Responsibility? It Should Be A Parent

Several years ago, Barrack Obama was asked at a press conference for his reaction to Lady Gaga’s suggestion he amend US foreign policy for aspects the Diva thought misguided. Obama replied he very much appreciated Gaga’s interest but didn’t intend any changes until he had spoken to Britney Spears.

Important decisions require maturity and experience. This is never more so than when dealing with life altering choices, where there are no mulligans, and consequences may be permanent. To assist prudent judgement in modern societies there is a guardrail, the “age of majority”, a principle that's been around since at least Roman times when the age of majority was 30. The concept is based on the understanding age and life experience are integral to good decision making. Although there is some variability depending on the issue, the rights of anyone under the age of 18 are restricted. Acknowledged and accepted limitations include consuming alcohol, voting, or entering into a legally binding contract.

Appropriately, the age of majority doesn't just suspend rights and decision making; it also suspends full accountability. For example, the administration of justice, including disclosure of identity, is different if the individual is under the age of 18. Recognition of special treatment for individuals under the age of majority is also embedded in the United Nations Convention on The Rights of the Child.

Why these principles should be abandoned for important decisions involving human sexuality has been the subject of much discussion recently. Unfortunately, the value of the debate is limited as arguments are frequently highjacked by single issue trolls prone to sweeping generalizations and hyperbolic language. In the result, the reaction to Premier Danielle Smiths proposals on gender identity ranges from self-serving to asinine.

A child’s confusion about which pronouns properly define them is not a trifling matter; it is a symptom of a confused condition requiring investigation. ?Other children, and adults who never reached full maturity, may respond to gender identification in damaging ways the child does not anticipate. Lacking the emotional maturity to manage the consequences, a superficially innocent decision on choice of pronoun can provoke additional distress compounding adolescent angst. Premier Smith’s policies recognize this and require parents be informed if the child requests such recognition at school. Knowledge assists parental enquiry and the provision of support.

The wisdom of placing limitations on drug therapies or surgical procedures is self-evident to the objectively minded. There can be honest disagreement about the biological impact of puberty blockers and hormone treatments but it’s clear something happens to the body when these substances are ingested. Thus, it is prudent to ensure individuals are sufficiently mature to understand the consequences before the treatment is available.

In contrast, there can be no ambivalence regarding the impact of surgical procedures wherein the body is physically modified. Appropriately, Premier Smith wishes to codify in Alberta, the standards broadly accepted elsewhere.

Providing sex education would require parental notification and the parents “opting in”. Opposition to this has been focused on the possibility children may not receive adequate instruction on a very important subject. The concern may be warranted but notification and opting in permits a parent to monitor the information provided and most importantly how it's interpreted by their child. This in turn would encourage dialogue, especially helpful at a point in an adolescent child’s life when staying connected can be challenging.

Support for transgender participation in sports is based on the notion someone identifying as a member of the opposite sex is biologically amended by the decision to self-identify. In a case where there has been medical intervention to render an individual closer to the sex in which they seek inclusion, there is an argument to be made. However, there is such variability in biological impact and in the alternatives selected to achieve it, sensible limits should be established.

Since it’s possible transgender participation in sport is mostly about opportunists pursuing an easier path to victory perhaps a new category, “A League of Their Own” would provide the opportunity to participate in a chosen competition while acknowledging legitimate concerns about fairness.

The issues under discussion come down to who should be the first responder. Clearly not those who have an agenda corrupted by self interest…professional agitators and opposition politicians for example who care far more about scoring points than about other people’s children.

Not the plethora of LBGTQ crusaders claiming suppression of their rights and the rights of people they claim to represent, organizations which spend 24/7 searching for the faintest whiff of prejudice. Outrage is their stock-in-trade, the entirety of the job.

Ignore the press. They have abandoned reportage, substituted opinion for news and determined their primary responsibility is to piss you off and keep you that way.

Teachers may have much to offer but their training does not incorporate the expertise needed nor do they have sufficient band width to manage multiple cases in complex family environments. Most importantly, their truncated emotional investment and limited legal responsibility is not an alternative to parenting.

That leaves parents.

In a rare theatrical roll in which Keanu Reeves spoke more than two words in a sentence, he played Todd Higgins in the movie “Parenthood” wherein he observed, “you have to have a license to drive a car but any asshole can have a kid”.

Entirely correct but the majority of parents aren’t assholes. They are hardworking, loving, responsible and well-intentioned adults with their children’s best interest as the top priority. An imperfect solution? Absolutely, but it’s the best of what’s available.