ABA Journal


Constitutional Law

Sex-reassignment surgery of infant in state’s care violated due process, adoptive parents allege

May 15, 2013, 12:39 pm CDT


This is so sad on so many different levels.

By Wow on 2013 05 15, 3:20 pm CDT

I'm no doctor, but it would seem as if the question should be what was the Standard of Care when the surgery was performed, not what the Standard of Care was 7 years later.

By OKBankLaw on 2013 05 15, 3:43 pm CDT

Truly heart-breaking story

By Yankee on 2013 05 15, 3:49 pm CDT

OKBankLaw seems correct to me, but this article doesn't say how far back the current standard of care comes from. It could have been the standard of care 20 years ago and, remaining unchanged, also be the current standard of care.

By Hooraytheist on 2013 05 15, 5:27 pm CDT


That's true, but since the article made a point of using the word "current", it led me to question whether the "current" Standard of Care was different than 7 years ago Standard of Care.

By OKBankLaw on 2013 05 15, 6:57 pm CDT

OKBankLaw raises a great point. In the past, when an infant was born with what was then called "ambiguous genitalia" the parents were strongly urged to choose a gender and allow the necessary surgery. This was the practice when I was an operating room nurse back in 2004. The condition has since come to be known as a disorder of sex development and the current trend is to avoid irreversible surgery. And yes, I agree, regardless of the standard of care at the time of the child's birth, the situation is heartbreaking.

By LegalNurse on 2013 05 15, 7:55 pm CDT

Not only does No. 2 have an excellent point on the timing issue, there may be a local practice issue in attempts to even determine a "standard," since the vast majority of surgeons won't come within a mile of these Frankenstein procedures.

By B. McLeod on 2013 05 15, 11:08 pm CDT

Add a Comment

We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.