Sex transition for 372 young patients in the London’s NHS clinic,
Sometimes against the mother’s will, 5 doctors fired
In the Italian Senate, a physician’s fight about the transex drug TPR
“For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind.” Some Pharisees who were with him heard him say this and asked, “What? Are we blind too?” Jesus said, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.“.
Gospel of John, 9, 39-41
___di Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio per VT Italia
While in Italian Senate Health Commission has recently begun the investigation to assess the risks associated with the use of triptorelin (TPR), the drug that allows children to block hormonal development in a perspective of sex transition, in England , where treatment for transgender people, even in preadolescence, is regularly carried out since ten years at the public expense, a storm blow up.
Triggering it is the rebellion, with official resignations, of many doctors in charge of the treatment: because they considered excessively fast and shallow the practices of beginning of the gender change process adopted by the structure, in which they operated, the only one authorized by the english National Health Service.
“The only NHS gender clinic for children is risking a “live experiment” by sending hundreds for life-changing medical intervention without sufficient evidence of its long-term effects, experts have warned.” The Times of London writes in a disturbing article published by Lucy Bannerman on Monday 8 April which, in fact, describes children in the process of sexual transition as human “guinea-pig”.
The thorough reportage, however, in substance, makes an update of the previous one of the Manchester Guardian last fall but does not emphasize the disruptive investigation published by the Mail of Sunday on November 18, 2018. The title is sufficient to understand the gravity of that complaint: “How the only NHS transgender clinic for children ‘buried’ the fact that 372 of 1,069 patients were autistic”.
These numbers were carefully hidden in the site of the Tavistock Center, the only healthcare facility authorized to the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS), despite that alarming statistics resulted from the studies of their doctors, as evidenced by the newspaper with a million readers and based in the London district of Kensington.
And was reported also by the Russia Today network that has dedicated an article with ample prominence confirming the validity and gravity of the issue on which, as fuel over fire, the protests of some parents with children already under treatment rained; and even those of a transgender association.
The phenomenon is assuming gigantic proportions in England: in the specialist clinic from the 97 cases of adolescents in care for the transition in 2009, it has gone to 2519 until April 2018.
A question marked by a strongly ideological imprint in which the Christian culture, which proposes a spiritual and natural education of children able to help them overcome their hardships and whims, to that relativist-scientist who, despite the absence of empirical data, claims the right to sell smoky dreams of fulfillment of every impulse, desire or transgression, even anti-naturalistic, at any cost! In the true sense of the word, given that huge business machines gain behind sex liberalism and emotional chaos.
As private individuals who pocket the profits of the trangender interventions in the London clinic paid by public health. Exactly how it will happen in Italy for triptorelin transgender therapies.
«EXPERIMENT NOT REGULATED ON CHILDREN»
“Given the scarcity of evidence, the off-label use of drugs (for outcomes not covered by the license of the drug) in the treatment of gender dysphoria largely means “a live” and unregulated experiment on children,” he told to the Times, Carl Heneghan, director of the Center of Evidence-based Medicine at the University of Oxford, thus crediting the hypothesis that at the present state of sexual knowledge those preadolescents are “guinea pigs” of sexual transitions.
But Professor Marcus Evans, one of the governors of The Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust in his resignation letter from the GIDS authorized center went further:
“In my 40 years of experience in psychiatry, I have learned that dismissing serious concerns about a service or approach is often driven by a defensive wish to prevent painful examination of an ‘overvalued system’ – he complained, as reported by the Guardian in the February 23 issue – I do not believe we understand what is going on in this complex area and the need to adopt an attitude which examines things from different points of view is essential.
This is difficult in the current environment as the debate and discussion required is continually being closed down or effectively described as ‘transphobic’ or in some way prejudicial.”
So a purely epistemological and scientific disquisition on the methods of evaluation and treatment of gender dysphoria immediately opens the door to an ideological and cultural vision that starts from two opposing points of view: that which for the good of the child wants to initiate less invasive interventions possible from a physiological point of view and what to try to contain the emotional turmoil of the very young is willing to comply with any of his desires that can be achieved today with drugs that block hormonal development (not only triptorelin).
“Evans’s decision to part company with the London-based trust, after a 35-year association, will intensify scrutiny of the service which has found itself in the eye of a storm as thousands of young people considering transitioning to another gender seek its help.”remarks the Guardian’s journalist Jamie Doward.
DISPOSAL OF BRAIN IN THE CLINIC FOR TRANSGENDER
The Times highlights that in the specialist development center of the Gender Identity, which is based at the Tavistock Center and the Portman Clinic in the north-west of London (and a branch in Leeds), just in the last few weeks the world market has happened.
“The Times has spoken to five clinicians who resigned from the service because of concerns over the treatment of vulnerable children who come to the clinic presenting as transgender – wrote – They believe that some gay children struggling with their sexuality are being wrongly diagnosed as “transgender” by the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) clinic.
All five former staff were responsible for deciding which trans-identifying youngsters should be given hormone blockers to halt their sexual development.
The vast majority of those who begin blockers go on to irreversible cross-sex hormones once they reach 16”.. According to the London newspaper, there are even 18 specialists who have left the sanctity facility in the last 3 years.
One of the doctors said that they remained so long faithful to their assignment “just to prevent other children from being treated”. According to a report by former team governor David Bell, another of the outgoing, some children assume a trans identity as a solution: “to multiple problems such as the historical abuse of children in the family, mourning, homophobia and a very significant incidence of autism spectrum disorder.
Many children who question their identity may have learned through online resources, or been instructed by parents, what to say to get the results they want.” But it was precisely the “hidden dossier” on autism cases that triggered the initial hurricane that still hangs over the clinic.
THE 372 AUTISTIC CHILDREN ON GENDER SEX THERAPY
«Since 2011, specialists at The Tavistock Centre’s Gender Identity Development Service in London have seen more than 1,000 under- 18s. An internal review discovered 372 of these patients – some 35 per cent – exhibited ‘moderate or severe autistic traits».
Yet despite the potential significance of the figures – and amid growing concerns that youngsters with developmental and mental health problems are being railroaded into medical treatment for ‘gender dysphoria’ – the finding has never been highlighted by the clinic since its publication in June.”
To write these sentences was Stephen Adams, correspondent The Mail on Sunday, who remarked precisely the obvious attempt to concealment by the health facility on its official internet pages: «The fact a high proportion of patients were autistic could only be found by clicking a link to an external website at the bottom of the article».
The medical journal Archives of Disease in Childhood, in fact, reported only on the percentage, but it was then the co-author Bernadette Wren, consultant clinical psychologist at the Tavistock, to confirm to the journalist that it was not a hypothetical generic estimate but a mathematical data inferred from 372 cases of autism ascertained on 1069 children in care (given up to 2017).
The response of a spokesperson of the GIDS center tries to be reassuring but it appears disconcerting: «All the young people who attend our service undertake a complete evaluation for a period of time.
There is a general consensus that a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder is not in itself a reason to exclude individuals from treatment for gender dysphoria». The opinion of Stephanie Davies-Arai, founder of the group of campaigns for parents Transgender Trends: «The fact a third of these patients have autistic traits is of huge concern and I would expect clinical professionals to be seriously investigating it».
The reason is explained by Dr. Sally Powis, an autism expert: «If you know that you are different from when you were a small child, there is a possibility that you consider that your gender is the problem, rather than autism».
According to the psychologist they would be worried by the mutations that are beginning in their body to the point of not knowing how to manage them and therefore seek the simple “escape” to block them. But the doctor «the autistic adolescents he has once the transition is over they could deeply regret if they discovered that exchanging sex did not solve their problems ». Just like lived on his skin by a mother interviewed by the British newspaper.
THE DESPERATE MOTHER FOR THE MENTALLY ILL SON IN TRANSITION
On November 3, as mentioned, The Guardian first reported the doubts of a senior staff member that the psychological and social motivations underlying young people’s desire to change sex were not fully examined.
An opinion immediately shared by a group of parents worried by the suspicion that the service was “fast-bringing young people” to drastic decisions in their lives without fully evaluating their personal stories.
In a letter to the board of directors, according the newspaper, the parents wrote that they feared “that the GIDS team be asked to face and evaluate complex and difficult cases within a very limited time frame”. Family members also objected to the fact that the 17-25 year-olds were diverted to the adult GID center: where, of course, psycosogical explorations are not done.
But it is still the Mail on Sunday that completes the work of the rival tabloid with what may be well defined a scoop: the interview with the parent of a one with serious problems. «The mother of an autistic teenager says she is ‘appalled’ at how the Tavistock Centre accepted her son’s claims that he was transgender but overlooked serious mental health problems – journalist Stephen Adham writes –
The woman, who wishes to remain anonymous, said her 16-year-old son was referred to the clinic by his NHS counsellor after he began insisting ‘out of the blue’ that he wanted to be a girl. The 38-year-old mum said she was ‘extremely upset’ that a senior psychologist accepted her son wanted to change sex, despite knowing he had autism and obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD).
The expert then told her son, her only child, that he could see doctors at the clinic who could prescribe drugs to help him change sex. ‘The psychotherapist from the Tavistock met him for an hour maximum and then made the assumption that changing sex was something that was very settled in his head”, the mother said.
“It was just terrifying. Her main concern was my son’s claims he wanted to be a girl when she should have been worried that he clearly wasn’t in his right mind because of his autism and OCD”». The Tavistock didn’t took part on disputes over the piscological problem but limited itself to defending the method: «Our evaluation process takes place in at least three sessions, often longer. No physical treatment would be offered or suggested after one session».
The health facility claims to comply with strict protocols that in reality, as is well evidenced by the various doctors, do not exist because they are blindly groping in the rooms of mere experimentation of very invasive scientific applications but without evidence. The same reasons why the Italian professor Assuntina Morresi wants to induce the Health Commission of the Senate of the Italian Republic to re-discuss the authorizations for the Triptorelin’s spreading.
ITALIAN PARLIAMENT THE TRIPHTORELIN DEFENSE BY THE PEDIATRICIANS
The alarm sounded in England does not seem to have had any relevance for the paraded doctors, on 10 and 11 April 2019, before the XII Hygiene and Health Commission of the Senate of the Italian Republic which began the examination of the “triptorelin affair” after that this chemical product, used above all for the treatment of prostate and breast cancers, has been authorized by the Italian Drug Agency not only for off-label use, or for purposes other than the original prescription and therefore in the inhibition of development in puberty age of secondary sexual characteristics, but even as a medicine repayable by the National Health System.
A fact that, according to some protesters of this measure (February 25, 2019), could encourage consumption for users and business on the shoulders of the State for manufacturing pharmaceutical companies.
Above all because it could alter the existence of children: according to some, too young to give informed consent. However, from the first auditions conducted by the Senate Commission Bureau, chaired by Pierpaolo Sileri of the 5 Star Movement, the fate of political verification, aimed at deciding whether to review at least the loanable sale, would seem already marked.
Four different groups have in fact already expressed a favorable opinion on the use, although with different prudent recommendations, of course not binding, with the exception of a doctor of the National Bioethics Committee (CNB) who expressed a postscript in contrast with the conclusions of the report of that body.
If on the one hand specialists and pediatricians support the usefulness of the drug TRP in Gender Dysphoria, or the perception of the child that he does not feel adequate to his sex, and in the treatment of the consequent psychological disorders that according to the experts may also have serious self-injurious consequences; on the other there is Professor Assuntina Morresi, professor of the Department of Chemistry, Biology and Biotechnology of the University of Perugia, who challenges its value even for a very simple reason: in a sea of opinions and technical counterparties plus or less detailed «there is no scientific evidence that the one with TRP is the elective treatment for these situations» says the doctor of whom we will report the analyzes below.
THE BUFFALOES SPLIT FOR SCIENTIFIC ACTS IN SENATE
«The Office of the President of the Health Commission, in the context of the examination of the assigned affair related to the use of the medicinal triptorelin (Act No. 207), held some hearings. On Wednesday 10 April, he met with representatives of the National Bioethics and AIFA Committee.
On Thursday 11 April, it was the turn of the representatives of the Italian Pediatric Society – SIPe, the Italian pediatrician doctors association – SIMPE and of the Italian Pediatric Federation – FIMP» reports the page of the XII Commission of the Senate of the Italian Republic which is obviously in the totally cognitive phase.
Given that it would be useless to report the arguments of the Italian Drug Agency, which has already expressed the favorable opinion that allowed its marketing, let us focus on the other interventions, all supplemented by relations rich in scientific details but also lacking and bizarre.
Such as that of Dr. Adima Lamborghini on behalf of the Scientific Committee of the Italian Federation of Medical Pediatricians (FIMP), which in just 18 pages filled with large and schematic writing hovers over the problem, bringing even grotesque allusions that reveal the superficiality of the approach as if it judgment of acquittal of the Triptorelina was already written.
The misleading insertion of the image of the screenshot of the article of Il Giornale “Vatican: yes to the drug to change sex” reported with the title only and without even the text.
A news, referring to the interview with the vice president of the National Bioethics Committee, Laura Pallazzani, corresponding member of the Pontifical Academy for Life, even labeled as “disinformation” from the Bufale.net (fake discovering site) but produced as an implicit subliminal message in a parliamentary hearing, obviously deprives of the contents that are not such to justify the title to effect of the newspaper.
