Transgender Is A Stalking Horse For The Normalization Of Pedophilia

Juno News;

Newfoundland parents just got the memo: Once your kid turns 12, the government says you’re no longer automatically entitled to know what’s in their medical records.

A June 19 letter from NL Health Services quietly ended automatic parental access to children’s health information. From age 12 to 15, parents now need the child’s permission to see the records. At 16, the teenager takes full control.

Sarah James Furlong, a concerned parent, took to social media in a bid to raise awareness of the apparent government assault on parental rights. Furlong is calling on parents to contact the Minister of Health, Lela Evans, to reverse the decision.

“I respect children’s rights and understand the importance of privacy,” Furlong said in a Facebook post. “However, I believe parents have a fundamental responsibility to protect, support, and advocate for their children—and that responsibility doesn’t end when a child turns 12.”

The move fits a pattern. Newfoundland and Labrador already lets students in Grade 7 and up change their names and pronouns at school without parental consent. Now the same province is extending that logic into medical records.

You bet it fits a pattern.

14 Replies to “Transgender Is A Stalking Horse For The Normalization Of Pedophilia”

  1. The image in Keean Bexte’s tweet of the woman giving the finger to parents says it all.

  2. Vote Liberal/Conservative/NDP
    Get Sodomized

    Typical Canadian: “I want the Government to DO Something!”

    They are, you idiots, they are.

  3. Memo to Newfie Parents:
    You can take the kid out of Dildo (NFLD), but according to the guvmint you can’t take the dildo out of your kid.

  4. One look at the picture of the NL Minister responsible is all you need to know.

  5. You know, in a country where an electorate (parents) had balls, it would never happen. They do it because they can. The best tool in their toolbox is the knowledge that resistance will be limited to a bit of whining and moaning.

    1. If I thought Canadians as a group had balls, I’d go long on hemp futures.

  6. “We cannot continue to send our children to Caesar for their education
    and be surprised when they come home as Romans.” ― Voddie T. Baucham Jr.

  7. given that at that age, any serious deliterious consequences of deliberate medical procedure **whatever*** the heck it might be, will land a great deal in the LAPS of the parents.
    on that basis alone should they not have access and knowledge of all medical records? hmmm?
    its like someone has all liability in a situation but no control.
    w t eff????
    ah, but looking at the rainbow flag mug one can see what the ROOT AGENDA is here.

  8. When my children turned 12 … I became very observant about who their friends were. I counseled them to be cautious about hanging out with unsavory friends. At least I didn’t have to worry (then) that the government would be the MOST unsavory of their so-called friends.

    1. Old Bob Hope joke: “They just legalized homosexuality here in California. I’m moving out before they make it mandatory.”

      1. Worse … trans … has already been made mandatory. And woe unto any parent who “denies” their child’s “authentic self”.

  9. I went down the rabbit hole on this one looking for a loophole. First, I determined that a parent could enter into a contract with their child to show them all medical information, but Newfoundland would not require a minor to comply. Then, I asked whether the medical privacy law would contradict the ability to list a child refusing to provide permission to view all medical information as a dependent. The response was that medical privacy and tax policy are two separate legal frameworks, and not interchangable. But, it stated that dependency included “financial support.” To which I responded, medical bills don’t pay themselves and despite the claim of Canadian healthcare being “free” there would be out of pocket costs. That IS a form of financial support. And, if a parent is obligated under child welfare law to provide financial support, isn’t it required that proper documentation be provided to make an informed decision on a minor’s medical treatment?

    The response is chilling: ” In extreme cases, completely withholding necessary medical funding because of a portal dispute could be viewed by child welfare authorities as medical neglect, regardless of the parent’s frustration with the privacy policy.”

    Newfoundland is insane.

Navigation