A Texas judge is expected to decide the fate of President Barack Obama’s new rule that would take effect on New Year’s Day and force doctors to provide transgender medical treatment for children who desire it.
The ruling will determine whether the Obama administration will be able to give the LGBT community yet another victory before the outgoing president leaves office to let the current President-elect Donald Trump take over next month.
“[The transgender] treatment would be required under Obama’s federal rule – even if the physician is convinced it would harm the child,” WND reports.
Representing the Christian Medical and Dental Associations, the Franciscan Alliance and the states of Kansas, Kentucky, Nebraska, Texas and Wisconsin, the Becket Fund filed the lawsuit against the outgoing president.
United States District Judge Reed O’Connor heard a case in Wichita Falls, Texas, and it was pointed out by the Becket Fund that Obama is looking to usurp physicians’ better judgment on transgender issues regarding children’s mental and physical health.
“[The Obama plan will impose treatment requirements on doctors] even if the doctor’s best medical judgment is that treatment could harm the child,” the Becket Fund announced Tuesday.
Becket Law Senior Counsel Mark Rienzi contends that the Obama administration is unlawfully attempting to infringe on the personal and confidential relationship between physicians and their patients.
“We made the argument that it’s incredibly improper for the government to invade the important doctor-patient relationship, and it shouldn’t be mandating doctors to perform procedures against their best medical judgement,” Rienzi informed. “Personal medical decisions about the welfare of a child should be free from political agendas and interference by bureaucrats.”
It was further disclosed that 900,000 doctors – virtually every physician in America – would fall under the Obama administration’s transgender mandate if it is left standing by New Year’s Day.
According to WND’s Bob Unruh, Obama’s new transgender rule would cost healthcare providers approximately $1 billion … despite the fact that government experts insist that the government’s Medicaid and Medicare programs will not cover such treatment – even for adults. This is because they contend that “clinical literature is ‘inconclusive’ on whether gender reassignment surgery improves health outcomes for Medicare beneficiaries with gender dysphoria.”
The detrimental effects of transgender treatment have been noted.
“Yet any doctor relying on the same research or their own medical judgment would be in violation of the new regulation and face potential lawsuits or job loss,” the Becket Fund disclosed in a statement.
Jumping the gun?
It is reported by experts on the issue that statistics show youth with transgender issues usually always outgrow such predispositions naturally.
“[U]p to 94 percent of children with gender dysphoria – 77 to 94 percent in one set of studies and 73 to 88 percent in another – will grow out of their dysphoria naturally and live healthy lives without the need for surgery or lifelong hormone regimens,” transgendermandate.org – a website that provides information on transgender issues – divulged.
Rienzi wants the Obama administration to back out of issues into which it has no business entering.
“We’re optimistic that the court will remind the government it simply has no authority to pass this type of law and that it has no business telling licensed medical professionals what procedures are in the best interests of their patients – let alone a child,” Rienzi impressed.
Constitutional crisis over transgenderism
A North Dakota lawsuit also begs the issue, claiming that the Administrative Procedures Act, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the United States Constitution’s First, Fifth and 14th amendments render such compulsion of physicians – to treat transgender youth – as invalid, according to Unruh.
The Becket Fund maintains that mandatory transgender treatment has even more problems.
“[The government] does not require Medicare and Medicaid to cover these same procedures, because Health & Human Services’ (HHS) own medical experts found the risks were often too high and benefits too unclear,” the legal group explained. “Yet any private doctor who made the same decision about the risks would be in violation of the new mandate and face potential lawsuits or job loss.”
According to the Becket Fund, shortly after the Obama administration successfully transformed the historical meaning of the word “sex,” the president sought to officially change things up for transgenders in court.
“For decades, across multiple federal statutes, Congress has consistently used the term ‘sex’ to refer to an individual’s status as male or female – as determined by a person’s biological sex at birth,” the organization stated. “But in the regulation, HHS redefines ‘sex’ to include ‘an individual’s internal sense of gender, which may be male, female, neither, or a combination of male and female, and which may be different from an individual’s sex assigned at birth.' [The Obama administration has done this], despite the fact that Congress has repeatedly rejected similar attempts to redefine ‘sex’ through legislation.”