Mother Forcing Chemical Castration & Gender Reassignment of 6 Year Old Boy In TX

[coins4commies]

Six years old is a little too young for that. You never truly know the reasons for the child "wanting" this. It could simply be that they truly want it, OR it could be very bad parents forcing the child to say that they want it. 6 years old is just too young.

I don't know, as a member of the LGBTQ community, I have much difficulty understanding the "T" part. I can only offer my experience. I pretty much knew my sexual preference by age 11. But at age 6??? I don't recall having the foggiest notion. I do recall that I was an effeminate child. However, if my parents had misconstrued it and went through these drastic measures to reassign my gender, I would have despised them for it. However, that is just my case.
From what I read so far in this case, it appears the child may be "gender expansive." Whatever that means. I'm not certain taking steps to force the child to be a "girl" is the called for action here.

You seem to be conflating gender assignments with sexual preferences.  Gender and sexual preference are not the same thing.  I think this is why you are saying 6 is too young and it is too young to be discussing sexual preferences.  

If 6 was too young for gender, we would need to stop assigning gender to children at all.  One thing we know for sure, is that the parents assigning gender at these "gender revels" before the child has even been born is definitely too early.  It just happens to work most of the time because most people are cisgender (i think its 95%).

You are off topic on this homeschooling rant anyway, you asked how I thought best to limit extremism and I replied. Your assumptions about "religion spreading like wildefire" are based on nothing and not as much of a big deal as you think it is anyway. I might also point out just because a lot of home schooled kids have religious parents doesn't mean home schooling makes people more religious. Furthermore, who the fuck do you think you are demanding that parents submit their children to the state for indoctrination anyway? If they want to raise their children religious that is their business. People raising their children to be religious is horrible to you but mutilating the genitals of children and chemically castrating them is fine?

Every private school is evidence for what he is saying.  I teach at a school where my philosophy aligns and parents seek out our school because of that. "creating global thinkers" is a big part of our mission and we don't have flags in our classrooms.

   Teachers at private schools have a responsibility to teach the values of the school's mission and every mission is biased. Unbiased would be to teach the kids about abortion and concentration camps and let them decide for themselves what is right and wrong but most schools will teach it with a certain bias like "killing babies is wrong" or "telling women what to do with their bodies is wrong" and "putting a group of people in concentration camps is wrong" or "there are consequences for your actions" .

Many private school missions even have politicized language in them.  Look for words like "equality" "global" "diversity" vs "individual" "successful" "productive" and you can pick up on the code.  Then you also have religious rules.  A teacher who is not teaching in accordance with religious rules at a religious school can be fired.  Someone like you would not make long at my school even if he was teaching something like computer science that, in theory, has nothing to do with political views but in a public school, you would be protected.  That is why public schools reduce extremism.  They provide more balance.

[1714718358]

1714718358

[1714718358]

1714718358

[1714718358]

1714718358

[1714718358]

1714718358

[1714718358]

1714718358

[bones261]

Six years old is a little too young for that. You never truly know the reasons for the child "wanting" this. It could simply be that they truly want it, OR it could be very bad parents forcing the child to say that they want it. 6 years old is just too young.

I don't know, as a member of the LGBTQ community, I have much difficulty understanding the "T" part. I can only offer my experience. I pretty much knew my sexual preference by age 11. But at age 6??? I don't recall having the foggiest notion. I do recall that I was an effeminate child. However, if my parents had misconstrued it and went through these drastic measures to reassign my gender, I would have despised them for it. However, that is just my case.
From what I read so far in this case, it appears the child may be "gender expansive." Whatever that means. I'm not certain taking steps to force the child to be a "girl" is the called for action here.

You seem to be conflating gender assignments with sexual preferences.  Gender and sexual preference are not the same thing.  I think this is why you are saying 6 is too young and it is too young to be discussing sexual preferences.  

If 6 was too young for gender, we would need to stop assigning gender to children at all.  One thing we know for sure, is that the parents assigning gender at these "gender revels" before the child has even been born is definitely too early.  It just happens to work most of the time because most people are cisgender (i think its 95%).

Some people happen to be gender fluid... In this case, they believe the child may be "gender expansive." I think it would be grave error to chemically and physically alter such a person. Also, the child may not be transgendered at all, but "questioning." For individuals who are pansexual, gender fluid, "gender expansive." etc etc, 6 may very well indeed be too young to figure out something that is rather complicated.

