In James Younger transgender case, judge grants parents joint medical, psychiatric authority

Austin, Texas, Oct 24, 2019 / 05:38 pm (CNA).- A Texas judge granted Jeffrey Younger and Anne Georgulas joint managing conservatorship of their son, James Younger, over whose gender identity his parents have argued in court.

The decision, given by Judge Kim Cooks of a Texas Family District Court, means that both parents have equal decision-making power in their child’s medical, dental and psychiatric treatment, The Texan reported.

Georgulas, who believes James identifies as a girl named Luna, will now have to obtain the consent of Younger before allowing James to undergo any hormonal or psychiatric “gender affirmation treatment.”

Yesterday, a jury ruled against a petition from Younger to obtain sole custody of James and his twin brother Jude, which he filed in an attempt to protect James from “gender-changing” interventions by Georgulas.

Georgulas is reported to believe James identifies as a girl in part because of his affinity for the Disney movie “Frozen” and its female character leads, along with other feminine preferences in toys. She has wanted to affirm James’ identity as a girl, while Younger has advocated for a “watchful waiting” approach to see if James changes his mind as he matures, The Texan reported.

According to the Washington Examiner, expert witnesses called in the court expressed doubts as to whether James actually strongly identifies as female. Younger has said that James identifies as a boy while he is in the care of his father.

Georgulas reportedly wanted to enroll James as a patient at the GENECIS in Dallas in their “Gender Affirming Care Program” for youth. On its website, the clinic says it offers hormone therapy and puberty suppression therapy along with mental health and social services. It does not currently offer “gender transition” surgery. Georgulas and Younger now have joint decision-making power over James’ enrollment in the program. Judge Cooks also reportedly issued a gag order against Jeffrey Younger, which means he is not allowed to discuss the case with members of the press.

The case of James Younger was met with outrage from critics who say it raises seriously ethical concerns regarding the rights of parents and the best interests of children experiencing gender dysphoria.

Several state representatives vowed to draft legislation that would protect children against hormonal treatments for gender dysphoria because of the Younger case.

“Absent a special session between now & the 87th Session, I will introduce legislation that prohibits the use of puberty blockers in these situations for children under 18. We missed our opportunity to do so in the 86th Session. We won’t miss the next one. #savejamesyounger,” State Rep. Matt Krause (R) said on Twitter.

Reps. Jared Patterson (R) and Cody Harris (R) both voiced their support for such legislation in tweeted replies to Krause.

Governor Greg Abbott tweeted that “the matter of 7 year old James Younger is being looked into by the Texas Attorney General’s Office and the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services. #JamesYounger.”

According to The Texan, Rep. Chip Roy (R) sent a letter about the issue to U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr, the director of the National Institutes of Health, and the director of the National Drug Control Policy, asking for a “federal study on individuals who undergo sex-reassignment surgery or hormone treatment before the age of 18,” and the potential harmful consequences of such procedures.


If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!

Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.


  1. Praise God.
    I’m guessing if the case had been in another state and not in Texas, things might have ended differently.
    In the coming decades it’s hard to imagine that there won’t be many malpractice and other suits filed by individuals who were medically experimented upon as children. It’s not unlike the eugenic surgeries of a previous generation. We see gender as something to be erased, a hundred years ago it was race, ethnicity or disability.

  2. I have been reading about this case on many websites, but no one has commented on a point of interest to me. That is, that the child’s legal mother is not the biological mother. I am curious as to who donated the eggs (the actual, biological mother), and what her stance might be? In the past, I recall various legal matters where a biological parent was able to interject and influence a case, even if some contract had previously been signed giving parental rights to another (as is typical with donating eggs).

    • Thank you for mentioning that. I’d brought that up also in a comment in a previous article.
      I heard someone speculate that the mother receiving the IVF treatment may have really wanted a boy and a girl all along. Who knows, but when you separate procreation from what God intended you can end up with all sorts of unintended consequences. And ultimately everyone involved suffers.

  3. I also noticed the left leaning news articles are trying to make this into a partisan thing. It is not.
    It is child abuse.
    God bless

1 Trackback / Pingback

  1. Prime Time Politics & Culture: Monday Edition – Big Pulpit

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

All comments posted at Catholic World Report are moderated. While vigorous debate is welcome and encouraged, please note that in the interest of maintaining a civilized and helpful level of discussion, comments containing obscene language or personal attacks—or those that are deemed by the editors to be needlessly combative or inflammatory—will not be published. Thank you.