Judge praises couple as 'good partents' for sending four-year-old boy to school in a girl's uniform
Social workers had accused the couple of being too quick to consider the child - who has been referred to as 'H' in court - as transgender at such a young age
A senior judge called a couple "good parents" and praised them for sending their four-year-old son to school wearing a girl's uniform. This comes following social workers accusing the couple of being too quick to consider the child - who has been referred to as 'H' in court - as transgender at such a young age, reports Daily Mail.
They even threatened to take H into care as they believe the couple had "actively encouraged" the child and "acted in a precipitate manner in relation to perceived gender dysphoria."
However, High Court judge, Mr. Justice Williams, exonerated the couple, called them "attuned and careful" parents who are definitely invested in H's welfare. A gender specialist had previously told the judge at the Royal Courts of Justice in Westminster that H's "gender-related presentation was consistent with a diagnosis of gender dysphoria."
They added that she "clearly identified herself as a girl" and "appeared to be a content, alert and socially engaged little girl."
The judge had also said that H had suffered no harm as a result of her "complete transition into a female occurring at a very young age." He added: "The evidence demonstrates to the contrary, this was likely to minimize any harm or risk of harm. The evidence does not support the contention that it was actively encouraged rather than appropriately supported."
H and the other children currently under the couple's care were said to be "prospering" and it was also "overwhelmingly obvious" that the couple are good parents.
Reportedly, the family's local council had initially sought the "immediate removal" of H and the other children from the couple's house. Social workers claimed that the couple was "resistant to acknowledging any potential disadvantage to H of being identified as transgender prematurely." They believed there was a risk involved since the man's "attitude to gender dysphoria might lead to faulty decision-making."
The couple was also accused of "failing to prioritize" H's needs - which they said was jeopardizing her emotional, physical and sexual development. Eventually, the council withdrew the care proceedings once the glowing expert reports of the couple's parenting skills emerged. Still, feeling like there was "a cloud of suspicion hanging over them," the couple sought complete exoneration in a public judgment.
The judge said that the care proceedings had had "a very obvious and considerable" impact on the couple. He also told the court: "It is self-evident that it is not in the children's welfare interests for these proceedings to continue any further. The lives of this family should now proceed on the basis that those concerns were comprehensively dispelled." He also shared that the expert evidence "provided clinical justification" for the couple's approach to how H identified herself. H's six-year-old brother - 'C' - also acknowledged that she was a "boy when she was born," but showing a "nuanced understanding" of gender issues, the little lad added that his sister was "now a girl and would grow up to be a woman."
The judge concluded saying, "Issues relating to gender identity and the medical understanding of such issues is complex and developing. Inevitably there is some lag between those professionals at the cutting edge and others, in which I include myself, which might have played some role in how these proceedings came about. Beyond that I will not venture."