Alberta court halts ban on gender affirming care for youth as Premier vows to fight decision
Live Events
Why this matters
(You can now subscribe to our
(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel
A judge's decision last week to temporarily block Alberta 's new law banning gender-affirming care for youth under 16 has sparked a deep and emotional debate, one that centers not just on legal arguments, but on the real lives of vulnerable young people.Justice Allison Kuntz granted the injunction, warning that halting access to puberty blockers and hormone therapy could inflict 'irreparable harm,' including forcing children through irreversible physical changes that don't align with their identity. 'The evidence shows that singling out health care for gender diverse youth will cause irreparable harm,' she wrote. Premier Danielle Smith countered forcefully during her radio show on June 28, stating, 'I feel there will be irreparable harm to children who get sterilized at the age of 10; we want those kids to have their day in court.' She emphasized the government's strategy as a precaution: preserving fertility until adulthood and cautioning against premature 'life-altering decisions.' The Premier described her approach as 'solid, measured, evidence-based—and on the side of kids.' Behind the courtroom rhetoric are dozens of health-care professionals and families urging Alberta to reconsider. Doctors explain that puberty blockers, used since the 1980s, even for cisgender children, are reversible and often life-saving. Studies show they reduce long-term mental health risks when started at ages 14–15.Trans youth advocacy groups agree. Bennett Jensen of Egale Canada, which helped initiate the court challenge alongside the Skipping Stone Foundation, said the injunction provides 'huge relief' for the five youth (ages 6–11) named in the case. NDP Leader Naheed Nenshi celebrated the court's decision as 'a great day for young Albertans who simply want to live authentically and safely,' calling the law 'demonizing vulnerable kids'.Federal Health Minister Mark Holland called the policy 'deeply disturbing,' warning it risks children's safety and urged dialogue with Alberta's government . Alberta's legislation, first introduced in late 2024, was part of a larger package also affecting school pronouns and trans inclusion in sports. It passed the legislature in December but awaited full proclamation.The legal battle now moves upward. The court injunction offers temporary protection, but the core question of whether provincial governments can bar access to gender-affirming care without violating the Charter of Rights will be decided by a higher court.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
39 minutes ago
- Economic Times
NATO's 5% pledge: Rearming the West or rebalancing the world
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel In an era where geopolitical boundaries are blurred and warfare has morphed from trenches to tech, NATO 's recent commitment to invest 5% of GDP annually in defence by 2035 sends a thunderous signal—not just to adversaries, but to allies questioning the alliance's strategic relevance. The Hague Summit Declaration, adopted by 32 member states, marked a pivotal moment in transatlantic security thinking. The question now is whether this is a forward-looking strategy or a reactionary bulwark clinging to the past the core of the declaration lies an emphatic reaffirmation of Article 5—the principle that an attack on one NATO member is an attack on all NATO members. However, the real headline is the proposed ramp-up in defence and security-related spending: 3.5% of GDP earmarked for traditional defence infrastructure and capabilities, and an additional 1.5% for resilience, critical infrastructure protection, and innovation. This is a fundamental reset of NATO's budgetary posture, reflective of a world no longer anchored to the certainties of post-Cold War strategic rationale behind this move is evident in the literature. From Russia's protracted war in Ukraine to hybrid warfare tactics deployed through cyberattacks, misinformation campaigns, and economic coercion, the threats facing the Euro-Atlantic region are no longer just physical; they are systemic. However, the implications of NATO's new doctrine stretch far beyond including Ukraine's security under the umbrella of NATO's own, the alliance is signalling that Kyiv's stability is no longer peripheral—it is central to the European defence architecture. Although the declaration stops short of directly naming Russia as an aggressor, it unequivocally categorises it as a long-term threat. The political calculus here is clear: to maintain unity among diverse member states while advancing a credible deterrent pledging 5% of GDP—especially in times of economic uncertainty, rising public debt, and shrinking fiscal room—will not be without domestic blowback. For many European countries, where defence budgets have long played second fiddle to social spending, the pivot will require not only financial reallocation but also political will. The path to 2035 will be fraught with parliamentary debates, economic trade-offs, and inevitable scrutiny from taxpayers questioning the utility of militarisation during said, NATO's blueprint smartly distinguishes between "hard power" and 'soft shield' spending. By allocating up to 1.5% for cyber defense , critical infrastructure, industrial innovation, and civil preparedness, the alliance acknowledges the multidimensional nature of modern warfare. Drones, AI, satellite technologies, and quantum encryption will define future battles. This is NATO's attempt to future-proof compelling aspect of the declaration is its call to dismantle internal defence trade barriers and catalyse transatlantic industrial cooperation. The subtext? Europe's dependence on American defence systems must