A federal judge of USA announced this Wednesday the elimination of a law that prohibits minors from undergoing change treatments gender in Arkansas. It is the first ruling of its kind after the promulgation of several states to restrict that right.
In his ruling, the lawyer justified the decision: “Evidence showed that vetted medical care improves mental health and the well-being of patients and that, by prohibiting it, the state undermines the interests that the state claims to promote”.
“There is no scientific evidence that any child will benefit from these procedures.while the consequences are harmful and often permanent,” he added in the statement quoted by the news agency AFP.
In this context, Judge Jay Moody described the measure as unconstitutional since, among other restrictions, it violates the rights of doctors to provide medical care and discriminates against transgender people.
The resolution is given after the denunciation of Dylan Brandt, a 17-year-old transgender teenagerwho was grateful and assured that his treatment changed his daily life: “He changed my life for the better and saw the dangerous impact that this law could have on my life and that of countless transgender people.”
Texas and Florida, the hardest states against gender change
Despite the resolution by the federal magistrate, the most conservative states are fighting against gender change: Texas prohibited the transition in minors under 18 and joined Florida, who with the help of his Republican governor Ron DeSantis signed a similar bill in May. Both States, two of the three most populous in the United States, set their position according to gender change and its clinical processes.
Florida, furthermore, prohibited teaching topics related to sexual orientation and gender identity in all school courses, which stipulates that public schools “shall not knowingly provide instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity” from kindergarten through the last year of high school.
The only way to teach about these topics is for the classes to be “required by state academic standards”, which is not the case, or that “they are part of a course on reproductive health” from which parents can withdraw their children.
Source: Ambito
