Justice Strum also questioned the Australian Standards of Care and Treatment Guidelines for Trans and Gender Diverse Children and Adolescents, authored by Professor Telfer, for not recognising that children may not be capable of making life-altering medical decisions about their gender identity. “It is concerning that an oddly binary approach is adopted in relation to children, especially of the age of the child the subject of these proceedings; that is, to affirm unreservedly those who present with concerns regarding their gender, brooking no questioning thereof,” he wrote in the judgment.
The case marked the first time a sitting judge has directly questioned the nation’s guidelines on gender-affirming care. While Justice Strum did not offer general comment on the treatment model adopted by the RCH, he said the impact of that model on a child was of relevance.
Source: Subscribe to The Australian | Newspaper home delivery, website, iPad, iPhone & Android apps