7-year-old put into father’s custody after mother ‘raised him as female’
A seven-year-old boy has been removed from his mother’s care because ‘she was raising him as female.’
High Court judge, Mr Justice Hayden, ordered for the child to be moved into his father’s care because his mother had caused her son “a great deal of emotional harm.”
Judge Hayden said: “It is striking that most of the boy’s interests are male-oriented. I am entirely satisfied, both on the basis of the reports and the father’s evidence at this hearing, that he has brought no pressure on the boy to pursue masculine interests. The boy’s interests and energy are entirely self-motivated.”
However, it is unclear whether the child was actually experiencing gender dysphoria or the mother encouraged a female identity onto her child.
Mermaids, a charity for transgender youth that work to support children and teenagers with gender identity issues. have reportedly supported the family for over two years. The organisation said that local authorities have taken a girl away from her mother and forced her to live as a boy.
They described the move as a “huge injustice and transphobic practice,” and described the ordeal as “devastating for the child”.
A petition has been started in wake of the ruling which states: “a recent court case has ruled a young trans girl to be removed from her mother and forced to live in her assigned gender. The mother has done nothing but provide support her child in being who she really is and has given her all the love and care in the world to allow her to live out as her true and authentic self.”
The initial investigation was launched after staff at the boys school contacted the social services department, and when the NSPCC received an anonymous call from someone who was concerned the mother had “stated twice in a week that the boy is transgender.”
Mermaids have described this phone call as malicious.
Concerns were also raised for the mental health and behaviour of the boy’s mother.
More from PinkNews
The High Court judge explained that the social services report from 2013 made “very disturbing reading” and alongside other reports, indicated that there was “widespread unease.”
Mr Hayden said: “What is perhaps most striking about the information that was being drawn to this local authority’s attention is that it came from such a wide variety of sources.”
“School staff were reading the situation carefully and were plainly alert both to the boy’s presentation and to the mother’s confrontational and inappropriate behaviour.”
He added: “I am bound to say that had their concerns been given the weight that they plainly should have, it is difficult to resist the conclusion that the boy could have been spared a great deal of emotional harm.”
Judge Hayden has previously written about children with gender dysphoria: “My experience in the Family Division leaves me with little doubt that some children, as young as 4, 5, 6 years of age may identify strongly with their opposite gender. Such children can experience rejection and abuse arising from ignorance both on a personal and institutional level.”
The judge ruled that the identities of those involved the case must be protected.