I know, I know. And from Australia, of all places. I would classify Australia as a secular left police state, at this point. I’m not sure if this judge’s ruling will stand up. But it sure is amazing to see a judge side with the father instead of the secular leftist mother. And even better, the judge sanctioned an “expert” in transgenderism – in fact, a transgender activist – for misleading the family court.

Here’s the story (biased to the left, of course) from The Australian. (full text archived)

Here is a summary I found on Twitter.

BREAKING: A Family Court Judge has prevented a 12-year-old boy from receiving ‘gender-affirming’ treatment and removed him from his mother’s custody after determining he does not have gender dysphoria, finding the boy had been surrounded by ‘gender-affirming and external influences’.

The mother claimed her son was gender-dysphoric from the age of 6 and started taking him to a children’s gender clinic.

Despite no formal diagnoses or consultation with the treating doctor, his mother gave him a female name and socially affirmed her son, including making him wear ‘gender-affirming’ underwear described as ‘small, tight, and padded underpants designed to pressure and flatten his penile area’.

The mother then sought the son to be prescribed puberty blockers, which the father objected to, resulting in court action. There was no formal diagnosis of gender dysphoria from the gender clinic until the commencement of the court case.

The Judge slammed one of the key witnesses in the case, a paediatric gender-medicine ‘expert’ who for failing to meet court requirements in giving an ‘objective and unbiased opinion that is independent and impartial’ after she was found to be an advocate for trans people who’s preferred model of healthcare for transgender children is ‘gender-affirming’ care and supported the removal of court authorisation for trans and gender diverse adolescents to receive gender-affirming hormones.

The Judge also found the RCH Australian Standards of Care and Treatment Guidelines ‘do not have the approval or the imprimatur of the Commonwealth or any State or Territory Government, including any such minister or Department of Health’.

This damning judgment further highlights the need for an urgent national inquiry into youth gender medicine in Australia and a pause on all medical gender transitions for children and young people until this inquiry is complete.

So, this is a shock ruling, to me. It goes against the other cases that I blogged about recently where women were claiming that their children had gender dysphoria in order to get full custody of the children, and the maximum child support from the father. Basically, they wanted the father’s money, and to raise the child without any male influence, and the family courts were giving it to them. Then we saw a case out of Colorado about legislation designed to label any dissent from transgenderism as “abuse”, which is typically used in divorces to cut the father out of his natural role.

What I expect from family courts is what I see in cases of divorce. I expect to see false accusations against the father, with no supporting evidence. I expect CPS to show up and take the child from the father. I expect the judge to award alimony and child support to the mother. So, this story out of Australia was a real shock. My view of Australia is that it’s become a feminized police state, where men are viewed as dangerous and evil. So I really was not expecting any kind of recognition of the importance of male influences in bringing up children.