From:
Pamosa27

Sent:
1/21/2020 5:55:13 PM

To:
"jamie.shupe@yahoo.com" <jamie.shupe@yahoo.com>

Cc:

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

Hi James, I used this same article as a reference in a paper I recently submitted...hopefully, it’s worthy of
publishing.
Monique
On Jan 21, 2020, at 2:47 PM, James Shupe (Formerly Jamie Shupe) <jamie.shupe@yahoo.com> wrote:

​Similarly, Kaiser has no problem dissing Lupron for precocious puberty but endorses it for gender dysphoria.
Women Fear Drug They Used To Halt Puberty Led To Health Problems

Women Fear Drug They Used To Halt
Puberty Led To Health Problems
Despite questions about Lupron’s lasting side effects and minimal
study into its safety, the FDA sped approval of the drug to market.
Years later, some young women are still living with the consequ…

James

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 4:41 PM, Natasha Chart
<natasha.chart@gmail.com> wrote:
Do you have a link for that, please?

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 4:32 PM QUENTIN VAN METER <kidendo@comcast.net> wrote:
Dr.Leena Nahata, a trans-affirmation advocate endocrinologist in Ohio, decried the use of puberty blockers in hyper-libidinous teenage boys with severe autism because it
was unethical to treat someone who could not consent to it legally while, at the same time, she is pushing for puberty blockers in trans kids in the early stages of puberty.
Can't make up this stuff!
Quentin

On January 21, 2020 at 2:23 PM "James Shupe (Formerly Jamie Shupe)" <jamie.shupe@yahoo.com> wrote:
In case it's not on the radar, the same folks arguing for chemical castration in children for the
purpose of gender confirmation are usually against the same thing being used on sex offenders. The
treatments are one and the same.
James
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:19 PM, Natasha Chart
<natasha.chart@gmail.com> 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 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.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.com> wrote:
Mike,
Look at the medical claim in
that "legal" ACLU quote; it is
false on multiple grounds
"no such thing as a
medically diagnosable group
of trans anybody; we are
talking about minors!
blockers, wrong sex
hormones and surgical
mutilation are never
medically necessary in
minors!"
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 15,
2020, at 5:00
PM, David Pickup
<
davidpickuplmft
@gmail.com>
wrote:
Translation..."It'
s ok to harm
boys by
removing body
parts because
at least we're
preserving a
class of people."
This is the
height of
political
correctness.

I

David Pickup, LMFT-S

(888) 288-2071
15851 Dallas Parkway, Suite 600

Addison, TX 75001
www.davidpickuplmft.com

IMPORTANT NOTICE:
This e-ma il
is mea nt only for
the us e of the
intended recipient.
It ma y conta in
confidentia l inform
a tion which is
lega lly privileged
or otherwis e
protected by la w. If
you received this ema il in error or
from s omeone who
wa s not a uthorized
to s end it to you,
you a re s trictly
prohibited
from reviewing,
us ing,
dis s emina ting, dis tr
ibuting or copying
the e-ma il. PLEASE
NOTIFY ME
IMMEDIATELY OF THE
ERROR BY RETURN EMAIL AND DELETE
THIS MESSAGE
FROM YOUR SYSTEM.

On
Jan
15,
2020
, at
3:56
PM,
Mich
ael
Laidl
aw
<
mike
@drl
aidla
w.co
m>
wrot
e:
"The
ACL
U of
SD
said
in a

stat
eme
nt
that
it's
unco
nstit
utio
nal
to
singl
e
out
one
grou
p of
peop
le
and
cate
goric
ally
ban
all
care
, no
matt
er
how
medi
cally
nece
ssar
y".
Lega
l
expe
rts
have
an
opini
on
on
that
stat
eme
nt?
Mike
On
2020
-0115
11:5
9,
Fred
Deut
sch
wrot

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>