Should families who reject LGBT children by guilty of abuse?

[Rutthenia]

It should be considered "child abuse" if parents abandon their children voluntarily for any reason, really. The whole LGBT issue shouldn't be special in this situation, as it's pretty wrong to purposefully abandon your child, period.

[Noraika]

The bolded part is extremely abusive.

How? I don't technically have legal obligation to them at that point, so, if they do something that they can't take back, and which violates my religious beliefs, why shouldn't I disown them?

Because, once again, that's child abuse, or neglect more specifically.

[Noraika]

It should be considered "child abuse" if parents abandon their children voluntarily for any reason, really. The whole LGBT issue shouldn't be special in this situation, as it's pretty wrong to purposefully abandon your child, period.

The main reason I bring this up is because parental and familial rejection of LGB+ and Transgender youth isn't currently considered such under the law, despite having effects on the child which most certainly would classify it as such.

[Rutthenia]

No. It's the right of the kid than to chose a life-style as long as they aren't harming anyone in the process but it's also the right of the parents than to not support this life-style even if, depending on it's intensity, said lack of support can be down-right dickish.

Now, as the brother of a lesbian, I myself adopt a stance of "benevolently not giving a shit" because I love her and thus try to don't act any differently as I would if she was straight; but, I honestly don't think I would be as accepting if it was for my own children.

Parents have no right to harm their children, and no-one 'chooses' to be LGBTQIA.

They do, however, have the choice of keeping their sexuality from the knowledge of their obviously anti-LGBT parents/guardians until they can financially sustain themselves independently.

[Romakivila]

That doesn't really answer the question. If I were to try to maintain a child's celibacy or to prevent them from undergoing sexual reassignment until adulthood (and disown them in the event that they were to do the latter after the age of 18), would I be considered 'abusive'?

A parent refusing to allow their child to receive treatment which is medically necessary (which is what transitioning is), to an adolecent is entirely abusive, becuase it compromises the health of the child for the 'preferences' of the parents. The medical standards of care quite clearly state, in the WPATH Standards of Care v7, that even "withholding puberty suppression and subsequent feminizing or masculinizing hormone therapy is not a neutral option for adolescents." and that such a decision is not the parent's right to do.

I'd argue pumping your child full of unnatural estrogen or testosterone could be child abuse, and is by no means medically necessary. I highly doubt doing that would truly effect the suicide rate, and many would come to regret their decision. The child is also not old enough to give meaningful consent until the arbitrary age of 18.

[Aelex]

Parents have no right to harm their children, and no-one 'chooses' to be LGBTQIA.

I was referring to the "life-style". Sure, I'm not saying people chose what they're attracted to as just like I don't "chose" to like beurettes, gay don't chose to like other men. I never implied so in my post and it would be quite intellectually dishonest than to try to claim the contrary.
Anyway, even if they can't chose their fetish, they still can chose their "life-style" by deciding, despite their attraction to them, to not bed other men.

[United Marxist Nations]

How? I don't technically have legal obligation to them at that point, so, if they do something that they can't take back, and which violates my religious beliefs, why shouldn't I disown them?

Because, once again, that's child abuse, or neglect more specifically.

If they're 18, they aren't a child anymore.

[USS Monitor]

It depends on the level of rejection. Ideally a parent who doesn't agree with/like LGBT people would continue to treat the child the same while maintaining a healthy distance. But treating the child badly or kicking out a child for being LGBT should be considered abuse.

^This.

It's also worth considering that if you take the kid away from their parents because the parents rejected them for being LGBT, that doesn't actually fix the problem. The kid is still rejected. They still are losing a key piece of the support system that they grew up with. Even if you can find a more supportive family for them to live with the last few years before they go out on their own, it will still be a traumatic experience.

If the parents are doing things that would be considered abusive in another context, those things are still abusive. If they're doing things that would be acceptable in another context, it might not be great parenting, but that doesn't rise to the level of abuse.

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

Parents have no right to harm their children, and no-one 'chooses' to be LGBTQIA.

They do, however, have the choice of keeping their sexuality from the knowledge of their obviously anti-LGBT parents/guardians until they can financially sustain themselves independently.

Which, as someone who is forced to do this, is torturous and harmful.

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

Parents have no right to harm their children, and no-one 'chooses' to be LGBTQIA.

I was referring to the "life-style". Sure, I'm not saying people chose what they're attracted to as just like I don't "chose" to like beurettes, gay don't chose to like other men. I never implied so in my post and it would be quite intellectually dishonest than to try to claim the contrary.
Anyway, even if they can't chose their fetish, they still can chose their "life-style" by deciding, despite their attraction to them, to not bed other men.

And why exactly should LGBT people be forced to repress themselves when cisgender/heterosexual people don't?

[Rutthenia]

They do, however, have the choice of keeping their sexuality from the knowledge of their obviously anti-LGBT parents/guardians until they can financially sustain themselves independently.

Which, as someone who is forced to do this, is torturous and harmful.

How can you represent a whole community of LGBT minors with your own personal experience?

[Noraika]

They do, however, have the choice of keeping their sexuality from the knowledge of their obviously anti-LGBT parents until they can financially sustain themselves independently.

Which is also damaging, but not unheard of, because it creates a constant atmosphere of fear around the parents that serves as a detriment. Overall, allowing as much as possible for the open and free expression of one's sexual orientation or gender identity, is the best thing for the emotional and psychological health of the child.

And I've yet to see any serious, well-reputable, or otherwise respected, professional association of professionals in their field, collaborate your claim that being LGB+ or Transgender is a choice. They actually say the opposition.

[Arachaea]

Yes. Proper parents shouldn't care about their children's orientation.

[Isyrannaea]

No.

[United Marxist Nations]

I was referring to the "life-style". Sure, I'm not saying people chose what they're attracted to as just like I don't "chose" to like beurettes, gay don't chose to like other men. I never implied so in my post and it would be quite intellectually dishonest than to try to claim the contrary.
Anyway, even if they can't chose their fetish, they still can chose their "life-style" by deciding, despite their attraction to them, to not bed other men.

And why exactly should LGBT people be forced to repress themselves when cisgender/heterosexual people don't?

Heterosexual people should be forced to repress themselves too, I think.

[Darjihad]

I'm wondering at what age a parent should be discussing sexual expression with their child without running afoul of child abuse laws anyway.

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

Which, as someone who is forced to do this, is torturous and harmful.

How can you represent a whole community of LGBT minors with your own personal experience?

I just put that in there because you clearly decided to ignore the statistics in the OP that show that forced repression is universally harmful.

And why exactly should LGBT people be forced to repress themselves when cisgender/heterosexual people don't?

Heterosexual people should be forced to repress themselves too, I think.

So you have a repression fetish? Lovely.

[Rutthenia]

They do, however, have the choice of keeping their sexuality from the knowledge of their obviously anti-LGBT parents until they can financially sustain themselves independently.

Which is also damaging, but not unheard of, because it creates a constant atmosphere of fear around the parents that serves as a detriment. Overall, allowing as much as possible for the open and free expression of one's sexual orientation or gender identity, is the best thing for the emotional and psychological health of the child.

And I've yet to see any serious, well-reputable, or otherwise respected, professional association of professionals in their field, collaborate your claim that being LGB+ or Transgender is a choice. They actually say the opposition.

I think you've gotten me and another guy mixed up, 'cause I haven't stated my opinion on whether being LGBT is a choice or not.

[Luminesa]

I'm wondering at what age a parent should be discussing sexual expression with their child without running afoul of child abuse laws anyway.

You mean just like "the birds and the bees" or something else?

[Benuty]

And why exactly should LGBT people be forced to repress themselves when cisgender/heterosexual people don't?

Heterosexual people should be forced to repress themselves too, I think.

At least you are commendable in that sexually repressing oneself goes for everyone.

[United Marxist Nations]

How can you represent a whole community of LGBT minors with your own personal experience?

I just put that in there because you clearly decided to ignore the statistics in the OP that show that forced repression is universally harmful.

Heterosexual people should be forced to repress themselves too, I think.

So you have a repression fetish? Lovely.

A what?

[Benuty]

How can you represent a whole community of LGBT minors with your own personal experience?

I just put that in there because you clearly decided to ignore the statistics in the OP that show that forced repression is universally harmful.

Heterosexual people should be forced to repress themselves too, I think.

So you have a repression fetish? Lovely.

There is nothing wrong with repression fetishes.

Freud might argue otherwise, but Freud is dead, and nobody listens to them anymore.

[Luminesa]

And why exactly should LGBT people be forced to repress themselves when cisgender/heterosexual people don't?

Heterosexual people should be forced to repress themselves too, I think.

Not really "repress", more like "control". Feeling an attraction to another person is not inherently a bad thing. Desiring to get in bed with everyone around you probably is. >.>

[Benuty]

I just put that in there because you clearly decided to ignore the statistics in the OP that show that forced repression is universally harmful.



So you have a repression fetish? Lovely.

A what?

Something something Freudian psychosexuality.

[Noraika]

I'd argue pumping your child full of unnatural estrogen or testosterone could be child abuse, and is by no means medically necessary. I highly doubt doing that would truly effect the suicide rate, and many would come to regret their decision. The child is also not old enough to give meaningful consent until the arbitrary age of 18.

Actually transitioning has a huge effect on the positive life outcomes and mental health of transgender people. In addition, parental rejection has a significant impact, and I can say with great certainty, after reading the Guidlines and Standards of Care for transgender patients, that the medical data disagrees with you. Withholding treatment is once again "not a neutral option".

Now, if you have some evidence from a reputable source that is current, and which collaborates your claims, that might make it a little bit different, and add a little bit of credibility, but ultimately you still have all but a small, and increasingly so, fringe which would agree with you on both transitioning being abuse, and withholding transitioning not being abusive.