But the UK says young women can understand the consequences of birth control (which does have potential negative side effects). Which I agree with, but all the pro-blocker people are saying this ruling is going to lead to banning birth control and abortion for under 18s.
Actually, I didn't think of that. I always knew about Nash v. Inman in contract law because it was a 'landmark' case but I wonder why it is seen that minors can not have the capacity to understand a contract and enter one but they can take medication like birth control and fully understand the possible concequences. Sorry. My legal knowledge is superficial at best and I've done 2 semesters of Australian legal studies so English law may as well be foreign to me.
My understanding — also not an English lawyer, so someone can correct me — is that the argument boils down to ‘if they’re going to have sex anyway, the potential consequences to a young woman for getting pregnant at 14 are way higher than the consequences of being prescribed birth control, so we might as well’. They will suffer in some way by not being prescribed contraception (by getting teen pregnant).
Stop threatening me with a good time.
Birth control =/= taking drugs that make you sterile and make your genitals basically useless.
I know in the US, Lupron is used off label as a puberty blocker for trans kids, so it hasn’t had the normal amount of studies. Is this also true in the UK?
Not to mention birth control can help with things like extreme periods, which transitoning can help but getting your uterus taken out in 3 to 5 years time is something birth control doesnt do.
If jesus came in a prescription bottle that could be sold 100 times over. A feel good cult of strange.
Lupron had been studied somewhat because it's been prescribed off label before. It's almost like the drug companies are desperate to sell this stuff.
It's side effects on adult women is fairly well documented and spoiler alert: they're fucking horrific. It's used off-label to treat endometriosis and permanent bone density loss is such a common side effect that most doctors prescribe it for no longer than six months to avoid early onset osteoporosis. But I'm sure giving it to children for years is totally fine, especially given that the manufacturer has already been sued multiple times for marking up prices and for not giving adults proper informed consent.
"Who cares about long-term problems?! Gotta get these kids hooked on troonery!"
Oh yeah, that reminds me that someone I know who went through fertility treatments in the late 90s told me she was really glad she avoided Lupron.
Good find, and good on you saving it just in case. These guys also have a podcast
