From: Andre Van Mol <95andrev@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 19, 2019 8:48 AM To: Fred Deutsch Cc: Kelsey Coalition ; Lee Schoenbeck ; Cretella Michelle ; Shupe Jamie ; Jon Uhler ; VBroyles ; Laidlaw Michael ; Jon Hansen ; William Malone ; Mary McAlister ; Mast Richard ; Heyer Walt ; Sharp Matt ; Chris Motz ; michael.biggs@sociology.ox.ac.uk; pamosa27@comcast.net Subject: Re: update Fred, The phrase “incorrect perception of their sex” grounds the bill in the material, the biological, physical reality, which makes it far easier to defend against the “who are you to say?“ people. Andre Sent from my iPhone On Aug 19, 2019, at 6:30 AM, Fred Deutsch wrote: > > > All, what do you think about KC’s suggest to add incorrect to the sentence: “...attempting to change or affirm the child’s incorrect perception of their sex.” > > > > I like the idea – I think it helps to further narrow the bill and avoids causing problems with other medical conditions. But does adding the word cause add’l problems? The other side will certainly argue “who are you to say what’s an incorrect perception?” The answer, of course, is if perception varies from reality, than it is an incorrect perception (the bill’s definition of sex is reality). That said, the process is political. Does the change cast doubt in the mind of legislators about who is to say what’s an incorrect perception? - Fred > > > > From: Kelsey Coalition > Sent: Monday, August 19, 2019 8:02 AM > To: Lee Schoenbeck > Cc: Fred Deutsch ; Andre Van Mol <95andrev@gmail.com>; Cretella Michelle ; Shupe Jamie ; Jon Uhler ; VBroyles ; Laidlaw Michael ; Jon Hansen ; William Malone ; Mary McAlister ; Mast Richard ; Heyer Walt ; Sharp Matt ; Chris Motz ; michael.biggs@sociology.ox.ac.uk; pamosa27@comcast.net > Subject: Re: update > > > > > Fred, thank you for your tireless work! I'd like to suggest clarifying this sentence by adding the word "incorrect" -- “...attempting to change or affirm the child’s incorrect perception of their sex.” Otherwise, professionals who use the proper pronouns for children who have a correct perception of their sex would be in violation. ~KC > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 9:30 PM Lee Schoenbeck wrote: > > >> >> >> Amen >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> >> >> >> On Aug 18, 2019, at 8:24 PM, Fred Deutsch wrote: >> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> That’s why I’m making road trips to visit with individual legislators, Andre. This will give them ample time to think about the bill. The trips are also good politics. Mostly you find candidates seeking election that hit the road, but it’s relatively unheard of to expend time and money to attempt to pass a single bill. It shows the legislators we’re serious, and it amplifies our credibility. And every little bit helps! - Fred >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Andre Van Mol <95andrev@gmail.com> >>> Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2019 8:14 PM >>> To: Fred Deutsch >>> Cc: Cretella Michelle ; Shupe Jamie ; Jon Uhler ; VBroyles ; Lee Schoenbeck ; Laidlaw Michael ; Jon Hansen ; William Malone ; Mary McAlister ; Mast Richard ; Heyer Walt ; Sharp Matt ; Chris Motz ; Katherine Cave ; michael.biggs@sociology.ox.ac.uk; pamosa27@comcast.net >>> Subject: Re: update >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Understood, and I know exceptionally good attorneys have gone over and over this. It is very specific to perception of sex, which is good. I also wondered about the need for such surgeries in trauma victims, but you also specified non-diseased, so that would seem ok. It’s just that if we are a bit confused and have misgivings, one wonders what the actual legislators will think. Perhaps part of the problem is we were dealing with the longer version for so long that now seeing such a condensed bill seems a touch bewildering. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Andre >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Aug 18, 2019, at 5:28 PM, Fred Deutsch wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The key to the entire bill is the language “attempting to change or affirm the child’s perception of their sex,” with sex defined as “the biological state of being female or male.” >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> We have to be able to explain the application. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> So let’s say we have a teenage girl: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 1. She perceives she is a boy. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 1. Doctors cannot perform any of the restricted surgical procedures or give restricted meds (PB & cross-sex hormones) thataffirm her perception of being a boy. >>>> 2. Doctors cannot perform any of the restricted surgical procedures or give restricted meds (PB & cross-sex hormones) thatchange her perception of being a boy. (I’m not sure this is applicable. Thoughts?) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 1. She perceives she is a girl. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 1. Doctors cannot perform any of the restricted surgical procedures or give restricted meds (PB & cross-sex hormones) thataffirm her perception of being a girl. (This scenario would mean there is congruity between body and mind. Bill is probably not applicable). >>>> 2. Doctors cannot perform any of the restricted surgical procedures or give restricted meds (PB & cross-sex hormones) thatchange her perception of being a girl. (This scenario would mean there is congruity between body and mind. Bill is probably not applicable). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Please let me know what you think - Fred >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> From: Andre Van Mol <95andrev@gmail.com> >>>> Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2019 6:41 PM >>>> To: Michelle Cretella >>>> Cc: James Shupe (Formerly Jamie Shupe) ; Jon Uhler ; VBroyles ; Lee Schoenbeck ; Michael Laidlaw ; Jon Hansen ; William Malone ; Mary McAlister ; Richard Mast ; Walt Heyer ; Matt Sharp ; Chris Motz ; Katherine Cave ; michael.biggs@sociology.ox.ac.uk; pamosa27@comcast.net; Fred Deutsch >>>> Subject: Re: update >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Perhaps the “the biological state…” quote can be repeated at that juncture where things get confusing? Bad idea? I have every faith that the other side will try to distort anything that is left hanging. Counting on common sense, Fairplay, and responsible readership from opponents will prove to be disappointing. >>>> >>>> Andre >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Aug 18, 2019, at 4:08 PM, Michelle Cretella wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> IMO, as Fred pointed out earlier, the definition of sex in the bill as " the biological state of being female or male, based on sex organs, chromosomes, and endogenous hormone profiles" - covers all bases. A boy who perceives himself as a girl and requests blockers & estrogen will be denied under this bill. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Biological sex" is redundant and may be used to imply there are other sexes like a social sex; "natal or birth sex" implies sex can change before or after birth ... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 10:29 PM James Shupe (Formerly Jamie Shupe) wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> My opinion is to cover your bases in the mentioned line as well. I think that sentence is too ambiguous and should get reworded. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It says: “attempting to change or affirm the child’s perception of their sex." So if a male child's perception of their sex is female? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I like what Andre suggested, but recommend changing natal to biological, based on court language. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Saturday, August 17, 2019, 10:19:46 PM EDT, Fred Deutsch wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Read the definition of sex in the bill: "Sex," the biological state of being female or male, based on sex organs, chromosomes, and endogenous hormone profiles. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Don’t you think that covers it? - Fred >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> From: Jon Uhler >>>>>> Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2019 7:16 PM >>>>>> To: VBroyles ; Andre Van Mol <95andrev@gmail.com>; Lee Schoenbeck ; Michael Laidlaw ; 'Jon Hansen' ; William Malone ; Mary McAlister ; Richard Mast ; Walt Heyer ; Matt Sharp ; James Shupe (Formerly Jamie Shupe) ; Chris Motz ; Katherine Cave ; Michelle Cretella ; michael.biggs@sociology.ox.ac.uk; pamosa27@comcast.net; Fred Deutsch Subject: Re: update >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for all your work. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Saturday, August 17, 2019, 06:25:32 PM EDT, Fred Deutsch wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> All, just a note to update you on status of the Vulnerable Child Protection Act. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I’m comfortable the bill and white paper are at or near final form. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I’ve begun my road trips across the state to meet with key moderate Republicans. Response has been mixed but mostly positive. Not a single legislator I’ve spoken with so far has a clue about what’s happening with transgender advocacy nor affirmative therapy. All of this is new to them. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Despite the generally positive response, I have no doubt this will be an uphill battle when we get to session. The last time I introduced a transgender-related bill in 2016, the state and the governor experienced political and economic pressures including boycott threats from around the country. I doubt this time will be any different. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I meet with the governor’s top policy advisor next week to discuss the bill. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I’ve targeted about 20% of the legislature to meet one-on-one prior to session. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> KC from Kelsey Coalition will be developing her suggested strategy for testimony that I’ll bounce off our South Dakota team. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> As always, please do not share this with media. The longer we can fly under the radar, the better. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Please let me know if you have questions. I am grateful for your support and prayers. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Fred >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > > > > > > > > > -> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > www.KelseyCoalition.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >