First of all, there is no definitive evidence that this child’s body is the way God designed it. As you are aware, there are many birth defects that people are born with. A person born congenitally blind or congenitally missing a limb is not so because of God’s “design” but because of the stain of original sin. It is perfectly licit to believe a person could have an embryonic error that caused their genitalia and reproductive organs to develop inappropriately; it already happens in many intersex and hermaphroditic conditions, disproving the idea that genitalia are infallibly produced in-utero.
Secondly, the Church actually ALLOWS for the surgery as “morally ethical” in “certain, extreme cases.” Therefore, it cannot be an intrinsically evil act, which makes sense, as the Catechism has allowances for surgery in medical and/or therapeutic usages.
Inter-sexed and hermaphroditic instances are not comparable, as they are the result of a malformation in the genital organs. This is something completely and entirely different, and relates to mental perception rather than genetic reality. This is not a simple “birth defect,” in almost all of these cases (all that I’m aware of, but I’m providing an allowance for cases that I am not aware of) the person’s body has developed perfectly in line with their genetic structure. Since we, as Catholics, believe that the body and soul are intrinsically linked, it is not a valid assumption to posit that the soul can be feminine, but the body accidentally became male.
Furthermore, the Church allows for -necessary- surgeries, of which this was not one. The young lady’s body function exactly as it was supposed to, she simply didn’t “feel” right, which is an entirely subjective notion, and not one that should be used in the determination of a person’s sex.
If you’re trying to claim that the Church has allowed for gender reassignment surgery, I’m going to have to ask you to prove it, because it flies in the face of everything I’ve read on the Church’s teachings about the body and soul, and on how they are inextricably linked.
There may be biochemical differences in people with depression, but not anywhere comparable to what’s found in transsexuals. The brain structures that are found in transsexuals have dichotomous sizes in the range of their identified sex. It is also important to note that these ranges are not overlapping, as people are wont to argue, and that the average transsexual woman would have to be around five standard deviations smaller than their “expected” brain size based on birth genitalia, a statistical absurdity.
The problem with this is that it has absolutely zero affect on whether or not the girl is female. Just because the deviations are more pronounced doesn’t mean that they’re not deviations, or that they should be treated as normal. Genetically speaking, she is a girl, and nothing is capable of changing that. I may be a male with a significant number of feminine traits and attitudes, but at the end of the day, my chromosomes still read xy, and I should act accordingly.
There is no Magisterial evidence that this is sinful, whatsoever. There have been no encyclicals, no ex cathedra statements, not so much as a passing comment from a sitting Pope (Pope Benedict’s Christmas address was about genderqueer individuals, a political product of the feminist movement, not about transsexualism, which is a medical condition that essentially disproves genderqueer theory).
Just because the Magisterium hasn’t made a declarative statement doesn’t make something sinful or not sinful. A sin isn’t a sin because the Church says so, the Church calls something a sin because it is one. I am using my prudential judgment to make a determination. It is not binding, nor is it inerrant; what it is is based on what I know of the Church’s teachings about the link between the body and soul, and how it is important that we respect our God-given bodies. It is my opinion that surgeries such as this reject the link between the body and soul, and reject the gift of our bodies. Should the Church ever make a proclamation to the contrary, then I will of course conform, but until that point it remains within my right to reach my own determination, which I have shared
.
To the OP: it is not sinful to transition if one is found by medical authorities to require it. If anyone tells you otherwise, ask them for some form of Magisterial evidence. They will not be able to produce any.
I don’t think we should be looking to the medical authorities to make prudential judgments on whether or not an action is a proper one to undertake. Keep in mind that these are the same people who will frequently advocate for abortion at the slightest hint of defect. Had there been a test to check for this supposed transgenderism, I’d imagine this poor girl wouldn’t have made it to the point of birth.
However, one would question the prudence at this age. Kids go through phases all the time, and it would be better to allow the child to dress/act/have their hair cut how they wish [within reason] until about 7-8, and only then working through the legal avenues and putting them on puberty blockers, etc.
This I can agree with wholly, except I’d push the age back a bit farther.
.