, publisher, Bacon’s Rebellion
-
There is no basis to believe that the physicians are not doing due diligence other than talking points from right of center partisans.
Using drugs off-label on large groups of children is an experiment, Teddy. There is a reason the FDA will not approve those uses, especially in children.
With the evidence available as to the known dangers (and, most importantly, not available for the admittedly unknown long term effects) of the drugs, convincing a jury that the practice is malpractice should not prove a big hill to climb.
The un-admitted but demonstrable sterilization effects should seal the deal.
-
No, it is not an experiment. Clinical research is defined by the collect of the data, not by the off label use. That is just the practice of medicine. The companies have probably never gone for childhood approval because getting the clinical trials approved would be almost impossible and would cause protestors and a media fire storm for any clinic that actually tried to do medical research. And puberty blockers have been around for years. The issue would be having 17 y/o on sex hormones but it would not be malpractice given the diagnosis of gender dysphoria resulting in the need for medical interventions. It would be just as much malpractice to have an adolescent going though gender dysphoria and to not treat the child but to just tell them to sit down, shut up, and do what they are told.
-
how does private insurance approve it then?
Randomized double-blind trials for ivermectin, but puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones? Eh, whatever. I wonder what Anthony Fauci has to say.
-
Well, aside from the fact that Ivermectin is 100% ineffective against COV-2, what would you want to hear?
So would this be the kind of “frivolous’ lawsuit that Conservative would like to limit as a part of their medical tort reform they routinely champion…? If so, do you think it is still a great idea? Just wondering…
-
oh… frivolous tort lawsuits! funny! Yes… indeed.. the reason why health care costs are so high… but haven’t heard that argument for awhile and certainly Sherlock is not using it.
Conservatism is changing…. a LOT…. apparently.
-
“Frivolous” lawsuit to save children from medical experimentation and sterilization. Sign me up.
-
You want the govt to overrule the parents?
-
Only when he disagrees with them.
-
-
So you are saying you are now against medical tort reform….?
-
Tort suits are the only way the medical profession gets cleansed of incompetent practitioners.
-
Hey! We agree on something!!
-
It’s not so much the doctors pushing this nonsense as it is the radical liberal activists! Most of these doctors are just going with the nonsense because they are afraid of retaliation from the woke mob and the Demoncratic party. I would know…. I’m a Transwoman myself!! And I have seen the change over the last 10 years. It’s causing a huge number of detransitions, regret, and suicide among the population that have been coerced/pushed by the modern, woke medical community into seeking this form of treatment at such a young impressionable age.
-
-
-
those who don’t want hormones/chemicals in their beef and chicken are okay with such in others’ children…interesting….
Some basic things.
At what age can someone have such procedures done without consent of their parents?
If the parents consent, where is the tort?
How many people would have these procedures if insurance would not pay for it? If insurance pays
for it – whose business is it then?
I’ll just state again. I do not understand folks who want to do this, clearly a different way of thinking.
And I can understand conservatives and religious not liking it.
But if the procedure is allowed as a legal “right” AND insurance will pay for it then how do other folks want to stop it on grounds other than legal, insurance reimbursable and personal right ( even if regretted
later?)
-
The argument is not about consent but about malpractice. The families will argue that they were not given an explanation of all of the treatment options with the possible negative outcomes of each treatment option.
-
All of them or most of them – around the world?
-
“Unless the tort bar retires en masse, such suits are coming to Virginia.”
Or, the tort bar could en masse shy away from such suits, because they don’t want the heat.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.