Idaho's new law requires parental permission for nearly all health care a minor receives. A 13-year-old’s pregnancy gets caught up in the consequences

[Nithavela]

Well it appears you agree with the law becauae that's what it says.

I find this doubtful, considering the multitude of cases like the one in OP.

 

[rjs330]

That's good to know. If birth control has nothing to do with the genitals then there is no point in talking to kids about it, and if gender identity has nothing to do with the genitals then kids can be any gender they want and there is no need to talk to them about it. So, since talking to kids about birth control and gender identity was what the authors of the law were trying to prevent, it looks like the law is unnecessary.

Why not? Aren't we talking about biology and science? Is biology and science just about genitalia? Am I missing something here? Are psychological mental health issues only about genitalia?

Geez man, is that how you think?

 

[rjs330]

I'm using "other people's genitalia" as shorthand for the habit of some conservatives to try to regulate other people's life regarding their sexual identity and activities.

It seems to me the left seems to have an odd fascination with genitals. I mean tgey seem to use the word every chance tgey get and insert it into subjects where it's not even the point. It's just weird.

 

[Pommer]

Hmm... still no mention of genitalia. Birth control has nothing to do with focusing on genitalia and gender identity has to do with the psychological issues with the child it still isn't some bizarre focus on genitalia.

I’m going to want to see the training-video for how school nurses discuss birth control without genitals being mentioned.

 

[RileyG]

That's good to know. If birth control has nothing to do with the genitals then there is no point in talking to kids about it, and if gender identity has nothing to do with the genitals then kids can be any gender they want and there is no need to talk to them about it. So, since talking to kids about birth control and gender identity was what the authors of the law were trying to prevent, it looks like the law is unnecessary.

Errr....there are lesbians and other heterosexual women who aren't sexually active who take birth control pills to control their monthly cycles AMONG other health reasons.

And no....it doesn't have to do with...genitals...NECESSARILY.

 

[RileyG]

I’m going to want to see the training-video for how school nurses discuss birth control without genitals being mentioned.

I had a friend who had to take birth control pills because she was getting her period every two weeks. It had nothing to do with......someone's genitals.

 

[Pommer]

I had a friend who had to take birth control pills because she was getting her period every two weeks. It had nothing to do with......someone's genitals.

Right but if a girl goes to the school nurse for bleeding (excessively) the child’s health should be the paramount importance, not “parental rights”.

 

[rjs330]

I’m going to want to see the training-video for how school nurses discuss birth control without genitals being mentioned.

Did anyone say genitals can be mentioned or shouldn't? You guys are just really bizarre with your focus here. I don't know how many times it has to be said. ITS NOT ABOUT GENITALS.

You guys are hyper focused on them. Its quite strange. Its about parental knowledge and consent about medical treatments for their children. If you are going to give professional medical advice to a child the parent should know about it or give permission for it. Rhat includes physical or psychological issues. It seems like rhe left wants to make genitalia the focus all the time.

If you are talking science and biology regarding the creation of life in a biology class of course you are going to mention genitals. It's biology for Pete's sake. Do you think that's the point of this law? I didn't see sex ed mentioned at all in this law.

If you however are going to prescribe birth control to my kid you should have to have my permission as a parent to do so. If you are going to provide psychological services and make psychological diagnosis regarding their mental health then i should know about it. Regardless of what its about. It could be about depression, anxiety, anorexia etc. It might come ad a shock to many on the left but the vast majority of medical issues or psychological issues have nothing to do with the genitals.

 

[rjs330]

I had a friend who had to take birth control pills because she was getting her period every two weeks. It had nothing to do with......someone's genitals.

Well to be fair the blood does come out through their genitals, but again the law has nothing to do with that. If my child is having that issue, which is a health problem and she needs to see a doctor and receive medical advice and a prescription then i should know about it so I make sure she's being taken cars of and all the follow ups are being done etc. Because pills mess with your body and estrogen. They often need to be adjusted. See this is much more than
A focus on her having a vagina. Which the left seems to think we ought to be dwelling on. It's really strange.

 

[Astrid]

How charitable to think covering up abuse is an unintended consequence.

Seriously.

Just try to write a law that covers every possibility.

 

[Postvieww]

One of the most concerning aspects of total parental rights has been the demonizing of teachers who put the students' interests before the parents'.

It would seem that teachers who involve themselves in gender issues with a student without the knowledge of parents have already been “demonized”.

 

[rjs330]

Seriously.

Just try to write a law that covers every possibility.

I've tried to get that conversation going here. Only one person was willing to consider it and take a stab at it. The left wants to complain, but aren't interested in actually have a solution to the issues they find so appauling.

 

[rjs330]

It would seem that teachers who involve themselves in gender issues with a student without the knowledge of parents have already been “demonized”.

And well they should be. They should be fired immediately.

 

[Pommer]

And well they should be. They should be fired immediately.

If a child asserts that they are a boy, should the teacher affirm that?

 

[rjs330]

If a child asserts that they are a boy, should the teacher affirm that?

Not if they are a girl.

 

[Pommer]

Not if they are a girl.

Who should determine that fact?

 

[rjs330]

Who should determine that fact?

Not who, what.