From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Kara Dansky
1/26/2020 6:54:12 AM
"patrick Lappert" <patrick@lappertplasticsurgery.com>
"QUENTIN VAN METER" <kidendo@comcast.net>, 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>, "James Shupe" <jamie.shupe@yahoo.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>

Subject: Re: Opposition strategy outlined in article. Have suggestions? - Physician-Patient relationship

Request: if this is going off into a conversation about the pros and cons of male circumcision, could someone please
take me off it? It's not that I don't care about that issue, it's just that it's a different issue than the one
immediately before us.
It would be beneficial, as a general matter, if people could update subject lines in order to track conversation
topics.
Thank you!
Kara
On January 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
patient-physician 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.co
m> wrote:
No doctor or parent has
a right to subject a child
to a life-altering 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 oft-repeated claim
with no support and it
must be confronted
directly.

On Wed, Jan 15, 2020
at 6:47 PM Natasha
Chart <
natasha.chart@gmail.co
m> 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.com
> wrote:
M
i
k
e
,
L
o
o
k
a
t
t
h
e
m
e
d
i
c
a
l
c
l
a
i
m
i
n
t
h
a
t
"
l
e
g
a
l
"
A
C
L
U
q
u
o
t
e
;

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

e
g
r
o
u
p
o
f
t
r
a
n
s
a
n
y
b
o
d
y
;
w
e
a
r
e
t
a
l
k
i
n
g
a
b
o
u
t
m
i
n
o
r
s
!
b
l
o
c
k
e
r
s
,
w
r
o
n
g
s
e
x

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

s
!
"
S
e
n
t
f
r
o
m
m
y
i
P
h
o
n
e
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