First because the doctor expresses her opinion in favor of the drug in exceptional cases in which “it must be administered only for a short period of time, in order to overcome any serious risks and find the most appropriate forms of accompaniment for the child”; secondly because that does not represent at all a position of the Vatican or of the Pontifical Academy for Life as it counts as “corresponding members” 87 international experts !!!
In my opinion, the inclusion, of course not accidental, of this quotation in an official document for the Senate would justify the immediate exclusion of the FIMP from this and subsequent hearings on health matters: because this is the obvious display of a contribution not only without of minimal scientific value but also artfully manipulated … But this little discovery of ours serves to confirm the climate of bias that hovers around the Trangender children and the cultural confusion, but also the scientific one.
THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE BIOETHICS COMMITTEE
Precisely for this reason, the National Bioethics Committee in its extremely rich double report (text and graphics) immediately puts its hands forward, effectively abdicating its own teleological speculative vocations, starting with a premise: “The Committee does not intend to rebuild on the plan the question of gender identity is historical-sociological and philosophical, although I am aware that this question inevitably remains in the background ».
If bioethics experts omit the socio-philosophical context, I ask myself what contribution they can make given that ethics in relation to life (bios) is a theme primarily of logical morality rather than health doctrine. Having established a well-founded risk of “paralogism” let’s watch what the dossier refers to. «First and foremost» for the NBC there is «the suffering of the adolescent with DG: it is a significant mental suffering, accompanied by a high risk of suicide and self-harm and high levels of depression and anxiety.
Therefore, in cases in which psychological, psychotherapeutic and psychiatric assistance is not conclusive, the use of the drug may be indicated to help the adolescent to face a situation of such complexity ». To many children in difficulty, a trip to Lourdes or Medjugorje, enriched by the rosaries of their parents, brought much benefit and was certainly less invasive than a chemical bombardment.
But in the era of progress, there is a risk of denunciation by asserting truths sanctioned by thousand-year empirical data. We risk being accused of “transphobia” as written by British professor Evans of Tavistock Center. After having thoroughly examined the problem thoroughly, pointing out the difficulty also due to the absence of established scientific evidence, the Bioethics organization conditions his opinion in favor of 7 “recommendations” of which we report the final: «The Committee, in Following what has been emphasized above, in conclusion it recommends a specific determination by AIFA to clarify the particular conditions of drug administration in the diagnosis and treatment of DG in adolescence.
Currently we are still far from a combined approach by a multidisciplinary team and there is no guarantee that the information to parents and the informed consent of the child will be taken with the necessary accuracy. The question of reimbursement and its inclusion in the list established pursuant to Law 648/96 does not solve any of these problems, because it limits itself to stabilizing the use of the drug on an economic level, leaving open the relevant ethical problems expressed in this document».
So, it is a great chaos because «some scientific societies propose its use, as indicated by AIFA» and «some health facilities already deal with individual cases with triptorelin in adolescents with DG, without however a protocol of interventions is yet approved and shared guidelines. The NBC therefore believes that it is appropriate to justify the use of this drug based on a prudent approach».
THE OPINION OF SIMP PEDIATRICIANS: RISKS FOR CHILNDREN’S BONES
The position of the Società Italiana Pedriatricians (SIMPe) is even more cautious. «A use of this treatment in conditions of gender dysphoria to curb development, pending a final choice of the subject, in support of psychotherapeutic treatments, has been proposed in some countries of northern Europe, Holland in particular, to a limited number of subjects, without, however, that there are published scientific studies that guarantee long-term safety», write the specialists who then highlight the “potential risks”: «Certainly, the development of bone mass is strongly blocked and since the peak of bone mass is reached around 23 years (on average 10 after puberty), this can determine an important predisposition to conditions of osteoporosis in adulthood with risk of bone fractures.
Finally, a strongly prepubber condition of the subject, even if it is the result of a personal choice and supported by psychotherapeutic interventions, can expose him to a greater risk of bullying in a context of peers with broadly adult-like somatic characteristics». Damn! But it was the English professors who wrote that some children consider the transgender loophole to escape from homophobic bullying.
In this case the treatment could therefore aggravate the pathology … «From this series of considerations derives the recommendation on the multidisciplinary approach by a team or a specialized center» that accompanies adolescents and their families over time, to allow to fulfill the expectations in the least traumatic way possible and to avoid phenomena of stigmatization and discrimination, with serious repercussions on the adolescent». The drug will also be administered as part of a protocol that also includes psychological, psychotherapeutic and psychiatric interventions, «aimed at removing causes of suffering induced by social motivations».
