Marsadia wrote:Not safe how? Again, we are getting stuck on the poor wording of this legislation. What defines a “legitimate danger” to their health? This would be far simpler and less confusing and less likely to be abused; if age requirements were stipulated in the legislation.
“2. Requires member nations to allow their inhabitants to seek and obtain hormone therapy with their free and informed consent, and ensure that those inhabitants face as few barriers as possible when seeking hormone therapy,”
Another example of why this legislation should be amended prior to being passed; what are “as few barriers as possible”? It works against the previously mentioned 4.a. as 2. Suggests that a member nation can actually have barriers to the process, which they are allowed to arbitrarily determine.
So in my case, I will be using 2. to install age requirements before 4.a. Can be enacted in my nation.
It's not safe because... it isn't safe. No medical professional would ever prescribe sex hormones to a 2 year old.
Precocious puberty is a condition where puberty begins too early (in cis children) and can have serious medical consequences, which is why puberty blockers are often used as treatment. Giving exogenous sex hormones to a 2 year old would result in a very early induced precocious puberty... which by any reasonable definition is a "legitimate danger" to health.
If this was a real-life piece of legislation, then yes, from a medical standpoint this proposal doesn't legislate strictly enough... but this is a game and it's what happens when people from a non-medical background write proposals on medical subjects. In retrospect, the author could have better addressed this with a clause about "age-appropriate" treatment: specifying puberty blockers for younger children, progressing to hormonal treatment as they get older.
Realistically from a gameplay perspective it does the job fine, and does outlaw silly suggestions like giving 2 year olds sex hormones. It's written well enough for me to vote for, anyway.