Liberal narrative & victimhood 24x7. This is why we can't have nice things.
(media.patriots.win)
⚠ NSFCucks ⚠
Comments (20)
sorted by:
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES
•
All
General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
She was 16 when she started puberty blockers, 17 when she started hormones and 20 when she had a double mastectomy. A minor cannot enter into a legally binding contact, so anything she would've signed for the first two would be inadmissible.
Or it’s admissible as evidence against the defendants/knowingly having a 16 year old sign a contract/waiver indicates that they knew that what they were doing was wrong.
Agreed. One wonders why she's not suing her parents, but I'm sure she's going after the deep pockets. Quelle surprise.
https://www.gillhams.com/site/library/legal_articles/minors_and_contractual_agreements.html
Based off that and the way the UK is approaching gender reassignment as being a medical necessity, there’s a very good case to be made that she understood what she was doing and that it was medically necessary, thereby making the contract binding, as it should be. It sucks for her, but these people obviously are incapable of learning in any other fashion other than coming face to face with the consequences of their own poor decisions. Her parents included
Trying to remove or ignore the consequences of our decisions is the widest and most tread road to ruin.