Above all avoiding forms of self-medication ». But in a country like Italy where helathcare is corrupted by large pharmaceutical companies, the recommendations will obviously become fresh water. As taught by the history of the Hepatitis B vaccine that became mandatory in Italy in 1991 thanks to the 300.000 euros bribe which the former Health Minister Francesco De Lorenzo was convicted. That’s why we need to read Professor Assuntina Morresi’s reflections: at the moment, the only one to have highlighted strong criticism and perplexity on the treatment before the Senate of the Republic.
NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE BUT RISK OF MORTALITY
«I note with satisfaction that the NBC’s response to the AIFA question on the use of triptorelin (TRP) for gender dysphoria (DG) is oriented towards a prudential use of the product, while the inclusion of the TRP in the list of offs reimbursable labels from the NHS, as AIFA has indicated its intention, would risk favoring their use, already regulated only in the off label mode.
I cannot, however, fully share the approved document, and this on the basis of some objections, first of all on the scientific level. In fact, at the current state of knowledge, there is no evidence of the efficacy of TRP for the treatment of DGs in minors during adolescence. On the contrary, from the hearings and from the literature of the sector heavy doubts and perplexities have emerged that, given to the attention of the NBC and of the audited experts have not been answered, and have not found space in the final document.
Therefore i think it useful to reiterate my perplexity, expressed during the discussion of the document, which concern: the consistency of the scientific literature in support (in my opinion really lacking); the ratio itself of the method (the criterion of gender “neutrality”) and finally the bioethical profile (the informed consent of the minor)».
With incredible clarity and capacity for synthesis, strengthened by her work as a columnist for Avvenire (the Italian daily of the CEI, the Conference of Catholic bishops), the professor Assuntina Morresi, a member of the NBC, writes a note with which she basically rejects the approval of the TRP for reasons, even before being ethical, strictly scientific based on the «uncertainty on existing literature data» recognized by the Bioethics Committee itself.
«The authorized use of TPR is first of all for precocious puberty, that is to interrupt a” puberty patologic” (for example for very young children, 7-9 years), while the off label use for DG is to interrupt a” physiological puberty “(for preteens, around 12) – highlights the professor of the Department of Chemistry, Biology and Biotechnology of the University of Perugia – Consequently it is not correct to assume the results of the studies of the block of a “pathological” puberty by TRP (of which there is extensive scientific literature) as valid also for that of a “physiological” puberty , as the sector literature often reports».
Among the concerns mentioned is the example of the “disparity in comparison between peers” of a 7-year-old girl for whom having a breast formed is a serious discrepancy and that of 14 for whom not having it is an anomaly. Dr. Morresi then reiterates the risk already pointed out by SIMPe pediatricians: «to interrupt the bone development for a” pathological “puberty at 7 years, is equivalent from the clinical / biological point of view to interrupt the same development if” physiological “, at 12 years?».
Regarding the effectiveness of the TRP in the DG, the doctor notes the lack of the so-called “follow up”, that is the analysis of the results with advanced therapy, referred to a single case and to a Dutch study on young transgender that confirms the wide use of the drug (111 out of 196) but shows only 55 for the positive outcome: a data deemed preliminary by the same medical writers.
«In these conditions it is not possible to speak of scientific evidence» also because «the existing data on the outcome of the SRS (Sex Reassignmentment Surgery) have a loss at the follow up of 70% of the people treated, and in any case those available show that the rates of all-cause mortality – including suicide – are generally much higher than those of the general population.
The phenomenon of so-called detransitioners also begins to emerge, that is, those who, after a course of gender, surgical and / or hormonal change, consider it appropriate to return to the starting genre (…) so as to provide a section specifically dedicated in the eighth edition of WPATH (World Professional Association for Transgender Health) Standards of Care».
On a scientific level then Morresi breaks every certainty: «The main motivation for the NBC in favor of the TRP is the suffering of the child with DG, above all for the fear of self-injurious behavior and suicidal intentions. But there is no scientific evidence that with TRP is the elective treatment for these situations».
EVEN THE LGBT COMMUNITIES DOUBTS
The implications, according to the professor, are remarkable: «This use of TRP leads to a “limbo” in which they can explore their own genre without the stress of developing a body in which they perceive themselves as aliens, the body remains in a neutral state of early puberty.
