Hormone Replacement Therapy - Should Parents Be Allowed to Offer to Children?

It is perfectly okay for someone to go through hormone replacement therapy under legitimate medical conditions. Issues like a man born with one testicle, or a woman's adrenal gland being out of whack. I am not concerned about these types of people. Moreover, I am concerned about a completely different thing. It is what most people think of when someone refers to "hormone replacement therapy".  Specifically when someone wishes to transition from a man to a woman and vice versa. I have a fundamental issue and it may not be for the reason people might think when they hear: "I don't support children having hormone replacement therapy for the purpose of transitioning."

"1stamender, you sound like a bigot!"

This is a fair reaction to what I just wrote. Though, hear me out. I believe in trans people's individual liberties. I believe in trans rights. Being that they ultimately have ownership over their own body, it is absolutely fundamental that they are able to do what with their body as they see fit. Just as a man or woman has a right to tattoo themselves or apply piercing, effectively what some might think as physical mutilation, yet people are generally okay with it. This is how I see people who transition. Those that choose to alter their body to their desires. I don't find anything wrong with that at all.

Question is, what about children? What if a child requests to go through hormone replacement therapy? In my opinion, they have no right to and neither does the parents. I consider it to be similar to that of physically placing a child in physical danger. Or even better, that a child must possess their autonomy. Any body modifications of any kind should not be allowed until they are able to properly assess consequence in their life. Namely when the prefrontal cortex of the brain (the portion of the brain that handles consequence and reason) is not fully developed until 25 years of age. Some might say that the prefrontal cortex is developed just enough at 18, or that it is even enough at 16. Take the example of sex itself. Why can't a parent sell their children into sex? Because while a child cannot consent whether or not they said yes or no to the request, they ultimately maintain their bodily autonomy.

Because they possess ownership of their body, their posteriority cannot simply revoke that body to then be destroyed. The only thing the parent, the posteriority, can do is effectively make that body better/stronger to handle life or to make life easier for them. This of course, while forcing the child, does not revoke autonomy because the child cannot yet understand the consequence of their own individual actions. Just as you sit a child in a dentist seat by force, the child would resist and cry and moan, yet we hold the child down for we know the consequence of what it is to "not" take the child to the dentist. Of course, while we force them, we do not destroy their bodily autonomy while doing so.

Now back into the thought if a child has a right to consent to transitioning, unequivocally, NO. There is no instance of consent. A child has no ability to claim this. Being that taking these hormones adversely affect the body in hormonal growth permanently, but also affect the way the body is shaped and formed as they age, it cannot be granted to them until they themselves can assess the consequence of their actions. Therefore, I have come to the conclusion while a child cannot "consent" to sex is the same exact reason why a child cannot "consent" to hormone replacement therapy, a tattoo, cigarettes, or anything of the sort even with the permission of the parent to do so. The purpose for these societal rules is to preserve individual autonomy over body, and leaving the choice to the individual who can cognitively understand consequence and fundamentally live with the consequence now that they fully understand it.