United States: Navigating The Murky Waters Of Best Interests With A Transgender Child

Dr. Diane Ehrensaft, child psychologist and author of the acclaimed book "One Pill Makes You Boy, One Pill Makes You Girl," describes "a growing cohort of children who, at ages as young as three or four, announce they do not accept...the gender assigned to them at birth." Similarly, a leading expert on medical treatments for childhood/adolescent gender dysphoria at Harvard Medical School, Dr. Norman Spack, describes that his patients, as young as eight years old, "have been digging in their heels for five years or longer about their gender identity and gender role."

According to the "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders" (DSM-5), gender dysphoria, previously classified as gender identity disorder of childhood (GIDC), is characterized by a marked difference between the individual's expressed gender and the gender assigned to him or her at birth. Gender dysphoria is manifested in children in a number of ways, including strong desires to be treated as the other gender or to be rid of the characteristics of the child's birth sex. The child may also embrace a strong conviction that he or she has feelings and reactions typical of the other gender.

While there is no reliable data as to the frequency of gender dysphoria due to the subjective diagnostic criteria, as well as children suppressing their cross-gender identification into adulthood, experts estimate that at least one in 500 children exhibit gender dysphoric behaviors. And with gender issues increasingly gaining public attention, the visibility of these children will no doubt increase in the years to come.

Still, with little precedent and a generally binary understanding of gender, the legal profession has yet to catch up with the shifting tides. Judges and lawyers alike oftentimes lack experience with issues related to gender and children. That lack of understanding can have serious consequences for the transgender and gender-nonconforming youth.

Without the proper support, caregiving and structures, transgender youth can develop an increased risk of clinically significant distress, anxiety, increased risk of suicide or impairment in social, occupational or other important areas of functioning in children. A 2009 study conducted by Dr. Caitlyn Ryan found that these risk factors are directly linked to the level of family rejection of a child's gender nonconformity, rather than to anything inherent in nonconformity itself. In drawing that causal connection, the study controlled for the effects of other factors, including social pressure a child may experience to conform to gender stereotypes. She and others, including Dr. Ehrensaft and Dr. Spack, advocate for a "supportive approach" or "gender affirmative" model that focuses on providing the gender nonconforming child with support and acceptance as a means of reducing internal psychological stress.

By contrast, some parents may attempt to change their child's gender identity through so-called "conversion" therapy: treatment aimed at trying to change a child's gender identity and lived gender expression to become more harmonious with sex assigned at birth. The World Professional Association for Transgender Health has outwardly condemned this type of treatment, and it has similarly been rejected by every major medical and mental health organization in the United States as ineffective and harmful.

Multiple jurisdictions, including New Jersey, are beginning to restrict the use of conversion therapies on minors. N.J.S.A.§§ 45:1-54, -55; King v. Christie, No. 13-5038, 2013 WL 5970343 (D.N.J. Nov. 8, 2013) (upholding constitutionality of New Jersey's ban for minors); Pickup v. Brown, 728 F.3d 1042 (9th Cir. 2013) (upholding constitutionality of California's ban for minors).

As families grapple with the proper course of treatment for a gender-nonconforming child, one of the most challenging aspects can relate to the legal roadblocks they may encounter. The federal constitution strongly protects parents' right to make decisions on behalf of their children, which will not be disturbed absent a compelling state interest. See Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205, 215 (1972).

However, when parents are divorced and disagree as to the course of treatment that is in the best interests of the child, the courts must intervene under the principles of parens patrie, even without a compelling state interest. S. v. A., 118 N.J.Super. 69, 70 (Ch. Div. 1972), (citing 4Pomeroy's Equity Jurisprudence, §??1304 (1941 Ed.)).

Nearly all states utilize the "best interest of the child" standard in disputed custody cases—a standard that necessarily involves the judge's subjective beliefs about what is best. While legislation, scholarly articles and case law abound with regulation of transgendered parents' right to custody under the best interest standard, there are no New Jersey cases, and in fact, few cases nationwide that bear upon the best interests of a transgender child.

However, when litigating a contested custody case in New Jersey involving a dispute as to the treatment of transgender children, practitioners should take note of two decisions wherein the court modified custody to award medical decision-making power to the unsupportive parent: Smith v. Smith, No. 01-DR-86 (Common Pleas Ct. of Jefferson Cnty., Ohio, Sept. 4, 2004, and Williams v. Frymire, No. 2011-CA-001568-ME (Ky Court of Appeals).

The Ohio case, Smith, revolved around the parties' child, then 10 years old, who had expressed from a very early age a desire to be treated as a girl. Upon the parents' divorce, the mother was awarded custody. While the child was in her care, she supported the child's decision to live as a girl; she allowed the child to wear girl's clothing, go by the name Christine, participate in transgender support groups and generally be treated as a girl.

Several years following the divorce, the father petitioned the court for a change in custody after the mother enrolled the child in school as female without his consent. In an omission that later appeared almost fatal to her case, the mother further failed to obtain a diagnosis of GIDC (now gender dysphoria) prior to undertaking significant decisions relating to the child.

The court entered a temporary order directing the mother to immediately stop allowing the child to wear girl's clothing, to stop referring to the child by the name Christine, to stop using female pronouns and to stop talking privately with the child about the child's female gender feelings.

A lengthy custody dispute followed. At one point between hearings, the father discovered that the mother had violated the court order by allowing the child to wear a girl's swimsuit and was witnessed referring to the child by a female name when speaking with another parent of a transgender child.

During the proceedings, five expert witnesses testified during a custody hearing, two on behalf of the mother, two on behalf of the father and one court-appointed psychologist. Both parents acknowledged that the child wanted to live as a girl and wanted to remain with the mother. The child corroborated these statements in an in camera interview with the judge.

As to the child's in camera testimony, the judge acknowledged that the child relayed a desire to live as a girl. However, the judge rejected the child's statements because he believed the child's gestures were not feminine, because the child did not mention being attracted to boys, and because the child "enjoy[s] a number of stereotypical male activities."

Following the hearing, the judge found that the mother was the actual cause of the child's desire to live as a girl: "Mother had fully embraced the child's female identity clouding the issue of what [the child's] feelings would have been at this point had mother been more supportive of [the child's] masculine identity." He further concluded that the child's "[m]other has not only been supportive of his female identity but has actually charged headlong into it with the apparent objective of making it come true."

The judge found the mother's refusal to allow the child to engage in corrective therapy to be extremely persuasive evidence to support his belief that the mother caused the child's cross-gender identification: "So resistant was she to the idea that [the child] should have a male identity that she refused to allow father to take [the child] to see Dr. Kenneth Zucker, who is reputed in the field to have data showing the condition to be reversible."

Ultimately, the judge awarded custody of the child to the father, allowing the mother only limited visitation.

Similarly, in the Kentucky case, Frymire, the judge modified custody to award primary caretaking and medical decision-making of the minor child to the father, who testified that he did not believe the child had a gender issue. The five-year-old girl in that case wore boy's clothing, was referred to by a male name and generally insisted on being treated as a boy.

At trial, the child's therapist testified that the child had GIDC, although she admitted that she did not perform any psychological tests prior to making that determination. The child's art therapist concurred, although she admitted that she lacked experience with transgender youth. The mother's expert thereafter affirmed the diagnosis.
In modifying custody from sole to joint, with the father being designated as the residential parent, the court did not dismiss the possibility that the child may have GIDC, but noted that girls can prefer male sports, toys and clothes without being medicated or requiring intervention. The Court of Appeals thereafter affirmed.

It appears that in both cases, there were a myriad of actions that the supportive parent could have undertaken to attain a more favorable result. At times, it seems that each case turned on technicalities: for instance, the supportive parent's failure to follow the court's orders, failure to obtain a qualified diagnosis prior to making significant decisions affecting the child, or failure of an expert to conduct the appropriate psychological testing.

Asaf Orr, a staff attorney with the National Center for Lesbian Rights who regularly represents parents in custody disputes involving transgender children, says that practitioners have much to learn from the actions of the supportive parents in both Smith and Frymire. He advocates that when confronting cases that involve childhood gender variance, practitioners should focus on the following guiding principles:

1. Encourage a supportive parent to retain competent health-care professionals from the very beginning. Orr believes that it is critical for the supportive parent to seek the advice of a competent health-care professional before making any major decisions regarding the child, including a psychologist, therapist or medical doctor. The attorney should ensure from the start of the case that the supportive parent follows the advice of those health-care professionals. The healthcare professional should treat the child as his or her patient and communicate with each parent openly and address any concerns raised by either parent.

2. Educate the court on the needs of transgender and gender-nonconforming youth.Like the general public,courts often have had little experience with issues involving transgender and gender-nonconforming youth. As a result, it is critical to be prepared to educate the court through the information contained in the pleadings and supplemented by scholarly materials and expert testimony. This will help the court better understand the child as well as the reason that the supportive parent is seeking the proposed custody arrangement or modification. In addition to having been successful in educating courts in several other cases, this approach creates a strong record for appeal, either to defend the court's order or demonstrate why it must be reversed.

3. Adopt a measured approach. Orr says that it is critical for supportive parents and transgender children to be patient with the transition. It is important to counsel your client to abide by court orders and to involve the noncustodial parent in decisions regarding the child's transition. This modicum of caution may mean delaying certain decisions. Orr warns that failure to act methodically and cautiously in this manner could result in the loss of custody to the nonsupportive parent, which could be more damaging than delaying transition. Nevertheless, attorneys should work with their clients to determine a strategy that will minimize the distress of delaying transition, while creating a record that supports the custody or modification being sought by the supportive parent.

As visibility of gender issues grows, New Jersey courts will no doubt soon encounter disputes such as those examined herein. Approaching these highly contentious and sometimes stigmatized gender issues in the proper way may determine the ultimate outcome of these cases.

Reprinted with permission from the June 5 issue of the New Jersey Law Journal. (c) 2014 ALM Media Properties, LLC. Further duplication without permission is prohibited. All rights reserved.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Fox Rothschild LLP
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Fox Rothschild LLP
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions