The beginning of our natural thoughts and our mind where they expand
is well-founded at the ages in between 8-13 years. It is hormones
inside our bodies that is the chemical that triggers our vast
development and it is consistent.
Whether you grow facial hair, seek to be the same height as your
uncle, or perhaps ask this question “Am I meant to be someone else?
Does it align with my identity, or am I transgender?”.
The idealistic face is as we start to immaculately gain maturity and
better understanding of ourselves. We seek autonomy, we question
aspects in our existence, and we explore new roles. Especially social
connection, I find this is a realistic aspect to it because it can be
the people around us who may shape us in a different way that we may
or may not. We must enact the mind of someone else, when that isn’t
us. We think our values, beliefs, and main identity is us when we
enact as someone else and it isn’t.
Donald Trump, President of the United States has shifted the tradition
of politics around the world with the right of a populist agenda.
Trump has been an advocate for the protection of biological women
sports and bathrooms separate to transgender females formally
biological men who use it. Similarly, we have been changes in the
Italian Republic by Prime Minister Meloni who has restricted
accessibility of gender affirming care, banning transgender women from
playing in biological women’s sports, and other faces that we meet.
Populist Supports and natural conservative faces have argued regarding
matters of what is happening in the classroom. There have been cases
in the United States and Australia where parents have outlined
concerns about occurrences in the classroom of deep influence into a
child’s mindset.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics highlights an estimation of 178
900 (0.9%) of the population over the age of 16 including adolescents
preferably identifying as transgender. However, those who advocate for
those have highlighted the Bureau of Statistics have missed key data
statistics of children under the age of 16.
The natural question is “How should we restrict gender affirming care?
What limits do we input that do not affect the natural Australian.”.
Previous State Leader of the Liberal Party Libby Mettam strongly
affirmed her belief in restricting occupants seeking gender affirming
care who were under 16. According to the State Liberal website it
stated “The Cass Review recommended the controversial affirmation
model, which is a pathway of social transition, puberty blockers,
cross-sex hormones and gender surgeries for children with gender
dysphoria, be discontinued.”.
Mettam highlighted the need to look at our research from professionals
in those institutions who are qualified to seek formal opinions
regarding the matter. I frankly agree with such and as evident the
priority shouldn’t be fully restricting it or making it under 20.
Rather we should look at what professionally competent individuals in
those institutions state that aligns with the natural factors.
Here is my own opinion and it is that: Transgender people that they
are fundamental Australian citizens, but the issue is identity
politics and how they make transgender advocation a left issue when it
should be a moderate issue since both sides have their say on what
they think is right. But I think it applies to general LGBTQ+
advocation and internal division that is severely politicized. Here is
my general policy view on it:
1. MANDATING A PROCESS
a. Enforcing that a mandatory process for these highlights should be
the matter of importance. I would restrict it to that 15-16 years
should undergo a rigorous process that aligns with the evidentiary
backed support by these institutions.
b. An individual should seek counselling from a clinically
institutional based place on the recommendation of a health
professional to determine the cause and seek a diagnosis of gender
dysphoria.
c. Authorizing gender affirming care should be seeked to be authorized
in the interests of a court, but we should create an institution in
the court that processes these matters. The authorization of gender
affirming care should be consented by both parents or caregivers
including a health professional with a written letter to the court
institution that confirms the diagnosis appropriately.
d. After authorization is giving, those seeking gender affirming
surgeries should only be authorized for those 18-19 years of age with
the approval of a health professional but the institution of the court
should not be involved in this matter.
People may argue about this policy and whether it should be effective
but regardless the Liberal Party was the party that legalized Same Sex
Marriage, the party that called for a Postal Survey to determine the
face. A total of 7,817,247 and 61.60% of the population backed a
proposal that was implemented. The Liberal Party is the party of
freedom in a way, and so is the constitution, a founding document from
the federation of our great country and its enactment of democracy.