> they're being dishonest about the odds Can you demonstrate this is the case - does showcasing a minority case imply that case is common? > A child wishing t

> they're being dishonest about the odds Can you demonstrate this is the case - does showcasing a minority case imply that case is common? > A child wishing to transition and a parent seeking to reject It doesn't matter what either parent or child thinks. In other context we are quite happy to say a child cannot consent to important things, even with parental consent. This is entirely about the medical gatekeepers. > hot topic right now is access to puberty blockers .. and the new thing is to suggest that there is zero risk with chemically postponing puberty - which mirrors the notion that there is zero risk of regret with transitioning, i.e. total suppression of caution/dissent. It's all misinformation using some boogeyman as justification: "don't worry about X - that's just a lie spread by transphobes/conservatives/republicans etc". But there can be truth in the panic. >> Can you describe what these are? > access to healthcare (e.g. Medicaid) for transitioning I'm not sure there was a standing precedent for this - there are other forms of healthcare also excluded/discriminated against. > freedom of expression, in the Florida Parental Rights in Education Act I don't think that is a FoE issue; there is no such right for anyone to interject into general education, plus there are plenty of topics excluded from education. gay/trans parents can talk to their own children as much as they want - what you are suggesting is they should have free and clear access to other peoples children without any oversight from their parents? Does that mean anti-trans/gay parents get to air their own views in from of their children too?