Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) thought he'd found common ground with Democrats on parental rights and women’s rights when it comes to so-called “gender-affirming care” for children.
He quickly learned that was not the case when he proposed legislation protecting a parent’s right to be informed when a child seeks such care.
The divide between the parties was apparent during a July 27 House Judiciary Committee hearing on The Dangers and Due Process Violations of Gender Affirming Care on Children.
As soon as Committee Chairman Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.) pounded the gavel to call the meeting to order, Ranking Member Rep. Mary Scanlan (D-Pa.) objected to the presence of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) on the dais.
Mr. Johnson said that non-members had been allowed on the dais to introduce witnesses, which is why Ms. Greene was there. Ms. Scanlan held to her objection, and Ms. Greene left.
Democrats portrayed the hearing as an attempt to destroy parental rights.
“Government should not stick its nose into a parent’s decision to seek gender-affirming care for their children,” said Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.). “I trust parents and medical professionals, not politicians.”
Republicans and their witnesses countered that they want to protect children from irreversible, ideologically-based medical procedures by adults who may or may not have their best interests at heart.
“It is nightmarish and surreal to hear what these people are doing to the bodies of our children,” said Mr. Johnson.
Mr. McClintock pointed out that leaders in California had put forward legislation that would classify parents who opposed gender reassignment as abusers. The California legislature is also currently considering bill AB 665.
Proponents of the legislation claim it will help young people get mental health care.
Opponents say it would allow children as young as 12 to get mental health counseling and place themselves in a group home without their parent’s knowledge or consent.
Mr. McClintock said he opposes the California legislation for the same reason Democrats give for opposing bans on gender reassignment care for children. He said it appeared the parties were in “complete agreement.”
“Both parties support a law that forbids performing the transgender procedures on a minor without the full and informed consent of the parents,” Mr. McClintock said.
He said that since it appeared they agreed, Congress should write a law protecting parental rights.
“Both parties support a law that forbids performing the transgender procedure on a minor without the full and informed consent of the parents. I believe we should advance such a bill right away,” he said.
Not Complete Agreement
In her opening statement, Ms. Scanlon defended parents’ rights to procure gender reassignment counseling and surgery for children. She said Congress had no right to get involved in that process.When Mr. McClintock attempted to connect his view with hers, Ms. Scanlon said they weren’t the same.
“What I said was parents have the legitimate right to make decisions for appropriate medical care for their children. The dispute is over what’s appropriate,” Ms. Scanlon said.
“I think you’re mischaracterizing the ‘complete agreement.’”
Mr. McClintock said Ms. Scanlon may not be as committed to parental rights as she made it appear.
“I thought we had just arrived at that agreement—until it comes down to doing it. Then you seem to have a change of heart,” Mr. McClintock said.
The witnesses before the committee came from both ends of the spectrum.
Puberty Is a Rite of Passage
The witness Ms. Greene had come to introduce was 19-year-old Chloe Cole, who is detransitioning from gender reassignment that began when she was 12. Ms. Cole said she has firsthand experience with how children can be led into making decisions they may grow to regret.“[Gender reassignment] caused me lifelong, irreversible harm,” Ms. Cole said.
She said her transition story began when she was 12 and starting puberty. She said she was afraid and confused about the changes she was experiencing. She also became very self-conscious about her body.
As a child, she was unable to explain what she was going through, she said. And when she asked for help, she was told she was “experiencing gender dysphoria.”
“All I meant was that I hated puberty,” she said.
According to Ms. Cole, she underwent a mastectomy and was put on gender-reassignment medications, permanently altering her body. She said she doesn’t know if she will ever have a child, but she knows she cannot breastfeed. She said that when her parents questioned the diagnosis, they were asked if they would rather have a dead daughter or a live son.
Some Similarities
Myriam Reynolds is a counselor and the mother of a transgender child from Texas. She said her family has benefitted by being able to access counseling and medical treatment for her child. She said her family’s experience was not what she had seen described in media accounts.Ms. Reynolds said that at 11, her daughter told her she was transgender. Since then, she has lived as their son and taken the name Cameron. Ms. Reynolds said they found health care providers to help them through the transition.
“The entire process was lengthy and meticulous. There was no rush and absolutely no coercion,” she said.
She denied that anyone pressured them to support the transition through threats of suicide or emotional manipulation. But, she said she believed transitioning was the best thing for Cameron.
“I have no doubt the benefit my son has received has been lifesaving,” she said.
Ms. Cole said she understood what Ms. Reynolds and her family dealt with. As a detransitioner, she only wants the best for the Reynolds family and Cameron. Her voice choked with emotion, she said she sees parts of her own experience in Ms. Reynolds’ story.
“I see my own mother and my own father and that she really loves her child. And she’s doing the best with what she’s been given,” Ms. Cole said. “I don’t wish for your child to have the same result as I did. I hope that your child gets to have a happy and fulfilling adulthood, however that may look.”
Women’s Rights
May Mailman, a senior legal fellow with the Independent Women’s Law Center, said the issue extends well beyond the rights of parents.She said it impacts all women.
She said changes to Title IX, meant to provide opportunities for female athletes, have stripped those opportunities away and handed them to biological men.
In testimony Ms. Mailman submitted to the committee, she wrote that schools would have to allow biological males to compete against women regardless of the women’s “risk of injury and losing playing time, medals, and privacy.”
“Rather, the school would need to prove to federal bureaucrats that allowing a biological male to compete on a woman’s varsity team would be unfair or unsafe in this specific sport and concerning these particular athletes,” she said.
Given the expense and possibility of negative press, Ms. Mailman said most schools have just submitted to the new rules. Former University of Pennsylvania swimmer Paula Scanlan said she has had that experience.
She was on the same college team as Lia Thomas, a man who identified as a woman and got the right to compete on the women’s team. Paula Scanlan said most people know that Lia Thomas, who barely made the list of the top 500 male swimmers, dominated the field when competing as a woman.
“What you do not know is the experience of the women on the University of Pennsylvania swim team,” she said.
She explained that female swimmers were required to share locker rooms and showers with Lia Thomas, who was over 6 feet tall and a “fully intact male.” When they complained, they were shut down.
“We, the women, were the problem, not the victims,” she said.
