Judge stops transgender female from seeing her children who live in an Ultra-Orthodox Community

At the end of last month a transgender female, who fathered 5 children, has been stopped from seeing them on the orders of a UK family court judge. The birth mother lives in an ultra-Orthodox Jewish (Charedis) community in Manchester where they are isolated from everyday British life and reject secular society. The birth father was also a member of this community but he opted to leave in 2015 and started living as a woman. This is a fairly complex case. Cases brought to the family courts in the UK are often held in private. In this case the judgement was approved for publication.

The children are a boy aged 12 (A), twin boy and girl aged 8 (B and C), a boy aged 5 (D) and a girl aged 2 (E).

The birth mother's argument is that the children would be ostracised by their ultra-orthodox community and unable to live normal lives due to their association with a transgender parent. It is interesting to note that Orthodox Jewish rabbis, acting for the birth father, argued that Judaism did not believe transgender individuals should be punished in this way.

The birth father's argument is that the community's opposition should be confronted and challenged legally. The birth father believes the threat of the children being marginalised should not trump her right to see her children. The birth mother responded stating that it was unfair to expect the children to bear the impact of their father’s decision to become a woman.

The birth father is allowed to send letters four times a year, with the suggestion that these could be sent to mark three Jewish religious holidays – Pesach, Sukkot and Hanukkah as well as the the children’s birthdays.

The Children’s Act (1989) states that the welfare of a child is the court’s ‘paramount consideration’. This is now the governing force behind all family law cases. The judge, in this case, also had to consider provisions of the Equality Act, which say that no one can be unfairly discriminated against because of their gender, and the child’s right to ‘preserve his or her identity’, under Article 8 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Reading through the actual court judgement, which I have linked below, the judge respected and was acutely aware of both the right for religious expression and the rights of transgender individuals. The ruling was based solely on a probability that the children, along with their birth mother, would be rejected by their community if the children were to have face-to-face contact with the father.

A few snippets:



The evidence from the birth father (Transgender female) starts at paragraph 58 on page 13. The birth mother's evidence starts at paragraph 69 on page 15. There also appears to be an accusation from the birth mother that the birth father inappropriately touched the 4 year old (presumably the now 8 year old). This was investigated and the judge dismissed it due to lack of evidence (paragraphs 28-32 on page 6).





I am struggling with this ruling although I understand how and why he came to his conclusions. The children's welfare was paramount in his decision-making but at the same time the birth father has lost all access to his children solely for becoming a transgender female.

Several issues spring to mind:

Should religious groups who agree to be governed and live a certain way be criticised for not living alongside and integrating with secular groups?

Would the people who support this ruling still agree if the group was Muslim living under Sharia law in the UK?

Was the judge acting in the best interests of the children by allowing them to continue living in an ultra-Orthodox group and be isolated from every day British life?

I quite like this from Luke Gittos, Law Editor at Spiked:

What the evidence in the case really showed was that surrounding these children were a group of adults who were unable to reconcile their apparent differences without recourse to the law. The father was wrong to argue that her choice to become a woman should be, in effect, validated by the court, notwithstanding the potential impact on the children. On the other hand, she was also right to say that she should not be denied access to her children because of her life choices.

This case showed that the law can never tell us what is right or wrong. It can only decide which side the law should favour in any given scenario. This is one case in which a whole series of rights came into conflict. In these cases, involving complex human relationships, a judge can merely fall down on one side. The sad fact of this case is that the result does not reflect what is right or wrong, only what the law favours at this particular moment.

Transgender woman stopped from seeing children because it is 'incompatible' with their Jewish faith

Family Court Judgement

The tragedy of the transgender ultra-Orthodox case

well, his/her mental health can be called into question

Well then, hopefully, when the mothers illness is addressed and sorted out she can see her kids again.

It's even more unusual and cruel to subject children to their 'mother' who is their father, and their father who is really their mother - that would do damage to the children, no doubt. The damage would be subtle but it would grow.

I agree with the judge on this one. People who deny biology are, in fact, not sane.

I mean do we call her/him? Him/her zhe/whee? What!?

a reply to: Morrad


Here we go. Certain people like to find ONE story and make it an issue.

Let's bring transgender talk to the table because we have NO trees to save or dolphins to stroke.


Segregation is caused by the PC people of the world. Always sticking their noses in where it doesn't belong.
Making an issue out of nothing

a reply to: dashen

"well, his/her mental health can be called into question"

Same could be said about a significant percentage of the population of our planet.

I don't understand transgender people ether, but i don't have to.

End of the day people are people and should be treated equally, plenty of people with mental health issues(highly debatable that transgenderism is a mental health issue) still get to see there children.

a reply to: dashen

If this person has been diagnosed by mental healthcare professionals as having true gender dysphoria, then it is NOT a mental illness issue. The healthcare professionals will tell you that. Would you believe healthcare professionals?

a reply to: kaylaluv

"true" gender dysphoria? is there a "faux" gender dysphoria?

a reply to: Morrad
That's one of the side-effects of making a big issue out of "minority rights". What happens when the "rights" of two different minorities come into conflict?

Sex changes are not effective, say researchers

a reply to: reboot23

Thanks, I thoroughly enjoyed reading your comprehensive and well thought out detailed assessment of my OP. Your in depth analysis certainly adds to the discussion.

a reply to: dashen

Maybe. Personally, id take a possibly delusional, mood swinging transgender person as a friend over an uncaring sadistic sociopath any day of the week. Tit for tat its pretty obvious to me the types of people that are actually dangerous.

a reply to: dashen

There are mental illnesses where someone might think they want to be an opposite gender, such as schizophrenia. But schizophrenia involves many other symptoms that distinguish it from true gender dysphoria. A mental health professional can tell the difference. The treatment for schizophrenia is anti-psychotic meds, which helps the symptoms of the psychosis. The treatment for gender dysphoria does NOT involve anti-psychotic meds (as they don't help the dysphoria at all), but instead involves encouraging the person to make whatever physical changes that will alleviate the dysphoria.

a reply to: OneGoal

elective castration is all the rage these days.

are you calling me an uncaring sadistic sociopath?

Because im only a few of those things

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: dashen

There are mental illnesses where someone might think they want to be an opposite gender, such as schizophrenia. But schizophrenia involves many other symptoms that distinguish it from true gender dysphoria. A mental health professional can tell the difference. The treatment for schizophrenia is anti-psychotic meds, which helps the symptoms of the psychosis. The treatment for gender dysphoria does NOT involve anti-psychotic meds (as they don't help the dysphoria at all), but instead involves encouraging the person to make whatever physical changes that will alleviate the dysphoria.

Except that doesn't work either, the suicide rate goes UP post op.

What's your point?

a reply to: OneGoal

Like axe murderers you mean?

Nah, the truly dangerous people are the ones who fight for causes they have no right to be fighting. Their zeal is dangerous.

a reply to: kaylaluv

I believe delusional thinking and OCD obssessive compulsive combinations can yield this issue in some, definitely.

a reply to: OneGoal

I have medically diagnosed Pure 'O' OCD and I know for a fact that OCD people are told NOT to act on their compulsions. So there goes that theory.

The guilt and very real emotional trauma you experience during compulsions and ruminations almost disables your ability to act on them as you're already feeling the consequences of an act you haven't even committed, also the acts are always diametrically opposed to the person's true character.

originally posted by: Morrad
a reply to: reboot23

Thanks, I thoroughly enjoyed reading your comprehensive and well thought out detailed assessment of my OP. Your in depth analysis certainly adds to the discussion.

No, it just points out people who cry attention and poke issues that are not an issue if words like transgender were not used. "Minority" groups didn't ask you to shed light on their woes. IT seems like the people who are not inside these minority groups are the ones who love to bring attention to something they see as normal.

So, please don't try and bring certain things to light for your own flag?star gathering.

I'm weighing victim classes.
This is difficult. Being Jew is definitely a heavyweight when it comes to identity politics, anti-semite a tried and true slander move.
Transgender is an up and comer. Really starting to its prowess as wedge issue over simple things like bathrooms, along with destroying children brains(physically, mentally) and children's identities. Destroying traditional norms is always a big plus for a victim class.

I think I'll have to go with the tried and true jews. The anti-semite slur is just too strong to risk it.

Here is my actual opinion. The father was selfish. she should have waited. A person's children come first. I don't think the court was right, but I am not close to the case to know the little details. I won't lose any sleep over it.

a reply to: Joneselius

Some are undiagnosed, and we both know that being told to not act on compulsions isnt always effective in some.