Read on Twitter
So, something I didn't mention RE the whole "UK banning under 16 from consenting to puberty blockers" situation.
The UK had something called Gillick Competancy. This is possibly the first step to dismantling it.
Thread.
The UK had something called Gillick Competancy. This is possibly the first step to dismantling it.
Thread.
So, what is Gillick Competancy? It's a piece of UK law that lays out a framework for under 16's to consent to medical treatments without needing parental consent.
It came about as part of a ruling about under 16's being able to access conraception without parental consent.
It came about as part of a ruling about under 16's being able to access conraception without parental consent.
"As a matter of Law the parental right to determine whether or not their minor child below the age of sixteen will have medical treatment terminates if and when the child achieves sufficient understanding and intelligence to understand fully what is proposed."
The idea of the ruling is that if an under 16 can demonstrate that they understand the outcomes of a medical treatment, they are able to consent to it of their own accord.
The original case meant under 16's who were having sex already could access contraception to do so safely.
The original case meant under 16's who were having sex already could access contraception to do so safely.
So, how does this UK under 16 puberty blocker ban interact with Gillick Competancy?
Basically, one of two things. Either trans medical care is considered an exception to gillick competancy, or we're facing gillick competancy as a standard being dismantled.
Both are bad options.
Basically, one of two things. Either trans medical care is considered an exception to gillick competancy, or we're facing gillick competancy as a standard being dismantled.
Both are bad options.
So, if trans medical care is considered an exception to Gillick Competancy, that's clear targetted transphobia. You believe an under 16 can consent to any medical treatment, but trans related care is some special case where a 16 year old suddenly can't consent anymore.
The alternative, which is concerning, is that we might see other aspects of Gillick Competancy over the coming months or years dismantled using this as the wedge issue.
Keep your eyes open for future bans on under 16's accessing birth control next.
Keep your eyes open for future bans on under 16's accessing birth control next.
Basically, keep an eye on this case, because it could well be the first step in the dismantling of overal rights for UK under 16's to have agency to consent to a wider variety of medical treatments they can currently consent to.
Basically, this case could potentially set the precident of "well, Gillick Competancy exists, but we have deemed no under 16 can understand the ramifications of starting birth control, so they'll need to go to court to access it, essentially banning it"
