Justice Francesca Marzari ruled that any attempt to persuade Maxine that she is a girl constitutes “family violence” because it would cause her “psychological abuse in the form of harassment or coercion.” Since she is receiving “treatment” for gender dysphoria (the persistent identification with the gender opposite her biological sex), any encouragement to reconsider that “treatment” is considered violence.
That looks like a stretch, but I could see the case being made under Texas law too.
Here is how Texas defines it:
Sec. 71.004. FAMILY VIOLENCE. "Family violence" means:
(1) an act by a member of a family or household against another member of the family or household that is intended to result in physical harm, bodily injury, assault, or sexual assault or that is a threat that reasonably places the member in fear of imminent physical harm, bodily injury, assault, or sexual assault, but does not include defensive measures to protect oneself;
(
2) abuse, as that term is defined by Sections 261.001(1)(C), (E), (G), (H), (I), (J), (K), and (M), by a member of a family or household toward a child of the family or household; or
(3) dating violence, as that term is defined by Section
71.0021.
Section 261.001:
(1)
"Abuse" includes the following acts or omissions by a person:
(C) physical injury that results in substantial harm to the child, or the genuine threat of substantial harm from physical injury to the child, including an injury that is at variance with the history or explanation given and excluding an accident or reasonable discipline by a parent, guardian, or managing or possessory conservator that does not expose the child to a substantial risk of harm;
(E) sexual conduct harmful to a child's mental, emotional, or physical welfare, including conduct that constitutes the offense of continuous sexual abuse of young child or children under Section
21.02, Penal Code, indecency with a child under Section
21.11, Penal Code, sexual assault under Section
22.011, Penal Code, or aggravated sexual assault under Section
22.021, Penal Code;
(G) compelling or encouraging the child to engage in sexual conduct as defined by Section
43.01, Penal Code, including compelling or encouraging the child in a manner that constitutes an offense of trafficking of persons under Section
20A.02(a)(7) or (8), Penal Code, prostitution under Section
43.02(b), Penal Code, or compelling prostitution under Section
43.05(a)(2), Penal Code;
(H) causing, permitting, encouraging, engaging in, or allowing the photographing, filming, or depicting of the child if the person knew or should have known that the resulting photograph, film, or depiction of the child is obscene as defined by Section
43.21, Penal Code, or pornographic;
(I) the current use by a person of a controlled substance as defined by Chapter
481, Health and Safety Code, in a manner or to the extent that the use results in physical, mental, or emotional injury to a child;
(J) causing, expressly permitting, or encouraging a child to use a controlled substance as defined by Chapter
481, Health and Safety Code;
(K) causing, permitting, encouraging, engaging in, or allowing a sexual performance by a child as defined by Section
43.25, Penal Code;
(M) forcing or coercing a child to enter into a marriage.
______________________
It sounds like the BC court is ordering the Father to quit interfering with mental health TREATMENT for gender dysphoria, which is the CORRECT course of action. Father's attempt to interfere with that treatment could be VERY detrimental to the child's emotional well being and would not be in the child's best interest.
Transgender people suffer from a serious mental health disorder. Ignoring it could result in even more mental health issues later.
As for referring to the child in a certain way, it is my understanding that mental health professionals have found that referring to them as their birth gender does not help them accept it, but only causes them more anxiety and makes it harder for them to respond to treatment.
.
