Sweet Clementine said:

---

I'm trying to tell you that at this point no one is altering the development of the child. No hormones or puberty blockers are going to be given at this time.

---

Did you type that with a straight face?????

https://thetexan.news/dallas-custody-battle-over-alleged-transgender-seven-year-old-will-resume-next-week/

Havent read this yet

It gets worse.... look what Kyle Kashuv tweeted. She's been pushing her ideology on CHILD PATIENTS. This is from 2 months ago so not based on this case and recent news

Disgusting.

Clearly steers readers to one side, but lays out the arguments and expert opinions. From the article no puberty blockers would come in to play for half a decade. It was inconceivable to me that Younger could lose based on the posts here. Now it becomes a little more clear how he could. He's an intensely unlikable con man who's devoutly religious, and anything he advocated probably suffered for being associated with him with the jury.

The link expounds on the custody issue by noting that they were given joint managing conservatorship, but the non-biological birth mother was given exclusive rights, while Younger's were limited. Given that Georgulas is an M.D. while Younger lied about teaching at North Texas, pursing his PhD, being college educated, and at times unemployed, I'd be curious if she paid him child support.

It's unclear whether Younger's discharge from the army based on an admission of homosexuality was him pulling the Max Klingler from M.A.S.H. routine, or genuine. If the latter it makes his orthodox embrace strange, but the the in vitro angle logical.


Edit:
As far as reviews for Georgulas I imagine they've long been polluted by Younger supporters and his backers. I'm sure that two month old review is legit. This very thread invited posters to go give fake reviews along with a link, and Forum 16 is practically rational compared to some folk out there who are outraged by the trial.

P.S.S. My knee jerk reaction would be of course not to grease the wheels for a 7 year old to feel comfortable transitioning. How terrible a Dad/person and incompetent an attorney do you have to be to lose this argument to a Texas jury?

annie88 said:

---

Quote:

---

The dad has to have some serious issues if he lost joint custody to this woman.

---

Not really, they usually favor the mom and if she's had liberal female judges like this wack-a-doo all along, they probably saw him as hyper masculine and couldn't deal with it instead of the abuse it is.

---

In this case, the dad does have some serious issues. He's a fairly bad person, but at the end of the day, welfare of the child is the issue.

And the mother is directly harming the welfare of this child.

Prognightmare said:

---

---

Question for the MDs:

Why would an adult need puberty blockers?

"Puberty blockers" = hormone blockers. Testosterone blockers in this case. They're used to treat prostate cancer, benign prostatic hypertrophy, and other conditions that are stimulated by testosterone

Pretty sure that review is satire. Her reviews page has gotten massively trolled since all this started

Sweet Clementine said:

---

No hormones or puberty blockers will be started at this time, and they are not even planned to be started yet. No castration, chemical or otherwise, will occur before the child is old enough/of legal age to decide.

---

Then why was it reported that puberty blockers would be instituted by the mother at age 8? What is your definition of "old enough to decide"? A person's brain is not even fully developed until after the age of 15. How could they have the capacity to make a life-altering choice like this before they have even cognitively matured?

As pointed out by others, your argument also ignores the mental and emotional abuse inflicted by the mother which would also affect the child's cognitive ability to make a rational decision about which gender he would like to be perceived as.

Agreed, but I would imagine her conduct with her own kid would prompt the Texas Medical Board to look into her.

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

It gets worse.... look what Kyle Kashuv tweeted. She's been pushing her ideology on CHILD PATIENTS. This is from 2 months ago so not based on this case and recent news

Disgusting.

---

Cmon, that's clearly a troll response to this story

BMX Bandit said:

---

annie88 said:

---

Quote:

---

The dad has to have some serious issues if he lost joint custody to this woman.

---

Not really, they usually favor the mom and if she's had liberal female judges like this wack-a-doo all along, they probably saw him as hyper masculine and couldn't deal with it instead of the abuse it is.

---

In this case, the dad does have some serious issues. He's a fairly bad person, but at the end of the day, welfare of the child is the issue.

And the mother is directly harming the welfare of this child.

---

I understand that, but given that the jury was only considering custody, while the judge is deciding the other issues regarding gender etc., do you know what the jury instructions would be for their deliberations?

What im getting at is that this case has not been decided.

The judge could still come back and say today that the mother is prohibited from doing anything regarding the boy's gender without court approval or until he is 18 or something.

Do, couldn't this just be a situation where the jury was allowed to only consider the custody (I.e. where the child should live) of the child, irrespective of either parents' desire regarding gender?

Something just isn't right about this (beyond the real prizes that this poor child's parents are). For a jury in Texas to award the mother sole custody given how nuts she is) there has got to be a lot more to this story that is not getting out into the media.

Maybe he is just a god-awful human but is in the right regarding the gender stuff, or she has a really good lawyer and he has a really bad one (or both, which I suspect), or as I stated above there is some procedural issue(s) that are not being conveyed , but this just doesn't pass the smell test on the surface.

I just have a hard time believing that the explanation is a runaway, agendized jury and an aggressively agendized judge have both convened on this one case to recklessly decide this case in a court in Texas.

BMX Bandit said:

---

annie88 said:

---

Quote:

---

The dad has to have some serious issues if he lost joint custody to this woman.

---

Not really, they usually favor the mom and if she's had liberal female judges like this wack-a-doo all along, they probably saw him as hyper masculine and couldn't deal with it instead of the abuse it is.

---

In this case, the dad does have some serious issues. He's a fairly bad person, but at the end of the day, welfare of the child is the issue.

And the mother is directly harming the welfare of this child.

---

The clarification that I read was that the dad sued for sole custody but the jury said no, and because the mom did NOT sue or counter-sue for sole custody, the custody just remained status quo.

So mom does NOT have sole custody - yet.

Sweet Clementine said:

---

No hormones or puberty blockers will be started at this time, and they are not even planned to be started yet. No castration, chemical or otherwise, will occur before the child is old enough/of legal age to decide.

---

100% false. That is exactly what the judge gave the mother permission to do.

annie88 said:

---

Sweet Clementine said:

---

No hormones or puberty blockers will be started at this time, and they are not even planned to be started yet. No castration, chemical or otherwise, will occur before the child is old enough/of legal age to decide.

---

100% false. That is exactly what the judge gave the mother permission to do.

---

when did this happen? I thought the hearing was this afternoon?

all good questions & points. would like to see what jury questions actually were also.

Mabel Choate said:

---

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

It gets worse.... look what Kyle Kashuv tweeted. She's been pushing her ideology on CHILD PATIENTS. This is from 2 months ago so not based on this case and recent news

Disgusting.

---

Cmon, that's clearly a troll response to this story

---

This woman knew two months ago this would be in the news now? Or you're saying it's faked?

this has been in the news quite some time.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3004048

BMX Bandit said:

---

annie88 said:

---

Quote:

---

The dad has to have some serious issues if he lost joint custody to this woman.

---

Not really, they usually favor the mom and if she's had liberal female judges like this wack-a-doo all along, they probably saw him as hyper masculine and couldn't deal with it instead of the abuse it is.

---

In this case, the dad does have some serious issues. He's a fairly bad person, but at the end of the day, welfare of the child is the issue.

And the mother is directly harming the welfare of this child.

---

What serious issues does the dad have and how is he a fairly bad person?

BMX Bandit said:

---

annie88 said:

---

Sweet Clementine said:

---

No hormones or puberty blockers will be started at this time, and they are not even planned to be started yet. No castration, chemical or otherwise, will occur before the child is old enough/of legal age to decide.

---

100% false. That is exactly what the judge gave the mother permission to do.

---

when did this happen? I thought the hearing was this afternoon?

---

Custody hearing today, but the judge's decision from the other day in favor of Georgulas could allow her to move forward with plans to potentially give James puberty blockers after she received a letter of recommendation from Dallas Rainbow Therapy, urging James to "receive a full psychological assessment for gender dysphoria and potentially take hormone blockers."

Now it does say could and potentially, but it's given the clear I think once custody is determined.

And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. Rom 1:28

Rapier108 said:

---

Quote:

---

after she received a letter of recommendation from Dallas Rainbow Therapy

---

Yeah, no bias at all from that group.

They and his lunatic mother are using this child to push their agenda.

---

Exactly.......more interested in adding another minion to their army rather than a child's well-being.

When this kid is 18 and is all screwed up, he should be able to sue everybody involved.

aTmAg said:

---

When this kid is 18 and is all screwed up, he should be able to sue everybody involved.

---

I'm guessing this boy will commit suicide long before he turns 18.

Quote:

---

Custody hearing today, but the judge's decision from the other day in favor of Georgulas could allow her to move forward with plans to potentially give James puberty blockers after she received a letter of recommendation from Dallas Rainbow Therapy, urging James to "receive a full psychological assessment for gender dysphoria and potentially take hormone blockers."

Now it does say could and potentially, but it's given the clear I think once custody is determined.

---

I am not aware of any decision made by the judge the other day that allows anything. Are you talking about the jury verdict?

"Rainbow therapy"

Geez... This would be like Planned Parenthood advising a 15 yo on an unplanned pregnancy. They claim that they'll present all options, but somehow the baby always winds up dead

Mabel Choate said:

---

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

It gets worse.... look what Kyle Kashuv tweeted. She's been pushing her ideology on CHILD PATIENTS. This is from 2 months ago so not based on this case and recent news

Disgusting.

---

Cmon, that's clearly a troll response to this story

---

From 2 months ago? the story is not that old that I am aware of.

100% convinced this woman is possessed by a demon.

It appears that the judge in the case has overturned the jury's decision from Monday:

Quote:

---

The judge presiding over the case of Jeffrey Younger, the father who is trying to protect his seven-year-old son, James, from chemical castration via a gender "transition," ruled today that the parents will have joint conservatorship over James, which includes making joint medical decisions for the child.

Judge Kim Cooks of the 255th district also put a gag order on the father so that he cannot speak to the press about the case and decided that the father is not required to pay attorney fees. The judge's decision means that the Save James website will have to be shut down.

---

I'm trying to find more information regarding this from a more reputable, or at least less biased source, but for now it appears the judge has acted to prevent the mother from acting unilaterally regarding "transitioning" the child.

Link

Chemical castration is the liberal's version of Electroshock Therapy with even more permanent effects.

Quote:

---

Judge Kim Cooks of the 255th district also put a gag order on the father so that he cannot speak to the press about the case and decided that the father is not required to pay attorney fees. The judge's decision means that the Save James website will have to be shut down.

---

That seems strange.

Sweet Clementine said:

---

I do have kids, and within reason I would support my child. I do think that gender/sex is not black and white. There are shades of gray.
I would certainly seek out the best medical care for my child, which is what the mother in this case is doing.

---

It is pretty black and white, whether your feelz think so or not

XX
XY

There are no others. None. Zip. Zilch. Nada. Zero.

Even if there was some gray area, we are literally talking about a child here. Child. Not an adult. Not capable of making rational judgement or decisions. Not capable of making lifelong decisions. Not capable of having the first clue what is going on. The kid doesn't even know what a boner is at this point in his life.

You arguments are pure garbage.