King County child advocate dismissed over refusal to support child gender surgeries

A veteran child advocate associated with the Superior Court of King County, Washington has been reportedly dismissed following her refusal to endorse gender-altering surgeries and hormone treatments for children under 12.

The advocate, who has chosen to remain anonymous, informed radio broadcaster Jason Rantz of her seven-year tenure with the Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) Program. This programme is dedicated to training individuals to champion the best interests of children aged 0-11. It has been reported that, after a brief hiatus, the advocate returned to new training requirements and was subsequently removed from her role when she expressed reservations about supporting young children wishing to undergo gender transition surgeries.

“I am very disappointed that CASA, whom I have supported for many years, has succumbed to the extreme liberalism that is rampant today,” the volunteer told Rantz.

“I am appalled that an organization that is supposed to protect our most vulnerable, children between the ages of 0-11, would require that its volunteers be willing to advocate for medical intervention that would alter the natural gender of children.”

A spokesperson from CASA informed Rantz that although volunteers can select individual cases, they are cannot "refuse to serve a category of children."

“Among the commitments made by CASA volunteers in their oath is to maintain objectivity, treat all persons with respect, fairness, and courtesy regardless of their human diversity,” the spokesperson said.

“CASAs also commit to maintain an active commitment to the child for the life of the case if possible and because each child’s case is dynamic, CASAs can select a specific case but may not refuse to serve a category of children.”

The recently dismissed advocate stated she would always be willing to serve children who identify as transgender. She expressed surprise that her concerns over gender surgery led to her removal, particularly as she had previously had the autonomy to select her cases.

“I cared about the children I advocated for and put a lot of thought and time into the decisions I made on their behalf,” she stated.