How is it possible in these conditions of non-belonging to any gender, “to explore one’s gender identity”? With respect to which hypothesis does it occur and explore, in the absence of a sexed body, that is, in the absence of the physical expression of one’s gender identity, if not an imaginary one?
And what about the typical love experiences of adolescence? Does the suppression of puberty not prevent the first, typical romantic and sexual experiences appropriate for the age (12-16 years)?» The Chemistry teacher adds then a question with which he unmasks the foundations of the No-gender culture:
In the NBC opinion on the disorders of sexual differentiation of minors it was recommended to identify a native sex, defining” the child’s pre-eminent interest in being raised in masculine or feminine sense “. In other words: it is possible to undertake a path of awareness of self-identity, in a lived experience of “neutral” sexual identity that can last up to four years?».
An orientation that in this ethical chaos on sexuality finds even the transgressive par excellence perplexed about triptorelin: «From the internal debate in the LGBT communities some concern about the possibility that the transitional treatment covers / censures a question linked to sexual orientation emerges of the minor: the perception of oneself as not congruent with respect to the genus of birth could depend instead on a sexual orientation of a homosexual type, and not on one’s gender identity. If this were the case, we would be in the presence of an attempt to «cure / modify” a homosexual orientation through a gender transition path, interfering with the development of sexual orientation: an objection also posed by some scholars».
PSYCHIC DISEASES, CONSENT AND CONSEQUENCES FOR FERTILITY
But the most painful notes have yet to arrive and are connected to the alarm of the English doctors of the Tavistock Center on autistic patients: «There is a high co-morbidity associated with Gender Dysphoria. How it is possible to establish the relationship between cause and effect, if one does not proceed first to cure co-pathologies (ex. Depression, anxiety, suicidal instincts, autism spectrum disorders, etc.), to identify the DG with reasonable certainty as a primary cause?
The problem arises because the DG is often presented as “feeling in a wrong body”, thus assuming the perception of oneself, of one’s gender identity, to be correct. It must be excluded that there is at the base a larger or different problem concerning one’s identity, while the body is “right”. Given the choice of the NBC to open to the TRP, making this aspect explicit as a basic criterion for the administration would have been appropriate. The NBC rightly emphasized the difficulties of informed consent.
But he did not mention an essential aspect: the need to inform the child and his family about the consequences for their fertility». It is the further warning launched by Professor Morresi: «at present there is no evidence on the full restoration of fertility in the event of withdrawal from treatment and permanence in the natal genus.
In the case in which, instead, we want to continue a transition path – as seems to happen in the great majority of those who opt for the block of puberty – we go towards a certain sterility, unless we provide for the preservation of fertility by cryoconservation of gametes, when the pubertal development reached allows it».
So comes the reflection on informed consent: «It is known as preadolescents (12 years), as well as adolescents (16 years), having a poor awareness of their procreative potential. It is right to ask how much a child with DG and his family can consciously and freely evaluate all this “and” considering lastly the co-pathologies that often accompanies the child’s DG (anxiety, depression, autism spectrum disorders, suicidal intentions), it is almost inevitable that the consensus in these conditions will slide towards a purely formal act».
Disturbing and imposing questions that reveal the ethical babel now raging on educational and sexual issues especially when pertaining to the depression that the novelist Giuseppe Berto baptized “The dark evil” by giving this pseudonym to contemporary psychoanalysis and psychiatry.
Two scientific worlds in which, like waves of a dark sea, assumptions and intuitions more than certainties clash: but above all paranoia and “Instructions to make themselves unhappy” as the psychological literature giant Paul Watzlawich wrote in his book.
An ocean of stormy motions in which he tried to bring order, centuries ago, a Nazarene carpenter with some fishermen from Galilee. And after having died with the name of Jesus and risen by virtue of that of Christ, he succeeded for almost two thousand years.
Before that “moral collapse” that broke out in 1968 according to recent reflections on the sexuality of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, which we will discuss in a forthcoming article on LGBT and pedophilia: two stepdaughters of the same liberalists fathers of abortion, of Transhumanism, of wombs rented as No-Gender and Transgender and finally of Triptorelina. The new biological weapon in the hands of conspiracy atheists who are trying to destroy the spiritual foundations of Christianity: openly at least since 1717. Pope Leo XIII clearly pointed out in his Encyclical Humanus Genus: the excommunication of Freemasonry. A document of 1884 in which the ethical conflicts of our times and their strategists are already predicted: of which we speak in an article on Satanism in the section Freemasonry and Conspiracy ni or in the one on Chinese newborns with brains altered in Bioethics and Transnumanism.
Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio