So is the Texas "transgender 7 year old" case over?

Earlier this week we learned that the Governor and Attorney General of Texas were “looking into” the case of seven-year-old James Younger. Against the wishes of his father Jeffrey, a jury decided that the mother could not be stopped in her plans to “transition” the boy into a girl named Luna, with plans for hormone adjustments and puberty-blocking drugs to follow in the next year or so. The state of Texas was supposedly investigating to ensure there was no child abuse going on.

Now it turns out that the entire point may be moot. The judge in the case has awarded joint custody of the boy to both parents (who are divorcing) and no such radical medical program will be allowed without the consent of both parents. (National Review)

A Texas judge ruled on Thursday that Jeff Younger is entitled to a say in his seven-year-old son James’s gender-transition process.

Judge Kim Cooks awarded Younger joint conservatorship over his son with mother Anne Georgulas, according to Life Site News.

Georgulas had previously insisted on pursuing James’s gender transition, and was backed by counselors and therapists who testified on her behalf that he is transgender.

A jury had previously ruled Younger could not prevent Georgulas from allowing their son to change genders.

I can look at this outcome in two ways, as vexing as it may be. On the one hand, allowing the father to step in and prevent this sort of mad scientist experimentation on his son is a win for both of them. (Assuming the mother doesn’t defy the court order and sneak off and do it anyway.) If the boy is saved from something awful, we can’t be too unhappy about that.

But as I wrote earlier in the week, there’s a larger issue on the table here and it might be swept under the carpet. If the Texas Governor, Attorney General, and Family Protective Services take this ruling as a signal that the issue is now moot and no further investigation is required, we’re right back where we started. Drawing national attention to the case of a mother who began calling their son a girl at the age of three and was preparing “transition” plans at the age of seven seemed like a moment of opportunity.

After all, what we’re talking about here is political correctness being taken to monstrous, Frankenstein’s Monster level proportions. One study after another has shown that in the vast majority of cases, children who express any sort of gender confusion so early in life tend to “age out of it” by their late teens if given the opportunity. And where they get such ideas in their heads is also a valid subject of inquiry. Too much of this “rapid onset gender dysphoria” is doubtless arising from peer pressure, social media or, as seems to be the case here, their own families.

If Texas walks away from this case, the opportunity for a more sweeping resolution could well be lost. What James Younger’s mother and the doctor she’s been talking to are doing amounts to child abuse and medical malpractice as far as I’m concerned. No long term studies exist as to the effects of prolonged hormone treatments on patients so young and eventual chemical castration will have irreversible effects. The most common puberty-blocking drugs in use have never been approved by the FDA for this purpose.

Someone is going to have to fight this battle in court and get some official guidelines. Otherwise, this practice will continue out of sight of the public in doctor’s offices around the country. Texas should push forward and continue the investigation despite the judge’s ruling.