Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 340 posts

Re: Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

#301

Post by Knufen »

mobilejdral wrote: post #212
floatingatoll wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your statement needs a clarification: > 13 days of hormone therapy are unlikely to cause sterility . Yes, it's possible he won't end up sterilized by this. However: The breast growth triggered in men by medical doses of estrogen is not reversible and requires surgery to correct. There will be social ramifications for life. There may be other (non-virility) physical ramifications for life.

2mg of E2 for only 13 days and he needs surgery? Sounds very much like something a lawyer would say. At most a few mm of development/widening of the areola with the start of development under. Not noticeable unless you are actually measuring them weekly. It is common enough that a someone will have to go off HRT after only a few weeks and anything underlying breast development will undo itself, but not the areola. Bu…

Don't forge the U curves of hormones, often small doses can result in a full hormone cascade whereas bigger doses doesn't cause the same response.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3365860/

Re: Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

#302

Post by ukverwwrttyv »

pgcj_poster wrote: post #164
floatingatoll wrote: post #116

This doctor must lose their medical license for life. At best they are wildly incompetent, at worst they are maliciously inflicting harm upon a teen for personal or political reasons. Giving estrogen to men usually causes irreversible sterility for life . The doctor would have known this. The pharmacist would have known this. That they chose to proceed with the risk of sterilizing a boy without notifying his parents…

> men pursuing a change in gender are expected to sign their name or initial in the box at least ten times in a row in order to receive their prescription This is not true, at least not anywhere I've gotten Estradiol. Also, while I'm sure you intended to be respectful with your comment, most people getting this treatment see themselves as women who are changing their bodies to match their gender, not as men who are c…

This comment should not be downvoted. HN have the smart people but does not have a basic knowledge how to be respectful and 'debating' about gender and biology.

Re: Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

#303

Post by oedmarap »

Tangential is yesterday's JRE podcast with Abigail Shrier[0] who's a journalist for the Wall Street Journal.

The interview discusses her new book's findings about hormone therapy given specifically to teenage girls through the means of "informed consent", which led to terrible developmental and reproductive damage that was in most cases irreversible.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtftWcgXjdg

Re: Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

#304

Post by pavelrub »

nullc wrote: post #86
swayvil wrote: post #46

"oppositional defiant disorder" That's what they call mouthy rebels these days

Meh. It's a real thing. A small but not trivial portion of the public immediately lapses into a near-rage at anything that appears to be an authority figure. People seem to grow out of it. Maybe it's PTSD from poor interactions with past authorities, maybe it's some kind of pack hierarchy hold over, who knows-- but it appears to be a pretty widespread phenomena. It doesn't stop being real just because the description…

The claim that "it's a real thing" doesn't mean anything other than that some people exhibit certain behaviors that some other people decided to group together, give them a name, and put it in DSM-5. None of this refute GP's claim that "that's what they call mouthy rebels these days".

Re: Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

#305

Post by mantap »

Animats wrote: post #247

Google: Oppositional defiant disorder: A condition in which a child displays argumentative behavior towards people in authority. Really. Not violence. Just "argumentative behavior".

The Wikipedia page for that is something to behold, reading it you get the distinct impression that someone has succeeded in convincing the psychiatric profession to make an entire stage of human development into a disorder.

Re: Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

#308

Post by [deleted] »

mattyfo wrote: post #178

Something doesn't add up with this story and I suspect it's going to come out in the lawsuit. If the doctor REALLY did want to lower testosterone levels in the 16 year old, there's a slew of medications that would have been more effective (Spiro, Lupron, Bica, etc). That amount of Estradiol isn't going to do much to lower T levels.

[deleted]

Re: Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

#309

Post by zozbot234 »

jjeaff wrote: post #195
pgcj_poster wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> men pursuing a change in gender are expected to sign their name or initial in the box at least ten times in a row in order to receive their prescription This is not true, at least not anywhere I've gotten Estradiol. Also, while I'm sure you intended to be respectful with your comment, most people getting this treatment see themselves as women who are changing their bodies to match their gender, not as men who are c…

How should one phrase that sentence without it becoming completely confusing? Would it be offensive to say "a person with an x and y chromosome"? Even though gender is only a social construct... for some reason, taking estrogen will have totally different effects on a person, depending on that gender.

> Would it be offensive to say "a person with an x and y chromosome"?

AMAB is politically neutral and unambiguous.

Re: Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

#310

Post by syshum »

whack wrote: post #236
syshum wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Retribution should not be a part of any justice system. As retribution is not justice. Restitution, Rehabilitation and isolation should be the 3 goals of a true justice system. Victims should have a path to restitution when possible (some crimes this is not) Criminals should have a path to rehabilitation when possible (some crimes this is not) For when the other 2 fail, Isolation is the final step, isolation means we…

You have made a series of claims, but not given any reasons to back them up. What theory of ethics/justice are you invoking, when you claim that retribution/deterrence is unethical and should not be a goal of our justice system. If a billionaire is found guilty of pedophilia, and offers to build for himself a lifetime "prison" that is really a 5-star resort, should he be allowed to do so? According to your argument,…

>>What theory of ethics/justice are you invoking

Mainly Zero-Aggression principle, under which the only ethical use of force is for defense of either yourself or others, and only to the extent eliminate the aggressive force being applied.

>>If a billionaire is found guilty of pedophilia, and offers to build for himself a lifetime "prison" that is really a 5-star resort, should he be allowed to do so?

That is a strawman and a red herring all in one. No a person should not be allowed to build their own guided cage, however the prison s/he is sent to should be humane, where s/he would not be physically abused by other inmates or guards, not be subjected to physical or psychological abuse, should be provided basic nutrition, and health care, etc

This can not be said to be true for the US prison system today

Further the system I advocate for would provide for massive amounts of restitution for the victim(s) of this billionaire, unlike the system of today which holds the criminal has a "debt to society" but not necessarily their victims where any restitution would be secondary to the retribution offered to society as "payment" for this debt

I advocate for victim restitution being the primary goal, and hold that society is owed nothing in the equation.

This once a person is isolated from society and can not harm anyone, continued abuse or violence is unethical, "punishment" in captivity is unethical.

Post reply on HN