News

ClaireChandlerRGB

The following is a copy of a speech Senator Chandler gave to Parliament on Wednesday, 9 December 2020.

Last week in the United Kingdom, a momentous judgement with international implications was handed down by the High Court. The court found in favour of the arguments put forward by the mother of a child with gender dysphoria and Keira Bell, a brave 23-year-old woman who had at 16 been prescribed puberty blockers after three short appointments with the Tavistock youth gender clinic.

The judges in this case observed that prescribing puberty blockers to children with gender dysphoria is an experimental treatment with real uncertainty over the short- and long-term consequences of the treatment and with very limited evidence as to its efficacy. Given the potential lifelong effects on fertility, sexual function, bone density and development of these treatments, as well as a lack of evidence of their full long-term impacts, the court found that children are very unlikely to be able to adequately understand and give informed consent to these experimental treatments.

This judgement has profound implications for Australia, not that you would know it from the muted — in some cases, non-existent — coverage by many Australian media outlets. Let’s look at what’s happening right now in Australia and how out of step it is with what has been found in the UK High Court.

Last month Bernard Lane, in The Australian, reported on the Family Court removing an Australian child from its parents because they wanted psychologists to consider other possible factors in their child’s gender dysphoria and the potential for other non-invasive treatments. The parents told the Weekend Australian that state authorities had said it was dangerous for their child to come back to their house because they want a thorough assessment by an independent psychologist and they hadn’t consented to testosterone treatment. The parents know their child needs help and support, and they want it to be provided by medical experts in an evidence based way. For this, the child has been taken away from them by the state. The mother told The Australian newspaper that their family and friends were shocked at their story. They just can’t believe it had happened in Australia.

Last week, just as the UK High Court was finalising its findings that puberty blockers are an experimental treatment for which young children are unable to give informed consent, the Victorian government intorduced legislation which criminalises discussion of the very same issues highlighted by the court. The Victorian legislation makes any conduct or practice that is not seen as gender affirming potentially illegal. The definition is so broad that it includes conversations and online discussion.

Under this bill, Keira Bell, a woman who has been through the transition process and had a court uphold the legitimacy of her concerns regarding the process, could be charged with a crime if she were to discuss her experience with a young Victorian experiencing gender dysphoria.

If the bill passes, the Victorian human rights commission will be given extraordinary powers to launch investigations into people questioning gender change practices and to “take any action it considers appropriate after conducting an investigation”. They will also offer education to persons and organisations engaged in change or suppression practices — practices which, as the bill makes clear, can include conversations about gender identity theory and the risks of experimental medical treatment on children.

Everyone familiar with how these commissions operate around Australia can foresee how these powers will be used and abused. Another round of guidance will be issued, threatening that it is against the law to question unproven medical practices such as puberty blockers. Investigations will be launched into parents and medical experts who question the single focus on gender-affirming medical interventions. More pressure will be applied to media not to report on any debate that questions medical interventions in children who have nothing medically wrong with their bodies.

If this legislation isn’t Orwellian and dangerous enough on its own, it has been introduced by the Victorian government at the exact time that the states are supposed to be working together to develop a service model for safe and appropriate care and treatment of children and adolescents with gender dysphoria.

How can the Victorian government play a central role in developing an evidence based model of care whilst simultaneously introducing a law criminalising any treatment that is not gender affirming? How can they take this position when the UK High Court has just handed down findings that puberty blockers are an experimental treatment for which children are unable to give informed consent? The same questions, frankly, have to be asked of the Queensland and ACT governments, who have also forced through similar laws in the past year.

In Australia, just as in the UK, the number of children and adolescents being treated for gender dysphoria with gender-affirming medical interventions has skyrocketed in recent years. Patient numbers at the Tavistock clinic in the UK rose from 97 in 2009 to 2,519 in 2018. We know from FOI data that referrals to Victoria’s Royal Children’s Hospital gender clinic rose by more than 1,700 per cent between 2012 and 2019. We have no idea what the national figures are, because states do not release the data on how many children have been given puberty blockers, hormone treatment and surgery. In fact, we don’t even know if this data is kept. If states do have this data, then they need to release it publicly now so that we can get a full picture of what’s happening.

The UK High Court in their judgement expressed extreme surprise the Tavistock clinic was not able to produce data on the treatment provided to their own patients, including the proportion of those on puberty blockers who move on to receive cross-sex hormones. Surely state governments have an obligation to find out if their own clinics are operating with the same absence of data.

We all want the best possible care for all children and adolescents who are suffering from any form of emotional distress. This care must be based on the most thorough evidence based approach so that mistakes aren’t made which have longer term consequences for these young people, consequences which Keira Bell and so many detransitioners have bravely detailed on the public record at great personal cost.

It’s clear from the Keira Bell judgement that there are many valid concerns about medical interventions on children experiencing gender dysphoria, yet for many years people raising those exact concerns, both here in Australia and around the world, have been labelled as hateful and transphobic and been accused of pushing children towards self-harm, just as those with legitimate evidence based concerns about women’s sport and women’s services have been defamed as transphobic and ignored by the mainstream media.

Thanks to the bravery of Keira Bell and the efforts of her supporters, the world can now see that silencing and pushing aside these concerns does not guarantee better outcomes for children who need care, support and the best possible medical assistance. This must be a turning point for Australia, away from silencing and slurs and towards proper evidence based outcomes and proper public discussion.

DragQueensatBrisbaneCityLibraryDM6Dec20 v2

Many prayers were answered last month when Sydney homosexual activist Garry Burns lost his fight against Israel Folau in the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

Praise the Lord – a battle has been won! But please don’t stop praying – the wider war goes on, this time in Queensland.

Johnny Valkyrie and Dwayne Hill are “drag queens” who mostly perform raunchy routines in Brisbane nightclubs. Such “queens” are generally homosexual men who wear exaggerated makeup and clothes to make them appear over-the-top, sexy females.

There were no complaints when Johnny (“Queenie”) and Dwayne (“Diamond Good-Rim”) performed in “adult” venues.

But when they read “LGBTQI stories” to young children in the Brisbane City Library in January this year (when Dwayne used the name “Diamond”), many people expressed outrage.

One of those disturbed by the “Drag Queen Story Time” was social commentator Lyle Shelton.

He published a blog post criticising the event, using public information. He said children need to be protected from sexualised role models and shouldn’t be exposed to the promotion of gender confusion.

“Drag Queens and what they represent are not for kids,” Lyle Shelton said. “They are dangerous role models and they should not be provided a place in front of children in public libraries.”

He said Diamond Good-Rim is a “homo-eroticised name, a reference to the anus… Good-Rim is a 2019 winner of an X Award from the Adult Entertainment Industry…

“Let’s hope the kiddies watching Drag Queen Storytime last Sunday don’t go exploring on Good-Rim’s Facebook page. Or ask their mum what ‘good rim’ means in the wonderful world of drag queens.’’

But Johnny and Dwayne have alleged that Shelton’s blog has incited “hatred towards, serious contempt for, or serious ridicule” against them.

They have lodged a complaint with the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT). They are demanding an apology and $10,000 each in compensation.

Lyle Shelton asked Dwayne Hill to drop the case in July. “The purpose of my blog-post was to express my deeply held conviction that Drag Queen Story Time events are extremely inappropriate for children,’’ he said.

“… I hold no ill will or feeling towards you, and the post was not meant to be a personal comment about you. I acknowledge that you are free to adopt and live out an identity and lifestyle that is at odds with my convictions and beliefs.

“My blog post is a legitimate exercise of another fundamental freedom – my freedom of thought, speech and expression on issues which I feel strongly about, and which are of significant public interest.”

Sadly, the drag queens did not drop their complaint. A compulsory QCAT conference could be held in Brisbane before too long.

This is a landmark case. It could affect your freedom and mine – to express our concerns about our children and grandchildren being exposed to confusing and harmful ideas.

Please pray!

Peter Downie - National Director

FamilyVoice Australia

KeiraBell

Three High Court judges in a landmark UK court decision have ruled that it is highly unlikely that a child aged 13 or under would be competent to give consent to the administration of puberty blockers.

The court also ruled that it is “doubtful that a child aged 14 or 15 could understand and weigh the long-term risks and consequences of the administration of puberty blocking drugs.”

The case was brought by two claimants against Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust. One of the claimants is Keira Bell, an outspoken “detransitioner”.

Bell was prescribed puberty blockers at age 15 and said that the practice of prescribing puberty-blocking drugs to children under 18 was unlawful as they lacked competence to give valid consent to the treatment.

Bell was then prescribed cross-sex hormones to promote male characteristics before undergoing surgery.

She has subsequently “detransitioned” to live as her birth sex and become an outspoken critic of gender clinics.

“Given the long-term consequences of the clinical interventions at issue in this case, and given that the treatment is as yet innovative and experimental, the court recognised that clinicians may well regard these as cases where the authorisation of the court should be sought before starting treatment with puberty blocking drugs,” the judgment stated.

Bell reportedly said outside court after the legal victory that she hoped it signaled the end of gender clinics “playing God with our bodies [by] experimenting on the young and vulnerable with untested, harmful drugs”.

MadelineChristianNanny 002

If you can, cast your mind back to Spring 2017 – and the postal survey for the Great Marriage Debate.

Well it wasn’t exactly a “debate”. TV stations refused to air informative TV ads on the “No” case for the same-sex marriage survey. Newspapers gave huge coverage to the “Yes” case and very little on the other side of the story. The government did not distribute booklets setting out arguments for both “Yes” and “No” cases, as required for a formal referendum.

Madeline, a Canberra childcare worker (18), was sacked, merely for posting her support for traditional marriage on Facebook. Her boss said: “Today I fired a staff member who made it public knowledge that they feel ‘it’s okay to vote no’. Advertising your desire to vote no for same-sex marriage is, in my eyes, hate speech.”

Madeline was traumatised. “There are many other young people who share my views,” she said. “But they are too terrified to speak out.”

By November 2017, some 60 per cent of Australians had voted “Yes”. They believed that changing the marriage law would make LGBT people happy, but not alter anything else.

They were wrong.

As Christian lobbyist Lyle Shelton pointed out on 14 September last year:

News broke overnight that a Christian school in Ballarat is being sued by a former teacher, Rachel Colvin, because she does not agree with the school’s position on marriage.

She resigned over the issue after Ballarat Christian College re-iterated that it was committed to the Christian view of marriage – that marriage can only be between one man and one woman.

Parents send their children to Christian schools because they expect Christian schools and their staff to uphold the Christian view of marriage. But Colvin, a supporter of same-sex marriage, now wants the parent community and the school to bow to her vision for marriage.

She is trying to force this on the school by suing it under the Victorian Equal Opportunity Act.

During the marriage campaign, we said over and over again that redefining marriage in law would weaponise state-based anti-discrimination legislation. And it has.

Principal Ken Nuridin said: “Our College provides a high-quality Christian education in accordance with our beliefs.The complaint against Ballarat Christian College was settled out of court in March. The school has been able to retain its biblical marriage policy, but has had to pay significant legal expenses as well as an undisclosed amount to its former teacher to cover “damages and lost earnings”.

“The claim has taken an enormous cost in time and resources already – detracting from the ability of a small school like ours to focus on what is important, the education of our students.”

If this trend continues, parents who choose Christian schools for their children’s education are in trouble. The freedom to teach biblical values – and to employ staff who uphold those values – is under attack as never before.

In South Australia just this past week, the Liberal government has released its new Equal Opportunity (Religious Bodies) Amendment Bill 2020. It would remove the ability of any faith-based school to choose teachers and other staff in accordance with its religious beliefs.

It comes just before the Christmas-New Year break when people are busy with other concerns.

FamilyVoice is busy too. But we will be strongly urging the government to withdraw the bill, and to protect, not destroy, religious freedom.

Your prayers and financial support are especially needed at this time.

For family, faith and freedom

Peter Downie - National Director

FamilyVoice Australia

Folau800px

Champion rugby player Israel Folau has had a tumultuous 19 months. In April last year on his personal Instagram account, he posted a blunt paraphrase of two verses in the Apostle Paul’s first letter to Christians in the Greek city of Corinth.

It was a grim warning to believers in that large and prosperous city, known for its temple prostitutes, drunkenness and promiscuity –a culture that may ring a few bells today.

But there is hope, as Paul goes on in verse 11: “And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.”

Folau also offered hope. In his Instagram post, he said: “Those that are living in Sin will end up in Hell unless you repent. Jesus Christ loves you and is giving you time to turn away from your sin and come to him.”

Folau had warned of Hell. And all hell broke loose.

Adulterers, thieves, drunks, swindlers and slanderers weren’t upset. But his mention of homosexuality – men who have sex with men – was like a red rag to a bull.

Folau was the Wallabies’ best player. But Rugby Australia sacked him – for stating his sincere religious belief, affirmed in a book treated with honour in every Australian court room.

As you probably know, Folau appealed his unfair dismissal and later won a significant out-of-court settlement. But he soon had another battle on his hands.

Sydney gay activist Garry Burns, who has made hundreds of complaints to the NSW Anti‑Discrimination Board over the years, lodged one against Israel Folau last December.

Burns claimed that Folau’s post vilified homosexuals. The Board initially accepted his complaint, but later rejected it, saying he had failed to keep the matter confidential and had sent numerous inappropriate emails to Folau’s lawyers.

NSW Anti-Discrimination Board president Annabelle Bennett said Burns’ complaint was “vexatious” and “a flagrant abuse of process such that no further actions should be taken”.

But Garry Burns did not give up. In April he appealed to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

Then last week there was good news.

On 18 November, the Tribunal rejected Mr Burns’ application. It found he was only doing it to get some funds to pay a $82,000 legal bill run up in another legal fight.

Tribunal chief Anne Britton said the “egregious nature of Mr Burns’ conduct” amounted to an abuse of process. He had sent “intemperate” emails to Folau’s legal team as well as disrespectful, intemperate and threatening emails to members of the Anti-Discrimination Board.

Israel Folau and others – including Bernard Gaynor, another victim of many Burns’ complaints – are praising God for this win.

We also give thanks for Mark Latham, whose campaign to reform the anti-discrimination complaint system has alerted other NSW MPs to the great injustices many people have suffered.

We pray that the Board and the Tribunal will continue to act with the wisdom they showed Mr Burns.

Peter Downie - National Director

FamilyVoice Australia