Adults 'fail by giving in to trans teenagers'

Adults fail in their duty to children if they just give in to the "instant gratification" demands of transgender teenagers who protest they cannot wait until 18 for irreversible sex-reassignment surgery, clinical psychologist Paul Stevenson says.

Mr Stevenson, well known for helping trauma victims after the Bali and Jakarta terror bombings of the 2000s, said psychologists should not "disenfranchise" parents of trans teens, nor "drive a wedge" between child and family. He was commenting on a submission by the Australian Psychological Society that doctors should be able to go ahead with under-16 trans surgery, with both parents opposed and no mandatory counselling for the adolescent, as long as the clinicians were "competent" in assessing the teen's capacity to make the decision.

The APS claims 24,000 members but Mr Stevenson said his breakaway body, the Australian Association of Psychologists Inc, had picked up 2000 new members in the past year, taking the total to 8000, partly because of discontent with the APS.

The AAPi appears to be the first health or medical pro-fessional body in Australia to go public with scepticism about the "child-led" affirmation approach to trans, which critics say discourages thorough investigation of a young patient's history and too readily puts them on a path to risky medical treatment, including puberty-blocker drugs, cross-sex hormones and surgery, such as mastectomy for trans boys.

Gender clinicians claim children are experts in their identity and going along with their transition is best for mental health. Mr Stevenson said the sudden decision of a teen to come out as trans brought grief and stress not just to parents but to the extended family, and for everyone's long-term interests the crucial relationship between teen and parent had to be supported.

 "Psycholo-gists are not in the business of splitting up families," he said. He said the teenage years brought rapid and confusing development, and conflict with parents. Some neuroscience studies suggested the decision-making brain might not fully mature until a person reached their 30s, making it unwise to allow teens under 18 to consent to irreversible medical treatment.

"We've got to help parents get their children through this period of time when the (teenager's) frontal lobe is 'out for renovations'," he said. "Parents are the best-placed people to get their kids through this, we shouldn't be driving wedges between them."

Some parents have reported a pattern of teenagers, typically girls, suddenly declaring trans status with scripted lines from social media about the immediate need for hormones to stop them committing suicide.

Mr Stevenson said suicidal ideas — like any other mental health issues —should be treated directly. Flinders University's Damien Riggs, co-author of the APS submission, claims it is "scientifically, incorrect" to suggest social media or peer pressure might influence a trans teenager's stated identity. He has argued that Medicare should fund a trans mastectomy just as it does for a healthy woman with a genetic risk of breast cancer.

Online forums suggest trans mastectomy costs about $10,000. Dr Riggs, who won a $694,514 federal grant to study "family diversity", is cited as an authority in the 2018 treatment standards for children and adolescents issued by the gender clinic at the Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne (which does no trans surgery).

Yesterday, the APS said the courts already allowed trans surgery for patients under 18. Where parents opposed it, "minors should have the right to access the opinion and guidance of suitably qualified medical professionals, including psychologists".

From "The Australian" of 4 Oct., 2019





Uni lifts standards pinpointed in CIS paper

Some of Australia’s most prestigious universities are starting to make sensible changes when it comes to international student recruitment. In recent weeks, the University of Melbourne has eliminated language on its website that seemed to encourage international students to take a casual approach to English language standards. This positive development comes in the wake of CIS research that highlighted potential problems with the recruitment practices of Australian universities’ English-language ‘foundation programs’.

The China Student Boom and the Risks It Poses to Australian Universities pulled together data from universities, state and federal agencies, foreign governments, international organisations, and press reports to present a full picture of the risks being taken by Australian universities in enrolling unprecedented numbers of Chinese students.

The University of Melbourne had previously explicitly pitched its foundation programs to students who “don’t meet entry requirements” and suggested they could take ‘equivalent’ tests or subjects as alternative pathways to admission. But now the university more responsibly encourages students to explore admissions options without suggesting that the alternatives are any less rigorous than the usual entry requirements.

It may not sound like much, but it’s a good start. Compare the improvements at Melbourne with marketing at the University of Sydney, which advertises that if a student is “unable to meet the minimum academic requirements for undergraduate study”, its foundation program “could be your ticket to study with us.” Other leading universities — such as ANU and Queensland — feature similarly enticing language. They seem to treat their foundation programs more as services for sale than as rigorous educational experiences requiring hard work and perseverance.

The University of Melbourne’s reforms are cosmetic, but important. Marketing may sound like a frivolous issue, but it sets expectations that stay with students throughout their studies. If other universities follow Melbourne’s lead, we can start a race to the top in international student recruitment. The higher we set our sights, the higher our students will set theirs.

SOURCE 




Warning of 'Fukushima-style' disaster as Labor pushes back against plans for nuclear power plants in Australia to reduce greenhouse gases

A chilling warning has been issued of a 'Fukushima-style' disaster in Australia as the LNP continue to push to explore nuclear power.

Nuclear power is currently a banned source of power in Australia despite the country having the world's biggest uranium reserves, but the Queensland Government is looking to open a nuclear power plant in Maryborough.

Bruce Saunders, the Labor member for Maryborough in Queensland's Legislative Assembly, has slammed Keith Pitt - the LNP member for the federal seat of Hinkler - for his push to open the 'Fukushima-style' nuclear plant.

'Mr Pitt - the man behind it all - owes it to our community to declare where he sits in the widening rift that is LNP energy policy,' Mr Saunders told The Chronicle.

In 2011, the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant was hit by the devastating tsunami in the region, causing a meltdown at the plant which necessitated the evacuation of all people in a 20-kilometre radius due to the release of large amounts of radiation.

It is considered the second worst nuclear accident in the history of nuclear power, behind the Chernobyl disaster in 1986.

Federal Energy Minister Angus Taylor has called for a parliamentary inquiry into the viability of nuclear power to reduce greenhouse gases from reliance upon coal-fired power plants.

'Angus Taylor has said he's more than willing to consider nuclear, opening the door to a Fukushima-style disaster right here in Maryborough,' Mr Saunders continued.

Mr Pitt spoke out against the 'outrageous claims' and said he had the best interest of Queenslanders when it came to cheaper and reliable energy. 'I want cheaper power prices not cheap political point-scoring from Mr Saunders,' he told the publication. 

He stated that renewable energy sources are unreliable and don't meet the needs of stable energy supply. 'Renewables don't work 100 per cent of the time and there are businesses and industries that need reliability, so solar is just not suitable for them,' he told The Northern Star.

'I called for an inquiry into nuclear power to get the facts, to look at the new technology available and to have an adult conversation.

'I'm pleased Minister Taylor has asked the Environment and Energy Committee to consider the economic, environmental and safety implications of nuclear power.'

SOURCE  






Sea World boss slams TripAdvisor ticket ban in name of animal welfare as 'activism gone mad' and claims it jeopardises Gold Coast tourism

Sea World boss Bikash Randhawa has slammed TripAdvisor's ticket ban for the theme park as 'activism gone mad'.

TripAdvisor has announced it will ban the sale of tickets to theme parks who house dolphins and whales following pressure from animal rights activists.

Animal rights group PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) praised TripAdvisor's decision to 'officially reject tourism to marine mammal prisons like Sea World'.

However, Mr Randhawa described the ban as a blow for the park, and claimed it  dismissed all the great work the parks and their staff have done in rescuing marine animals.

'This is activism gone mad. It's over the top. I think they are lost in the world of minorities who amplify their opinions on social media while the rest of the world is fully behind us,' Mr Randhawa said.

He went on to describe the ban as 'irresponsible' due to its strong potential in jeopardising tourism in the area.

'I believe what has happened here is that they have put themselves in an embarrassing and difficult spot by painting us with the same brush as Third World country operators who mistreat animals,' he said.

Mr Randhawa wrote to TripAdvisor in an attempt to persuade the popular booking site of the park's positive work with animals.

'It's disappointing that we were not engaged by you to understand our position, nor were we informed of this announcement by any representative from TripAdvisor, despite our long and successful working relationship,' he wrote in the letter. 

The ban was also strongly reprimanded by State Tourism Minister Kate Jones who claimed 'no one does more for the protection of marine animals on the Gold Coast than Sea World'.

It was previously revealed in a statement that Sea World contributes millions of dollars to animal research and rescue yearly.

'Throughout our history, we have conducted rescue operations on animals in need all over Australia, and while the goal with every rescue is to rehabilitate and release, this is not always the case and Sea World is a sanctuary for rescued animals,' the statement read.

The marine park has come under fire from protesters in the past, despite rescuing over 600 animals and not housing any whales.

But the global online website said the decision to ban the sale of tickets came after consultation with a number of experts.

Although TripAdvisor suggested some marine parks may be excluded from the ban, it seems Sea World is not part of the exception.

 SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here