When I hear the Premier of Alberta explain why the government is restricting options for trans youth, I think about the scared young person in a basement who hears that. Children hear more than adults think they do. When I was 11 years old, for example, I had my ears wide open in church and school to find someone I could trust to tell about the abuse that was happening to me at home – and to shrink away and hide from those who made me feel shame and fear. Now I am concerned about what young people struggling with their sexual development are absorbing when governments in some provinces close down avenues in school and health care for them to reach out and our political leaders are publicly shaming them in the name of child protection.
The impacts for young people should be the top priority in the current public debates about what trans youth will or will not be allowed to do. Legislation in Alberta and Saskatchewan that restricts the ability of transgender minors to access gender-affirming health care and restricts the access of all children to comprehensive sexual education sends strong messages to young people. It induces shame, fear, and unworthiness in those who do not fit stereotypes.
When the Premier of Alberta uses the notwithstanding clause to prevent evidence of the negative impact from being heard in court, the silencing and harm for young people is even greater.
Policies based on fear, shame, and disgust are the opposite of child protection. They have a silencing impact that leaves young people at greater risk for mental health issues and evenW suicidal thinking. Reports that fewer young people in Alberta are asking questions is not evidence that this was just a fad; it is evidence of silencing that harms young people for the long term. Evidence of the negative impacts for the health of young people, compiled by the Canadian Medical Association and other intervenors, would have become public through court challenges. When the Premier of Alberta uses the notwithstanding clause to prevent evidence of the negative impact from being heard in court, the silencing and harm for young people is even greater.
A second concern is the public misrepresentation of the reality for trans-gender youth and the health care process they go through from first enquiry to the possible use of hormone therapy and later surgery. No one can say they want to change genders one day and get surgery without question. Each case is different and involves layers of careful physical and psychological assessment. That is what the physician-patient relationship is designed to do. The public misrepresentation of that reinforces fear and stereotypes in the population, as well as for young people.
If there are cases of abuse within the health care system, there are ways to deal with that without denying access to everyone. Justifying the legislation by majority opinion reinforces instead of corrects public lack of understanding and misperceptions. It is the opposite of political leadership. It is irresponsible governance more than child protection.
A third concern is the use of arbitrary ages, such as 16 for hormone treatment and 18 for surgery, as a dividing line in this area of public policy. Young people develop and mature in dramatically different patterns, especially sexual development. The gradual development extends beyond the age of 18 – even past 75 in my case. Respect for the evolving capacities and development of young people is an important tool in children’s rights. Making age 18 an arbitrary line in something as personal and individual as sexual development is a violation of the rights of young people.
Christians and faith communities have a role to play
For Christians, respect for the rights of young people is consistent with seeing every child as created in the image of God. Each child is called to develop their God-given potential and their own calling to love God, love neighbour, and find their place in God’s mission in God’s world. God has a relationship with each child as a person of worth, not as a future person or just through parents. Children are persons with moral agency and evolving capacities to make decisions that affect their own person and development, with the support and guidance of adults in their home, community, church, and school. Adults often underestimate the capacities of young people to discern right and wrong, and develop their own spiritual relationship with God.
We can stand with young people and stand up for them when their rights are being violated, including their right to their own spiritual development.
Churches and faith communities should be places where young people can test, explore, and develop their own potential. We can stand with young people and stand up for them when their rights are being violated, including their right to their own spiritual development. Church members could provide spaces for young people who are now being denied spaces in schools for open and honest learning about sexual development, help them find the health care they need, and challenge and protest public policies that violate the rights of young people. The Christian education community could provide public leadership by providing truly comprehensive and integrated sexual education that respects the rights and evolving capacities of children as moral agents in relationship to the God who loves them.
Parents are supporters and duty-bearers, not owners
Parents have the privilege and duty to support and guide young people as they develop their full potential. Jesus, for example, pointed to children in the middle of the circle as God’s chosen, not just through their parents, and he suggested the harshest treatment, a millstone at the bottom of the lake, for those who violate the rights of children. Parents are not owners of children as property and should not have absolute control. Young people are also citizens and have a right to expect governments to protect their rights. Ironically, in Alberta right now, parental control is absolute in access to sexual education and then taken away entirely in the matter of gender-affirming health care. Both of those fail to respect the rights and moral agency of young people themselves and they inhibit the maturing process for young people to become full participants in the society as well as their homes. They also fail to respect the important role of parents, as outlined in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which Alberta and Saskatchewan have ratified. Checks and balances are needed, also, to ensure that children growing up in contexts that do not respect their rights can have access to other spaces of support.
The current trend in public discourse and policies for trans youth is serious regression in how Canada implements the rights of young people, which should be of concern to all Canadians and Christians. The hope is that public mobilization in opposition to it will lead to more will reverse the silencing and give voice to young people and families. Support for the court cases that put the rights of young people at the center could lead to a re-think of how we respect the evolving capacities and moral agency of young people in Canadian society.
In the meantime, we can all stand with trans youth by creating spaces where they are heard and helped instead of silenced and put at greater risk. We can also stand up for trans youth by letting our political leaders know that putting down trans youth is not child protection or a way to get our votes.
– Kathy Vandergrift Kathy brings years of experience in children’s rights and abuse prevention to her analysis. In 2008 she received the UNICEF Aldo Farina Award for international education and advocacy about children’s rights. In 2024 she received the King Charles Coronation Medal for her advocacy for children’s rights in Canada.
(Send us an email with your thoughts and let us know if we have your permission to add them here.)