[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Josephus]

I'm not a parent, but I think that if I had a nine year old son who said he wants to be called Loretta and wear a dress, I think I might suggest he waits a while longer, while, maybe, not discouraging some sort of cosplaying at home. I probably would be pissed if he comes home one day with a report card calling him Loretta.

Why should he wait? Parental comfort?

Because he might grow up and realize that he was too young to make a life-chainging decision, and really he was just gay and the school guidance counsellor was just woke and made a wrong call.

Are you talking about hormones and gender affirming surgery?

If we stick to example of son who decides to use a female name and where traditional female clothing, well that's just another form of experimentation that children often do. Not exactly traumatizing to learn you ultimately don't identify as female. But better to experiment than remain in doubt.

I've got no objection to that. It's the hormones and surgery I do

[Josephus]

Ok. Maybe I was jumping the gun a bit. That said isn't changing a name a legal requirement, and wouldn't that require consent.

I've got no objection to a case where my nephew might say at school "please refer to me by neutral or feminine pronouns and can you please start calling me Loretta ". But I'm not sure if his name on record should change.

But either way, this isn't a hill to die on for me and I won't be changing my political slant on this issue.

[Valmy]

I've got no objection to that. It's the hormones and surgery I do

I am generally only ok with those things with parental consent. Though I could be open to delaying the surgery until the age of 18 if it is something really serious.

Yes it may suck for some young people that parents have so much power but that is just how our society works and as abusable as that is, I think it is better than other options. I would rather parents not put their kids in Scientology or home school them to be some fundamentalist religious nut either but to not allow that seems heavy handed to me.

[Jacob]

I've got no objection to a case where my nephew might say at school "please refer to me by neutral or feminine pronouns and can you please start calling me Loretta ". But I'm not sure if his name on record should change.

I think a lot of this hinges on how you imagine when and how this (now cancelled) law would be used.

Are we imagining kids randomly asking schools to change their names on their records just for the lols?

Are we imagining that the law would be used by wokeist school staff pushing confused kids into changing their names and turning them against their parents in pursuit of some sort of agenda?

Are we imagining that the law would only really come up in cases where the kid genuinely needs some support as they navigate a difficult time, where those difficulties include dealing with their parents?

[Jacob]

I am generally only ok with those things with parental consent. Though I could be open to delaying the surgery until the age of 18 if it is something really serious.

That's a different debate, though. This is about what's required to change the name and pronouns on some paperwork - and, apparently according to the premier in question (though that's not supported by the act as written as I understand it) - whether the teacher can even use a different name or pronouns in the classroom at the child's request without seeking explicit parental consent prior.

[Valmy]

I am generally only ok with those things with parental consent. Though I could be open to delaying the surgery until the age of 18 if it is something really serious.

That's a different debate, though. This is about what's required to change the name and pronouns on some paperwork - and, apparently according to the premier in question (though that's not supported by the act as written as I understand it) - whether the teacher can even use a different name or pronouns in the classroom at the child's request without seeking explicit parental consent prior.

Yeah. That's different. Their official name and gender should stay the same until parental consent is reached though. The name used in the classroom is a bit different as tons of people go by names other than their paper first name already. It would seem weird to have to ask for written parental consent everytime a teacher calls a kid by their nickname.

[crazy canuck]

I've got no objection to a case where my nephew might say at school "please refer to me by neutral or feminine pronouns and can you please start calling me Loretta ". But I'm not sure if his name on record should change.

I think a lot of this hinges on how you imagine when and how this (now cancelled) law would be used.

Are we imagining kids randomly asking schools to change their names on their records just for the lols?

Are we imagining that the law would be used by wokeist school staff pushing confused kids into changing their names and turning them against their parents in pursuit of some sort of agenda?

Are we imagining that the law would only really come up in cases where the kid genuinely needs some support as they navigate a difficult time, where those difficulties include dealing with their parents?

There have been a lot of assumptions made in this thread about what was actually changed, and what the policy had been before the change.

The only thing that has changed is that teachers are no longer required to use the pronouns chosen by a child under the age of 16 without parental consent.

The policy never did provide for the ability of the child to make a legal name change.  That would have been silly for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that schools have no legal power to make legal name changes.

This thread is a good example of how effective conservative speaking points are, it got pretty much everyone here thinking schools were doing things they absolutely were not doing.

TLDR - the policy that was in place was in effect the same thing as allowing little William to ask to be called Bill.  Not  so much a culture war point, but it sure gets inflamed into one quickly.

[Jacob]

Yeah. That's different. Their official name and gender should stay the same until parental consent is reached though.

Why?

The name used in the classroom is a bit different as tons of people go by names other than their paper first name already. It would seem weird to have to ask for written parental consent everytime a teacher calls a kid by their nickname.

I'm sure they'd be fine with consent obtained once.

The crux of the question IMO is what you do when there is conflict between the parent and the child, and what degree of agency the child has.

I think we have if not evidence then at least testimonial that for trans kids having institutional support is important and creates better outcomes (less suicide, dysphoria, and alienation), especially in cases where they're in conflict with one or more parents. This would argue in favour of letting the child make the decision - and that's what underlies the initial law I believe.

Arguing against that there are a few differint arguments that I can discern (keeping in mind that this is about pronoun use and naming at school, in the class room and on paperwork).

1. One argument is that "trans stuff is weird and should be discouraged as much as possible because that will make it go away".

2. There's the somewhat related "what if being supportive of trans folk results in 'perfectly normal' kids being tricked or pushed into being trans because it's trendy and that damages them?"

3. A belief in the fundamental principle that parents own their kids and that parents have both the right and the obligation to review and sign off on any decision the child may or may not want to make. For most of us, however, we are never going to be in the situation where we'll have to decide whether to consent or not, as most of us don't have trans kids.

So on one hand, we're weighing the needs of a small (probably very small) group of vulnerable kids for whom this is quite important against some other argument.

In your case, Valmy, it sounds like you value the broad principle of parental rights over the needs of a  potentially very small but vulnerable group of kids, is that right?

[Jacob]

There have been a lot of assumptions made in this thread about what was actually changed, and what the policy had been before the change.

The only thing that has changed is that teachers are no longer required to use the pronouns chosen by a child under the age of 16 without parental consent.

The policy never did provide for the ability of the child to make a legal name change.  That would have been silly for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that schools have no legal power to make legal name changes.

This thread is a good example of how effective conservative speaking points are, it got pretty much everyone here thinking schools were doing things they absolutely were not doing.

TLDR - the policy that was in place was in effect the same thing as allowing little William to ask to be called Bill.  Not  so much a culture war point, but it sure gets inflamed into one quickly.

I saw it reported that it also covered the ability for the child to have changes on their paperwork - such as their report card.

Is that incorrect?

[crazy canuck]

That is not correct.  Parental consent was always required for name changes on official paper work. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/new-brunswick-policy-713-changes-employees-teachers-1.6874957#:~:text=Minister%20of%20Education%20Bill%20Hogan%20says%20the%20changes,the%20written%20policy%20does%20not%20explicitly%20say%20this.

"The policy has always required a parent's consent for official name changes for students under 16 — on report cards, class lists and school systems. This section has not changed."

That is, at least in part, because schools have no power to make official name changes.  Poor little William will always be officially William, not matter how many people know him as Bill.

[Barrister]

I think we have if not evidence then at least testimonial that for trans kids having institutional support is important and creates better outcomes (less suicide, dysphoria, and alienation), especially in cases where they're in conflict with one or more parents. This would argue in favour of letting the child make the decision - and that's what underlies the initial law I believe.

My understanding is that we have a serious lack of evidence on almost everything relating to trans kids.  Whether it's suicide, dysphoria or whatever - there's just a serious lack of data on the efficacy of all kinds of treatments.

The million dollar question is when children state they are trans, what amount of them would naturally desist/accept their natal gender as they grow older, versus those whose gender dysphoria would persist.  We just don't really know, other than to say the value of either side isn't zero.

[Jacob]

That is not correct.  Parental consent was always required for name changes on official paper work. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/new-brunswick-policy-713-changes-employees-teachers-1.6874957#:~:text=Minister%20of%20Education%20Bill%20Hogan%20says%20the%20changes,the%20written%20policy%20does%20not%20explicitly%20say%20this.

"The policy has always required a parent's consent for official name changes for students under 16 — on report cards, class lists and school systems. This section has not changed."

That is, at least in part, because schools have no power to make official name changes.  Poor little William will always be officially William, not matter how many people know him as Bill.

Thanks for the clarification.

So this is ultimately all down to Conservative virtue signalling - claiming to make thinks a bit harder for trans kids and reinforcing parental rights - while changing nothing of substance. This, then, leading to a counter charge of trans-supportive signalling by interested parties.

... well at least it generated some traffic in this thread 

[Jacob]

My understanding is that we have a serious lack of evidence on almost everything relating to trans kids.  Whether it's suicide, dysphoria or whatever - there's just a serious lack of data on the efficacy of all kinds of treatments.

Fair enough. The question is what we do while that evidence accumulates.

The million dollar question is when children state they are trans, what amount of them would naturally desist/accept their natal gender as they grow older, versus those whose gender dysphoria would persist.  We just don't really know, other than to say the value of either side isn't zero.

I don't think it's a particularly tough question when it comes to how they'd like to be addressed in the classroom. If Robert wants to be called Bob, call him Bob. And if it turns out Robert wants to be called Betty and referred to as she, do that. Maybe Betty will change her mind later, that's cool. Or she won't. That's cool too.

When it comes to irreversible actions for children I'm significantly less confident.

[Sheilbh]

Fair enough. The question is what we do while that evidence accumulates.

I don't think it's a particularly tough question when it comes to how they'd like to be addressed in the classroom. If Robert wants to be called Bob, call him Bob. And if it turns out Robert wants to be called Betty and referred to as she, do that. Maybe Betty will change her mind later, that's cool. Or she won't. That's cool too.

When it comes to irreversible actions for children I'm significantly less confident.

I suppose it's not accumulated neutrally but through looking at different approaches - so there's that side of things.

I think one thing I'd hope is normal is an openness. Position it as "of course I'll call you what you want" rather than necessarily assigning another (trans) identity. I think to try and make it as neutral and open an act as possible for young people rather than accidentally, unintentionally creating a new set of social/mental constraints that someone has to build the courage up to to come out of.

[crazy canuck]

That is not correct.  Parental consent was always required for name changes on official paper work. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/new-brunswick-policy-713-changes-employees-teachers-1.6874957#:~:text=Minister%20of%20Education%20Bill%20Hogan%20says%20the%20changes,the%20written%20policy%20does%20not%20explicitly%20say%20this.

"The policy has always required a parent's consent for official name changes for students under 16 — on report cards, class lists and school systems. This section has not changed."

That is, at least in part, because schools have no power to make official name changes.  Poor little William will always be officially William, not matter how many people know him as Bill.

Thanks for the clarification.

So this is ultimately all down to Conservative virtue signalling - claiming to make thinks a bit harder for trans kids and reinforcing parental rights - while changing nothing of substance. This, then, leading to a counter charge of trans-supportive signalling by interested parties.

... well at least it generated some traffic in this thread 

Yes, and that brings me back to my criticism of Trudeau, PP was really only responding to Trudeau's own virture signaling on the point. 

We don't have any adults (or to borrow a phrase from Succession - serious people) in politics.