[TECSHARE]

Six years old is a little too young for that. You never truly know the reasons for the child "wanting" this. It could simply be that they truly want it, OR it could be very bad parents forcing the child to say that they want it. 6 years old is just too young.

I don't know, as a member of the LGBTQ community, I have much difficulty understanding the "T" part. I can only offer my experience. I pretty much knew my sexual preference by age 11. But at age 6??? I don't recall having the foggiest notion. I do recall that I was an effeminate child. However, if my parents had misconstrued it and went through these drastic measures to reassign my gender, I would have despised them for it. However, that is just my case.
From what I read so far in this case, it appears the child may be "gender expansive." Whatever that means. I'm not certain taking steps to force the child to be a "girl" is the called for action here.

You seem to be conflating gender assignments with sexual preferences.  Gender and sexual preference are not the same thing.  I think this is why you are saying 6 is too young and it is too young to be discussing sexual preferences.  

If 6 was too young for gender, we would need to stop assigning gender to children at all.  One thing we know for sure, is that the parents assigning gender at these "gender revels" before the child has even been born is definitely too early.  It just happens to work most of the time because most people are cisgender (i think its 95%).

I think the larger point is it doesn't fucking matter and there should not be a coordinated effort to influence children one way or the other at such a young age because they haven't bothered to explore the situation themselves yet. "Get them while they are young" is a saying because children are malleable and easily influenced, and that is why the Postmodernist Deconstructivist Critical Theorist Marxists such as yourselves target such young children, because they are to young to have figured any of it out for themselves yet. All you are saying here is if the gender fluid/trans/non-binary/attack helicopters don't get to have the identity they want then no one can have an identity. This is at the core of why Critical Theory is so toxic. It uses the logic that equality is brought by denying others their rights and justifying it by acting in the name of some so called victim class.

You are off topic on this homeschooling rant anyway, you asked how I thought best to limit extremism and I replied. Your assumptions about "religion spreading like wildefire" are based on nothing and not as much of a big deal as you think it is anyway. I might also point out just because a lot of home schooled kids have religious parents doesn't mean home schooling makes people more religious. Furthermore, who the fuck do you think you are demanding that parents submit their children to the state for indoctrination anyway? If they want to raise their children religious that is their business. People raising their children to be religious is horrible to you but mutilating the genitals of children and chemically castrating them is fine?

Every private school is evidence for what he is saying.  I teach at a school where my philosophy aligns and parents seek out our school because of that. "creating global thinkers" is a big part of our mission and we don't have flags in our classrooms.

   Teachers at private schools have a responsibility to teach the values of the school's mission and every mission is biased. Unbiased would be to teach the kids about abortion and concentration camps and let them decide for themselves what is right and wrong but most schools will teach it with a certain bias like "killing babies is wrong" or "telling women what to do with their bodies is wrong" and "putting a group of people in concentration camps is wrong" or "there are consequences for your actions" .

Many private school missions even have politicized language in them.  Look for words like "equality" "global" "diversity" vs "individual" "successful" "productive" and you can pick up on the code.  Then you also have religious rules.  A teacher who is not teaching in accordance with religious rules at a religious school can be fired.  Someone like you would not make long at my school even if he was teaching something like computer science that, in theory, has nothing to do with political views but in a public school, you would be protected.  That is why public schools reduce extremism.  They provide more balance.

Every private school eh? You are a teacher and no one ever told you all inclusive statements are generally wrong? Furthermore you have no evidence of this, this is just a list of assumptions on your part. You seem to be under the impression that state run or public schools are without bias. Generally I find those who claim to be the most unbiased usually are desperately attempting to hide it. The state and public schools most certainly do have bias, you just think that is A-OK because they align with your own. That is not the same as being unbiased, which frankly is not possible. Some how your bias is more appropriate that the bias of others in your mind. Some one like me would make you look incompetent in your own classroom by knowing more about the subject matter than you as a teacher. I have done it before. You have no business "educating" anyone, except for maybe being a living example of the failures of Marxism.

Of course you would frame the ability to have open debate as something to be punished, but that is how public and state schools operate isn't it? Punishing those who disagree with the state narrative is something to be proud of in your eyes. Public schools reduce extremism? I guess that's why there is so much violence at them right? I am sure you think it is the fault of guns, and not the fact that it is designed to be a human meat grinder beating out any sense of individuality, critical thought, or free thinking from young minds. The fact that you are in a position to indoctrinate others is terrifying.

[coins4commies]

Every private school eh? You are a teacher and no one ever told you all inclusive statements are generally wrong? Furthermore you have no evidence of this, this is just a list of assumptions on your part. You seem to be under the impression that state run or public schools are without bias. Generally I find those who claim to be the most unbiased usually are desperately attempting to hide it. The state and public schools most certainly do have bias, you just think that is A-OK because they align with your own. That is not the same as being unbiased, which frankly is not possible. Some how your bias is more appropriate that the bias of others in your mind. Some one like me would make you look incompetent in your own classroom by knowing more about the subject matter than you as a teacher. I have done it before. You have no business "educating" anyone, except for maybe being a living example of the failures of Marxism.

Of course you would frame the ability to have open debate as something to be punished, but that is how public and state schools operate isn't it? Punishing those who disagree with the state narrative is something to be proud of in your eyes. Public schools reduce extremism? I guess that's why there is so much violence at them right? I am sure you think it is the fault of guns, and not the fact that it is designed to be a human meat grinder beating out any sense of individuality, critical thought, or free thinking from young minds. The fact that you are in a position to indoctrinate others is terrifying.

In chemistry, we have "rules" and teach young students the rules only to reveal that most of these rules have exceptions later.  Generalizations are valuable when you aren' talking to someone who's main intent is to twist your words into something out of context and derail the disucssion.  Did you really believe I was claiming every single private school?   I was lucky enough to have someone tell me about hyperbole.

Yes I have evidence and spoke of mission statements already.  I've been through the catholic school system and spent a few years coaching and teaching in it.  Religious schools, teach their religious values. period. Thats the whole point of their existence.  Its in every mission statement.  Everything is through that lens.

I'm not saying public schools can't be biased.  Everything has bias.  Public schools usually just represent the bias of the community they are in with a slight shift accounting for all of the right-leaning teachers who don't believe in government-run education.    You can still expect a public school in Topeka Kansas to have a far right bias.  In fact, I met the high school Biology teacher of the children of Phelps family. She talked about how teaching science there was huge struggle but she wanted to do it.  They won't be able to fire her as easily for trying to teach evolution as a private school would.

 For the last six years, I've been to NAIS, POCC, and NSTA national conferences, visited 182 private schools, and spoken with thousands of teachers and administrators.  I know what their schools are about because we discussed the successes/barriers/struggles their schools are having with implementing many of the topics I've discussed here with you and know you consider extreme.

-increasing counseling
-providing breakfast and lunch to all students
-incorporating non judeo-christian holidays and teachings
-converting to non gendered bathrooms
-gender studies
-more diverse representation in faculty and administration
-more diverse student bodies
-what if i say the wrong thing
-emotional well-being
-giving students freedom to organize (womens, gun control, and climate change walkouts)
-how to avoid being targeted by right-wing media


workshops I gave:
-how to teach sex in biology (xy isn't always male)
-sustainability in school buildings (reduce carbon and ecological footprint)
-teaching climate change within every topic instead of as a standalone

[TECSHARE]

Every private school eh? You are a teacher and no one ever told you all inclusive statements are generally wrong? Furthermore you have no evidence of this, this is just a list of assumptions on your part. You seem to be under the impression that state run or public schools are without bias. Generally I find those who claim to be the most unbiased usually are desperately attempting to hide it. The state and public schools most certainly do have bias, you just think that is A-OK because they align with your own. That is not the same as being unbiased, which frankly is not possible. Some how your bias is more appropriate that the bias of others in your mind. Some one like me would make you look incompetent in your own classroom by knowing more about the subject matter than you as a teacher. I have done it before. You have no business "educating" anyone, except for maybe being a living example of the failures of Marxism.

Of course you would frame the ability to have open debate as something to be punished, but that is how public and state schools operate isn't it? Punishing those who disagree with the state narrative is something to be proud of in your eyes. Public schools reduce extremism? I guess that's why there is so much violence at them right? I am sure you think it is the fault of guns, and not the fact that it is designed to be a human meat grinder beating out any sense of individuality, critical thought, or free thinking from young minds. The fact that you are in a position to indoctrinate others is terrifying.

In chemistry, we have "rules" and teach young students the rules only to reveal that most of these rules have exceptions later.  Generalizations are valuable when you aren' talking to someone who's main intent is to twist your words into something out of context and derail the disucssion.  Did you really believe I was claiming every single private school?   I was lucky enough to have someone tell me about hyperbole.

Yes I have evidence and spoke of mission statements already.  I've been through the catholic school system and spent a few years coaching and teaching in it.  Religious schools, teach their religious values. period. Thats the whole point of their existence.  Its in every mission statement.  Everything is through that lens.

I'm not saying public schools can't be biased.  Everything has bias.  Public schools usually just represent the bias of the community they are in with a slight shift accounting for all of the right-leaning teachers who don't believe in government-run education.    You can still expect a public school in Topeka Kansas to have a far right bias.  In fact, I met the high school Biology teacher of the children of Phelps family. She talked about how teaching science there was huge struggle but she wanted to do it.  They won't be able to fire her as easily for trying to teach evolution as a private school would.

 For the last six years, I've been to NAIS, POCC, and NSTA national conferences, visited 182 private schools, and spoken with thousands of teachers and administrators.  I know what their schools are about because we discussed the successes/barriers/struggles their schools are having with implementing many of the topics I've discussed here with you and know you consider extreme.

-increasing counseling
-providing breakfast and lunch to all students
-incorporating non judeo-christian holidays and teachings
-converting to non gendered bathrooms
-gender studies
-more diverse representation in faculty and administration
-more diverse student bodies
-what if i say the wrong thing
-emotional well-being
-giving students freedom to organize (womens, gun control, and climate change walkouts)
-how to avoid being targeted by right-wing media


workshops I gave:
-how to teach sex in biology (xy isn't always male)
-sustainability in school buildings (reduce carbon and ecological footprint)
-teaching climate change within every topic instead of as a standalone

More moving goal posts. Now you are moving from what I said, home schooling, to private schools, and now Catholic schools. As usual you argue the points you wish were being discussed, not the ones actually being discussed. Even if the topic was Catholic schools, your personal experience is what is known as "anecdotal information" and is not statistically relevant. You can teach a workshop on underwater lesbian basket weaving, it doesn't make it truthful or useful. You claim state schools are the pinnacle of science and are less bias, but here you are demonstrating you clearly work your own political ideologies and dogmas into your "teaching", things which have nothing whatsoever to do with science, and consist of Marxism masquerading as science.

More actual on topic subject matter: https://www.bitchute.com/video/hDpZPwkDvJVs/

[coins4commies]

Catholic schools are all private and are examples of non state schools.  NAIS is the national association of independent schools.  Conference topics anecdotes as they represent high demand topics from a large sample size of independent schools coming together at a national level.  In the absence of statsitical data, anecdotal evidence can be useful.  Just because anecdotal evidence isn't as strong as statistical evidence, doesn't mean it must always be completely discredited.

You claim state schools are the pinnacle of science and are less bias, but here you are demonstrating you clearly work your own political ideologies and dogmas into your "teaching", things which have nothing whatsoever to do with science, and consist of Marxism masquerading as science.

Thats kind of the point.  I wasn't able to do as much of that at a state school as I am at a private school that has institutional support for my "dogmas".  

The point was that state schools provide much more balance while private schools and homeschools provide a specialized, and often extreme bias that caters to the mission/affiliation of the school.   My school was founded to promote social justice while Catholic schools have a mission to teach in accordance with the catechism.  People generally instill their own values in home-schooling.  Those are all inherently biased sources of education.  

[TECSHARE]

Catholic schools are all private and are examples of non state schools.  NAIS is the national association of independent schools.  Conference topics anecdotes as they represent high demand topics from a large sample size of independent schools coming together at a national level.  In the absence of statsitical data, anecdotal evidence can be useful.  Just because anecdotal evidence isn't as strong as statistical evidence, doesn't mean it must always be completely discredited.

You claim state schools are the pinnacle of science and are less bias, but here you are demonstrating you clearly work your own political ideologies and dogmas into your "teaching", things which have nothing whatsoever to do with science, and consist of Marxism masquerading as science.

Thats kind of the point.  I wasn't able to do as much of that at a state school as I am at a private school that has institutional support for my "dogmas".  

The point was that state schools provide much more balance while private schools and homeschools provide a specialized, and often extreme bias that caters to the mission/affiliation of the school.   My school was founded to promote social justice while Catholic schools have a mission to teach in accordance with the catechism.  People generally instill their own values in home-schooling.  Those are all inherently biased sources of education.  

And apples and pears are kinds of fruits. What the fuck is your point? I said home schooling and you bring up other forms of schooling then attack that claiming they are the same thing. You are a walking inherently biased "source of education".


"Texas Court Orders Father to Raise His Son As A Transsexual"
www.informationliberation.com/?id=60480

[TECSHARE]

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-08-01/berkeley-couple-support-their-children-aged-4-8-transition

[Oxstone]

You know, thanks a lot TECSHARE.

Before knowing you, I was only pro free speech and against censorship. I mainly discussed with intelligent people, and even if they were from various political views I saw no reason to censor anyone.

BUT now I understand the point.
Some people are not able to discuss, they are only talking to hear themselves and will continue to yell and yell there nonsense, pushing arbitrary points and deciding that such subject is out topic or such thing isn't in the definition, refuse facts based on their own criterias etc...

And such people kill discussion.
People like you are trully killing debates, because there is absolutely ZERO point in talking with you.

Have you ever admitted to be wrong on anything even once in your life?

There is a reason you've been nominated as the fourth troll of the forum.

If EVERYONE is telling you you're an asshole, maybe it is because you are one
Might want to thing about it you know.

[TECSHARE]

You know, thanks a lot TECSHARE.

Before knowing you, I was only pro free speech and against censorship. I mainly discussed with intelligent people, and even if they were from various political views I saw no reason to censor anyone.

BUT now I understand the point.
Some people are not able to discuss, they are only talking to hear themselves and will continue to yell and yell there nonsense, pushing arbitrary points and deciding that such subject is out topic or such thing isn't in the definition, refuse facts based on their own criterias etc...

And such people kill discussion.
People like you are trully killing debates, because there is absolutely ZERO point in talking with you.

Have you ever admitted to be wrong on anything even once in your life?

There is a reason you've been nominated as the fourth troll of the forum.

If EVERYONE is telling you you're an asshole, maybe it is because you are one
Might want to thing about it you know.

Hey mOgliE. Could you be any more obvious of a sock puppet? Don't have the nuts to post under your main account eh? Did you think I was gonna be like "OH NOES EVERYONE HATES ME! I BETTER GO HOME!"? Have fun with your transformation into a totalitarian because you can't back up your beliefs with a logical argument.

[TECSHARE]

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/mom-sues-county-for-giving-her-minor-son-sex-change-without-her-consent

[mOgliE]

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/mom-sues-county-for-giving-her-minor-son-sex-change-without-her-consent

The "child" was 17 years old and was granted the emancipated status. I get that the mother didn't like that but that's the case of most parents whose child are granted emancipation status.

If someone is granted emancipation it means he's free to do whatever he wants without referring to his parents no? Unless emancipation is a different legal status in US of course, I don't know anything about this status in other country!

[TECSHARE]

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/mom-sues-county-for-giving-her-minor-son-sex-change-without-her-consent

The "child" was 17 years old and was granted the emancipated status. I get that the mother didn't like that but that's the case of most parents whose child are granted emancipation status.

If someone is granted emancipation it means he's free to do whatever he wants without referring to his parents no? Unless emancipation is a different legal status in US of course, I don't know anything about this status in other country!

No. Learn to read. The required due process through the court was not completed. The school just unilaterally declared it so.

[mOgliE]

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/mom-sues-county-for-giving-her-minor-son-sex-change-without-her-consent

The "child" was 17 years old and was granted the emancipated status. I get that the mother didn't like that but that's the case of most parents whose child are granted emancipation status.

If someone is granted emancipation it means he's free to do whatever he wants without referring to his parents no? Unless emancipation is a different legal status in US of course, I don't know anything about this status in other country!

No. Learn to read. The required due process through the court was not completed. The school just unilaterally declared it so.

Of course even when someone is politely asking you something stating they don't know much about the official process you have to be a dickhead don't you?

"“Unbelievably, Minnesota statutes authorize a county to deem a minor ‘emancipated’ to receive welfare payments to live on their own and allow medical providers to void parental input if it determines the minor is living apart from the parents and is managing personal financial affairs,” said Kaardal."

Doesn't it mean that they had the right to do so? That's how I understand the sentence.

[TECSHARE]

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/mom-sues-county-for-giving-her-minor-son-sex-change-without-her-consent

The "child" was 17 years old and was granted the emancipated status. I get that the mother didn't like that but that's the case of most parents whose child are granted emancipation status.

If someone is granted emancipation it means he's free to do whatever he wants without referring to his parents no? Unless emancipation is a different legal status in US of course, I don't know anything about this status in other country!

No. Learn to read. The required due process through the court was not completed. The school just unilaterally declared it so.

Of course even when someone is politely asking you something stating they don't know much about the official process you have to be a dickhead don't you?

"“Unbelievably, Minnesota statutes authorize a county to deem a minor ‘emancipated’ to receive welfare payments to live on their own and allow medical providers to void parental input if it determines the minor is living apart from the parents and is managing personal financial affairs,” said Kaardal."

Doesn't it mean that they had the right to do so? That's how I understand the sentence.

You didn't just ask a question. You made a statement as if it were fact. This is a statement you would not have made if you even bothered reading the article, which you didn't. If you don't like me being "a dick", maybe don't be so fucking lazy and self assured. Emancipation requires a court process, it can not just be unilaterally declared.

[mOgliE]

You didn't just ask a question. You made a statement as if it were fact. This is a statement you would not have made if you even bothered reading the article, which you didn't. If you don't like me being "a dick", maybe don't be so fucking lazy and self assured. Emancipation requires a court process, it can not just be unilaterally declared.

I'm fucking quoting your own article right in my post xD
If you don't want to answer just don't you know

[TECSHARE]

You didn't just ask a question. You made a statement as if it were fact. This is a statement you would not have made if you even bothered reading the article, which you didn't. If you don't like me being "a dick", maybe don't be so fucking lazy and self assured. Emancipation requires a court process, it can not just be unilaterally declared.

I'm fucking quoting your own article right in my post xD
If you don't want to answer just don't you know

Too bad you aren't intelligent enough to quote correctly. Also reading the article first helps, I still doubt you have, because if you did you would see your point contradicted several times. Also, the statement you made that I was referring to was referring to your original post, which was not a quote. You can't even manage to figure out how to read these short forum posts let alone an article.

[mOgliE]

I'm fucking quoting your own article right in my post xD
If you don't want to answer just don't you know

Too bad you aren't intelligent enough to quote correctly. Also reading the article first helps, I still doubt you have, because if you did you would see your point contradicted several times. Also, the statement you made that I was referring to was referring to your original post, which was not a quote. You can't even manage to figure out how to read these short forum posts let alone an article.

ahahahah xD
It's insane, you took so much energy explaining me how dumb/lazy/stupid I am and still haven't explained how the child can be considered emancipated and not emancipated at the same time. I guess it's a difference between authorithy level but I won't know as you just want to insult inferior beings like myself rather than explain your shit.

Sorry I bothered you xD

[TECSHARE]

I'm fucking quoting your own article right in my post xD
If you don't want to answer just don't you know

Too bad you aren't intelligent enough to quote correctly. Also reading the article first helps, I still doubt you have, because if you did you would see your point contradicted several times. Also, the statement you made that I was referring to was referring to your original post, which was not a quote. You can't even manage to figure out how to read these short forum posts let alone an article.

ahahahah xD
It's insane, you took so much energy explaining me how dumb/lazy/stupid I am and still haven't explained how the child can be considered emancipated and not emancipated at the same time. I guess it's a difference between authorithy level but I won't know as you just want to insult inferior beings like myself rather than explain your shit.

Sorry I bothered you xD

Actually that is the very first thing I did was make clear they did not do due process. Again, this is why I have zero respect for you as you accuse me of exactly what you do.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/mom-sues-county-for-giving-her-minor-son-sex-change-without-her-consent

The "child" was 17 years old and was granted the emancipated status. I get that the mother didn't like that but that's the case of most parents whose child are granted emancipation status.

If someone is granted emancipation it means he's free to do whatever he wants without referring to his parents no? Unless emancipation is a different legal status in US of course, I don't know anything about this status in other country!

No. Learn to read. The required due process through the court was not completed. The school just unilaterally declared it so.

[TECSHARE]

"Johns Hopkins professor on child transgender trend: ‘Many will regret this’"

https://www.thecollegefix.com/johns-hopkins-professor-on-child-transgender-trend-many-will-regret-this/