What Comes After Transgenderism? Transableism!

You could say that cutting off healthy body parts violate the “do no harm” ethic of medicine. But that concept is becoming increasingly malleable, as seen with radical transgender interventions, including on children — which can lead to sterility and sexual dysfunction — and transforming euthanasia/assisted suicide into just another “medical treatment.”

Advertisement

Moreover, such disabling surgical alterations are already happening. A bit ago, a Canadian surgeon amputated the fingers of a BIID patient who fervently believed they did not belong on his body, which the media reported as a resounding success. A psychologist once blinded a patient with a caustic substance because she was convinced her true self could not see. He was not subject to professional discipline as far as I know, and a fawning media piece described how happy the patient is now that she can’t see.

So, some activists and bioethicists are asking: Why should transgendered people be allowed to have their bodies fundamentally altered, while transabled people — who believe similarly that their “true identity” is as a disabled person — can’t receive similar relief?

Ed Morrissey

Exactly. One can take a libertarian approach to this question in theory, as long as only adults are allowed to make these choices and that they foot the bill themselves, pun fully intended in the context of the case Smith highlights. However, that's how it started with transgenders, and then activists and the medical community began grooming children to create lifetime dependency on providers. We need to return to the Hippocratic Oath, full stop.  

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on HotAir Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement