From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

"James Shupe (Formerly Jamie Shupe)"
1/26/2020 7:03:04 AM
"patrick Lappert" <patrick@lappertplasticsurgery.com>, "QUENTIN VAN METER" <kidendo@comcast.net>, "mike@drlaidlaw.com"
<mike@drlaidlaw.com>, "Fred Deutsch" <Fred.Deutsch@sdlegislature.gov>
"Natasha Chart" <natasha.chart@gmail.com>, "Vernadette Broyles" <vbroyles@childparentrights.org>, "Mary McAlister"
<mmcalister@childparentrights.org>, "Michelle Cretella" <drmcretella@gmail.com>, "Katherine Cave"
<kelseycoalition@gmail.com>, "David Pickup" <davidpickuplmft@gmail.com>, "Eunie Smith" <alaeagle@charter.net>, "Gary
McCaleb" <mccgsm@gmail.com>, "Glenn Ridder" <glenn.ridder@outlook.com>, "Horvath Hacsi" <birdcatcher9@yahoo.com>,
"Hudson, MD Bernard" <loyolamd82@gmail.com>, "Jane Robbins" <rlrobb123@gmail.com>, "MD Paul Hruz PhD"
<hruz_p007@att.net>, "Margaret Clarke" <margaretclarke317@icloud.com>, "Matt Sharp" <msharp@adflegal.org>, "McHugh
Paul" <pmchugh1@jhmi.edu>, "Monique Robles MD" <pamosa27@comcast.net>, "Richard Mast" <RMast@lc.org>, "Roger Brooks"
<rbrooks@adflegal.org>, "Scott, Greg" <Greg.Scott@heritage.org>, "Timothy Millea MD" <TMillea@qcora.com>, "Walt Heyer"
<waltsbook@yahoo.com>, "William Malone" <malone.will@gmail.com>, "Jeff Shafer" <jshafer@adflegal.org>, "Chris Motz"
<cmotz@sdcatholicconference.org>, "Jon Hansen" <jon.hansen@sdlegislature.gov>, "Andre Van Mol" <95andrev@gmail.com>,
"Kara Dansky" <kara11@me.com>


Bcc:

Subject: Re: Opposition strategy outlined in article. Have suggestion

The problem with going down the circumcision path is other entities will bring up FGM, aka female genital
mutilation, as a rightful part of their faith or beliefs.
James

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 9:48 AM, patrick Lappert
<patrick@lappertplasticsurgery.com> wrote:
Circumcision, having many historic dimensions, has also many justifications. The Mosaic covenant ceremony being
the first, it has also been proposed in the past as a way of reducing cervical cancer. For most, it is cosmetic (
I want my boy to look like the other boys). There is no strictly valid medical indication apart from phimosis/
stricture.
Regardless of the "indication" for circumcision, the key element to be remembered is that in all cases it is
intended to serve the "gender" of the boy; that is it is in the service of the masculine sex, and meant to usher
them into the right function of man as father and husband in their particular culture. IT IS NOT A PROCEDURE THAT,
BY ITS NATURE, DESTROYS THE REPRODUCTIVE FACULTY.
Patrick
On January 26, 2020 at 9:07 AM QUENTIN VAN METER <kidendo@comcast.net> wrote:
Just to play devil's advocate, how can we justify male circumcision when the medical benefits of such are equivocal? Obviously, there is a GIANT difference in the outcome

of removing entire organs as opposed to just a bit of foreskin. I am thinking out loud about what the opposition might say in rebuttal.
Quentin

On January 26, 2020 at 12:56 AM Michael Laidlaw <mike@drlaidlaw.com> wrote:
The following is along the lines of what Kara, Natasha, and Michelle have been saying. In fact
Michelle and I and others once had a conversation about Olson-Kennedy’s teen mastectomy study. We
concluded that it is not a scientific study at all, but a document filled with details of crimes by
doctors against girls and young women.
Here is my version rebutting the argument that this bill will cause an interference in the patientphysician relationship:
Doctors who willfully harm patients are criminals. If a doctor drugs a patient unconscious and
surgically removes her 14 year old, healthy breasts, this is a criminal act. The 14 year old cannot
freely give consent to this procedure as she does not have the capacity to know what her self at age
25 or 30 years old would want. She can never have functional breasts replaced. Women who thought
they were trans have regretted this happened to them. One such woman uses donor milk because she is
physically incapable of producing milk after her mastectomy.
Likewise an 11 or 12 year old cannot make an informed consent decision to stop normal puberty.
Puberty blockers lead in the majority of cases to sterilization and sexual dysfunction. A boy or a
girl of that age cannot possibly know or understand if their future self at age 25 or 30 would want
a child and functional sexual relationships. They are not developmentally able to make such a
decision.
The physician who blocks normal puberty and places the child on a pathway to sterility - which is
what happens in the majority of cases - is a criminal.
The cases described here do not constitute healthy physician-patient relationships. Indeed these are
not physician-patient relationships at all, they are criminal-victim relationships. The physician
who does mastectomies of 14 year old breasts or provides 11 years old puberty blockers has willfully
caused harm to a child - notwithstanding the desires or knowledge of the parents or child! The child
is simply not able to consent to the harms that will result. Just as a girl could not possibly
provide consent to female genital mutilation in another context. No matter if the parents and
doctors all sign forms in agreement.
The physician is ultimately responsible for the harms as he or she is the only one who can sign the
prescriptions and use the scalpels and surgical tools in the operating room. The physician is
criminal in these scenarios and must be prosecuted by the law.
A just society cannot allow children - who by nature do not have the cognitive and developmental
capacity to comprehend the damage to their bodies and reproductive capabilities - to undergo these
harmful procedures.
-Mike
On 2020-01-25 10:05, QUENTIN VAN METER wrote:

Short, sweet and top notch.
Quentin

On January 24, 2020 at 8:08 PM Michael Laidlaw <mike@drlaidlaw.com> wrote:
All,
I've recorded my SD testimony and put it up on YouTube. Please share:
https://youtu.be/jBIDOSTgRTc
-Mike
On 2020-01-21 11:19, Natasha Chart wrote:
Exactly.
And even in the case of something like cancer, any sterilization is a side
effect, rather than a goal, of a treatment for other purposes. There's no
directive that children with cancer must be sterilized, and if doctors could
prevent that outcome, surely they would. For no other type of child is that
considered a humane end goal of treatment.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 1:46 PM Vernadette Broyles <
vbroyles@childparentrights.org> wrote:
Barring an actual physical disease state for which such interventions
offer a cure. Puberty and a child's biological sex are not a disease.
They are part of normal human development and human functioning to be
protected in a developing minor.
Vernadette
Vernadette R. Broyles, Esq.
President and General Counsel

5805 State Bridge Rd., Suite G310
Johns Creek, GA 30097
770.448.4525
vbroyles@childparentrights.org
www.childparentrights.org

On Jan 21, 2020, at 1:38 PM, Natasha Chart <
natasha.chart@gmail.com> wrote:
Kara will be joining us to testify, and I bet that she would be
willing to join a statement saying that there's no definable
class of person who needs to be sterilized as children.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 12:57 PM Vernadette Broyles <
vbroyles@childparentrights.org> wrote:
Fred and all,
CPR-C can prepare a rebuttal this week to the ACLU that
Mary (UCAL Berkely), Jane Robbins (Harvard Law), and I
(Harvard Law, Guardian ad Litem for children) can sign
and send. I can ask Kara Dansky (former ACLU lawyer) of
Womens Liberation Front if she'd be willing to sign from
the left. Mary's email re: involuntary sterilization
would be key part of the response. We also need to
stress the point the the ACLU is entirely missing the
point of this bill — it nothing to do with
discriminating against any class of children, but rather
everything to do with protecting a vulnerable group of
children, and all children (given the social
contagion). While there may be a constitutional right
to refuse to carry a child to term (under Roe), there is
no constitutional right to chemically and surgically
mutiliating one's healthy body, where there is no
disease to be treated — that is child abuse.
When would you need this?
Vernadette
Vernadette R. Broyles, Esq.
President and General Counsel

5805 State Bridge Rd., Suite G310
Johns Creek, GA 30097
770.448.4525
vbroyles@childparentrights.org
www.childparentrights.org

On Jan 16, 2020, at 11:42 AM, Michael Laidlaw <
mike@drlaidlaw.com> wrote:
Very well stated Mary.
On a different note, I have this new thread dispelling the "wrong puberty"
argument.
https://twitter.com/MLaidlawMD/status/1217698028858986497
-Mike

On 2020-01-16 07:08, Mary McAlister wrote:
Yes, and also point out that these procedures amount to involuntary
sterilization of minors. They cannot legally or psychologically
consent. Their parents cannot give informed consent since the
knowledge necessary for informed consent does not exist. The
Supreme Court struck down laws providing for sterilization of serial
criminals in Skinner v. Oklahoma and mentally incompetent adults
cannot be sterilized even if their guardians consent without a court
order. Are the ACLU and similar groups advocating for involuntary
sterilization of children? Also their equal protection arguments are
without merit. " Transchildren" are not being treated differently from
other children. In fact the opposite is true. This bill will ensure that
"transchildren" have the same protections from dangerous medical
experiments as do other children.
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020, 8:55 AM Natasha Chart <
natasha.chart@gmail.com> wrote:
Agreed.
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 8:33 AM <
drmcretella@gmail.com> wrote:
Let's Memorize Katherine's response and
repeat it ad nauseam regardless the question
or accusation. That is the bottom line here.
We must be bull dogs on this fact and
principle.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 16, 2020, at 7:59 AM,
Kelsey Coalition <
kelseycoalition@gmail.com>
wrote:
No doctor or parent has a right
to subject a child to a lifealtering medical experiment with
unknown long-term
consequences. Without this ban
in place, SD will follow what is
already happening in other
states: minors who successfully
sue in court to obtain this
supposedly "life-saving" medical

intervention. And when they
grow up with irreversible regret,
who will be liable? The state.
This ban is also important to
prevent custody battles. We
have several parents who have
reached out to the KC because
of a former spouse who is intent
on medicalizing their child.
Finding an attorney to help is
nearly as difficult as finding a
therapist. And even when they
do, who knows how a judge will
rule? Banning these procedures
will take these serious medical
decisions away from misinformed
judges.
The claim that this is lifesaving
medically necessary intervention
is the big unchallenged domino
that is driving both the legal and
medical scandal. This is an oftrepeated claim with no support
and it must be confronted
directly.

On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 6:47
PM Natasha Chart <
natasha.chart@gmail.com>
wrote:
The ACLU have done
as much as anyone
could to make sure
it's impossible to
define a class of
persons under these
laws.
On Wed, Jan 15,
2020, 5:22 PM <
drmcretella@gmail.co
m> wrote:
Mike,
Look at
the
medical
claim in
that
"legal"
ACLU
quote; it
is false
on
multiple
grounds

"no such
thing as
a
medically
diagnosa
ble group
of trans
anybody;
we are
talking
about
minors!
blockers,
wrong
sex
hormones
and
surgical
mutilatio
n are
never
medically
necessar
y in
minors!"
Sent
from my
iPhone
O
n
J
a
n
1
5
,
2
0
2
0
,
a
t
5
:
0
0
P
M
,
D
a
v
i
d
P
i
c
k

u
p
<
d
a
v
i
d
p
i
c
k
u
p
l
m
f
t
@
g
m
a
i
l
.
c
o
m
>
w
r
o
t
e
:
T
r
a
n
s
l
a
t
i
o
n
.
.
.
"
I
t
'
s
o
k
t
o
h
a
r

m
b
o
y
s
b
y
r
e
m
o
v
i
n
g
b
o
d
y
p
a
r
t
s
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
a
t
l
e
a
s
t
w
e
'
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
r
v
i
n
g
a
c
l
a
s
s
o
f
p

e
o
p
l
e
.
"
T
h
i
s
i
s
t
h
e
h
e
i
g
h
t
o
f
p
o
l
i
t
i
c
a
l
c
o
r
r
e
c
t
n
e
s
s
.
David Pickup, LMFT-S

I

(888) 288-2071
15851 Dallas Parkway, Suite 600
Addison, TX 75001
www.davidpickuplmft.com