evolve into a mutual technological collaboration. With U.S. domestic politics becoming increasingly isolationist and polarised, especially in light of looming electoral uncertainties, Europe has no choice but to shoulder more of the strategic burden of timing of this declaration cannot be ignored. This occurs at a time when questions are being raised about the longevity of American leadership and the cohesion of Western alliances. Populist politics, migration crises, climate-induced conflicts, and digital disruptions are redrawing the map of security concerns. In this light, NATO's 5% commitment is as much about deterrence as it is about staying for all its ambition, the declaration raises a philosophical question: can militarised investment alone secure peace in a world where most battles are fought in cyberspace, legislatures, and courtrooms? While NATO shores up its arsenal, adversaries weaponize currency systems, manipulate public opinion through AI-generated propaganda, and infiltrate supply chains. In such a scenario, defence must be defined not only by missiles and manpower but also by legal resilience, technological agility, and economic its closing remarks, the summit's declaration looks ahead—to Türkiye in 2026 and Albania thereafter. Symbolically, this eastward shift in NATO meeting venues reflects a changing strategic frontier. The frontlines are no longer confined to the Fulda Gap but extend into the Black Sea, Indo-Pacific, and digital cloud networks connecting us NATO's 5% pledge is more than just a budgetary item. It is a test of collective resolve in a fractured global order. If implemented wisely—with strategic clarity, equitable burden-sharing, and an eye on emerging threats—it could become a blueprint for securing liberal democracies in a multipolar, volatile world. But if the focus remains confined to tanks and treaties while ignoring the algorithmic and institutional battlefields of the 21st century, NATO risks building a fortress for yesterday's warThe author is Department of Commerce, Assistant Professor and Research Supervisor, St. Thomas College (Autonomous), Thrissur, Kerala
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Rath Yatra stampede: Puri DCP, Police Commandant suspended following tragic incident
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel Puri DCP Bishnu Charan Pati and Police Commandant Ajay Padhi have been suspended following the stampede at the Jagannath Yatra in the city that killed three people and injured around 50 others, announced Odisha Chief Minister Mohan Charan Majhi announced the transfers of Puri Collector Siddharth S Swain and SP Binit Agarwal after the tragic incident. The state government announced a financial aid of Rs 25 lakh to the next kin of the victims of the stampede.A stampede took place early Sunday morning near the Shree Gundicha Temple in Puri, Odisha. The tragic incident occurred around 4 am when a large number of devotees had gathered near the temple as part of the annual Rath Yatra celebrations. The event attracts lakhs of pilgrims from across said that the injured have been taken to nearby hospitals, and the condition of six of them remains deceased have been identified as Basanti Sahu from Bolagarh, and Premakant Mohanty and Pravati Das from Balipatna. Their bodies have been sent for stampede follows a health emergency on Saturday, when nearly 750 devotees had to be taken to hospitals due to exhaustion and pressure from the dense to health officials, more than 230 people were admitted to the Infectious Disease Hospital (IDH), while about 520 others were treated at the District Headquarters Hospital (DHH). Most were discharged after receiving first devotee in a critical condition was transferred to SCB Medical College and Hospital in Cuttack for further care. At least 12 other patients are still in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU).Officials are keeping a close watch on the situation. The administration has asked devotees to stay cautious and cooperate with the authorities during the ongoing Rath Yatra.
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
Pakistan's Asim Munir threatens India again, rekindles Kashmir issue
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel Pakistani Army Chief Asim Munir on Saturday claimed that India had made two unprovoked attacks, terming it a troubling absence of strategic at the Pakistan Naval Academy in Karachi, Munir blamed India for escalating regional tensions and vowed a decisive response to any future Indian further called Pakistan a "net regional stabiliser," claiming that Islamabad had responded "resolutely" to "unprovoked" Indian military aggression."Despite provocations, Pakistan displayed restraint and maturity, reaffirming its commitment to regional peace," he claimed that India deliberately created tension in the region just as Pakistan was nearing the elimination of the address, Munir once again brought up Kashmir, claiming that "at such a time, we must remember the sacrifices of our Kashmiri brothers who are struggling against India's illegal occupation."'Pakistan is a strong advocate for a just resolution of the Kashmir issue in accordance with United Nations resolutions and the aspirations of the Kashmiri people,' he had termed Kashmir as Pakistan's 'jugular vein' just days before the horrific Pahalgam terror attack that killed 26 civilians."Kashmir is our jugular vein; it will remain our jugular vein; we will not forget it," Munir had said, addressing the Pakistani diaspora response to the deadly attack, India put the Indus Waters Treaty on hold, a decisive blow to its neighbour. This was followed by the launch of Operation Sindoor , which targeted and demolished terror launchpads deep inside Pakistan.A three day military escalation followed as Pakistan and India launched multiple attacks on each other from May 7 to 10.
