Teenage surgery without parent's consent

[Catholic_Lady]

Should minors be allowed to get sex reassignment surgery without their parent's consent? 

Apparently this is happening in Minnesota with a teen who wants to transition into a woman and the mom is saying no. Was curious to know yall's opinions on the legal side of things.

[pocaracas]

Why does the mom say no?
How about the dad?

Legally?... could this person get any other form of voluntary surgery without the parents' consent?

[vorlon13]

I've had friends who were transitioning even as far back as 1976. In that era, it was actually viewed as a positive and even a somewhat 'necessary' aspect that since there was no insurance coverage for it, the procedures had to be done at the expense of the person desiring it. Since then as now, some of the procedures are irreversible, having the individual responsible for the cost was viewed as a way of insuring only the most highly motivated/confident/sure individuals had the surgeries.

I'm wondering how anyone could convince me prior to their turning 25 or even 30 years old, that they will not later on regret the decision?

Additionally, some 'options' aren't available either from their not being possible, or ethical constraints from the medical community. The upshot of that is, there are individuals that cannot be 'surgically reassigned' adequately to conform to their desired outcome. Some of these younger people coming forward might be 'better off' to wait as the procedures/ethics evolve to more precisely match their needs, than to settle for something now that might in the long run be something that will either require revision surgery(ies) or it would have been precluded entirely by the earlier operation.

I also strongly suspect the problems outlined above are drastically worse in Iran, for instance, where it seems a 'one size fits all' approach is the only approach available . . . .

[Excited Penguin]

Of course not.

And I defer to poca's question further on that.

This is the kind of bullshit that PC allows for.

As an adult go right ahead. But not as a child. Not without your parents' consent and a mandatory psychological evaluation ideally.

[account_inactive]

I think the age requirement for the surgery should be lowered to sixteen.

[Tiberius]

I'm not sure, though they should be able to take hormones which block puberty without their parents' permission. There are studies which show that blocking the development of sexual features can help transgender people through that difficult stage of their lives, and is fully reversible, before they decide whether they want to transition.

[Tiberius]

To add to that, I agree with Bella's point. When we say "minor" what do we mean? Under 21, under 18, under 16? I think at age 16 you're pretty independent and should be able to make your own choices about your body.

[Excited Penguin]

To add to that, I agree with Bella's point. When we say "minor" what do we mean? Under 21, under 18, under 16? I think at age 16 you're pretty independent and should be able to make your own choices about your body.

I think in reality it's even more nuanced than that. Some reach maturity of thought at 14, for example. 

But the point is if any other surgeries require parental approval this shouldn't get a pass just because it's about transgenders' rights which are a minority.

[Aegon]

At first, I thought the topic would be about surgeries in general. I have tarsal coalition, and when I was 14 I was offered a surgery to separate the tarsal bones. It was causing me a great deal of pain, so I really wanted to do it. Since I was a minor, it was my parents' say, and they thought the risks outweighed the benefits (it was an intensive surgery, to be fair.) My feet still give me constant pain to this day, and although I can manage it better than I used to, I'm still upset that my parents stopped me from at least trying to fix it. The surgery is no longer on the table now that my feet are fully grown.

But for sex reassignment surgery? I don't think so. That's a monumental step to take for something that they can't be sure is something they truly want, with no literal medical benefits.

[I_am_not_mafia]

Maybe some facts might not go amiss here. For example, by minor you mean someone who is a few months off 18. The daughter is 17 years old, living her own life and is financially independent. The mother is just being a vindictive cunt in trying to ruin the daughter's life even though she has no contact with her at all. Nor does the mother even want to make any contact with her daughter.

http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/m...nt-n685266

states that "mother has made it known to him that she no longer wishes to have any contact with him," "knows where he is and has made no attempts to bring him home," and "has taken no actions to report him as a runaway or taken legal action to keep him in her home."

Minnesota does not have a legal process for the emancipation of minors. But the law makes it clear that minors who aren't living at home are essentially considered adults when it comes to medical care: "Any minor who is living separate and apart from parents ... and who is managing personal financial affairs, regardless of the source or extent of the minor's income, may give effective consent to personal medical, dental, mental and other health services, and the consent of no other person is required."

At what point do you stop being a minor? Surely if you are financially independent and functioning as an adult, you are not a minor.