I
M
P
O
R
T
A
N
T

N
O
T
I
C
E
:
T
h
i
s
e
m
a
i
l
i
s
m
e
a
n
t
o
n
l
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
u
s
e
o
f
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
.
I
t
m
a
y
c
o
n
t

a
i
n
c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
w
h
i
c
h
i
s
l
e
g
a
l
l
y
p
r
i
v
i
l
e
g
e
d
o
r
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
p
r
o
t
e
c
t
e

d
b
y
l
a
w
.
I
f
y
o
u
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
d
t
h
i
s
e
m
a
i
l
i
n
e
r
r
o
r
o
r
f
r
o
m
s
o
m
e
o
n
e
w
h
o
w
a
s
n
o
t
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d

t
o
s
e
n
d
i
t
t
o
y
o
u
,
y
o
u
a
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
l
y
p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
f
r
o
m
r
e
v
i
e
w
i
n
g
,
u
s
i
n
g
,
d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i

n
g
,
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
n
g
o
r
c
o
p
y
i
n
g
t
h
e
e
m
a
i
l
.
P
L
E
A
S
E
N
O
T
I
F
Y
M
E
I
M
M
E
D
I
A
T
E
L
Y
O
F
T
H
E
E
R
R
O

R
B
Y
R
E
T
U
R
N
E
M
A
I
L
A
N
D
D
E
L
E
T
E
T
H
I
S
M
E
S
S
A
G
E
F
R
O
M
Y
O
U
R
S
Y
S
T
E
M
.

O
n
J
a
n
1
5
,
2
0
2
0
,
a

t
3
:
5
6
P
M
,
M
i
c
h
a
e
l
L
a
i
d
l
a
w
<
m
i
k
e
@
d
r
l
a
i
d
l
a
w
.
c
o
m
>
w
r
o
t
e
:
"
T
h
e
A
C
L
U
o
f
S
D

s
a
i
d
i
n
a
s
t
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
t
h
a
t
i
t
'
s
u
n
c
o
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
a
l
t
o
s
i
n
g
l
e
o
u
t
o
n
e
g
r
o
u
p
o
f
p

e
o
p
l
e
a
n
d
c
a
t
e
g
o
r
i
c
a
l
l
y
b
a
n
a
l
l
c
a
r
e
,
n
o
m
a
t
t
e
r
h
o
w
m
e
d
i
c
a
l
l
y
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
"

.
L
e
g
a
l
e
x
p
e
r
t
s
h
a
v
e
a
n
o
p
i
n
i
o
n
o
n
t
h
a
t
s
t
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
?
M
i
k
e
O
n
2
0
2
0
0
1
1
5

1
1
:
5
9
,
F
r
e
d
D
e
u
t
s
c
h
w
r
o
t
e
:
U
p
d
a
t
e
d
a
n
d
e
x
p
a
n
d
e
d
a
r
t
i
c
l
e
f
r
o
m
o
u
r
s
t
a
t
e
'

s
l
a
r
g
e
s
t
p
a
p
e
r
.
M
a
n
y
o
f
t
h
e
l
i
n
e
s
o
f
t
h
o
u
g
h
t
t
h
e
o
p
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
s
w
i
l
l
u
s
e
i
s
o
u

t
l
i
n
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
a
r
t
i
c
l
e
.
L
e
t
m
e
k
n
o
w
a
n
y
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
y
o
u
m
a
y
h
a
v
e
t
o
c
o
u
n

t
e
r
.
F
r
e
d

h
t
t
p
s
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
a
r
g
u
s
l
e
a
d
e
r
.
c
o
m
/
s
t
o
r
y
/
n
e
w
s
/
p
o
l
i
t
i
c
s
/
2
0

2
0
/
0
1
/
1
5
/
s
o
u
t
h
d
a
k
o
t
a
l
e
g
i
s
l
a
t
u
r
e
b
i
l
l
w
o
u
l
d
p
u
n
i
s
h
d
o
c
t
o
r
s
w
h

o
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
s
e
x
r
e
a
s
s
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
s
u
r
g
e
r
i
e
s
l
g
b
t
/
4
4
7
6
3
4
2
0
0
2
/

--

Follow us on Twitter

YouTube
Facebook

<blocked.gif>
www.KelseyCoalition.org

<PastedGraphic-14.png> <PastedGraphic-14.png>

Patrick W. Lappert, MD
8263 Madison Blvd.
Suite E
Madison, AL 35758