The Texas Supreme Court has ruled against the appeal of a father named Jeff Younger to prevent his ex-wife from moving his nine-year-old son, James, to California, where, Younger fears, she will “transition” the boy into a girl.
In a tweet, Younger commented on the decision: “My children are now subject to being chemically castrated in California. Texas is an empire of child abuse, led by Texas judges.” He also said that it had the result of “effectively terminating” his “parental rights.” Worth noting is that Younger’s estranged wife, Anne Georgulas, is not even the biological mother of the child.
In considering the Younger case, a mental disorder called Munchausen syndrome by proxy (MSP) comes to mind. Note that this article does not amount to a diagnosis of anyone involved, but merely speculation on what may be happening. MSP syndrome occurs when a caregiver (the abuser) fabricates or induces an illness in someone else (the victim)—often their own child—to gain attention or concern for themselves.
A systematic review of every reported case of MSP since 1965 was published in 2017 by the journal Child Abuse & Neglect. The study found that “nearly all abusers were female (97.6 percent) and the victim’s mother (95.6 percent). Most were married (75.8 percent).” In an interview with Refinery29, Marc D. Feldman, a distinguished fellow of the American Psychiatric Association, said people with MSP typically have a background working in healthcare, “reflecting their particular interest in medical matters.” As it so happens, Younger’s estranged wife is a pediatrician.
That a medical background is common among people with MSP makes a lot of sense because that background can provide the veneer of “informed care” for what is actually just plain abuse. But why would a woman do something like this to her own child? “The main reasons the mothers behave this way is that they are after attention and concern; they seek to control their child,” Feldman said. “Or they are angry, rageful people with sadistic tendencies,” he added.
After a year of wanting to wear dresses, presumably encouraged by Georgulas, the child, James, began receiving counseling to start the process of transitioning, also presumably encouraged by Georgulas. After all, she is a pediatrician.
Younger and Georgulas have made competing claims about how things got to this point. Younger said that when James was just a two-year-old, his wife all too eagerly pounced on any perceived interest in feminine things and that James never desired to be a girl when he was around Younger; Georgulas claimed, on the contrary, that James had always wanted to be a little girl named “Luna.”
A video recorded by Younger showed James saying that “mommy” tells him he’s a girl, paints his nails, and gives him dresses to wear. The answers Younger received during a line of questioning were telling. The Daily Wire produced a transcript of the exchange:
“You’re a boy, right?” Mr. Younger asks his son in the video.
“No,” James responds. “I’m a girl.”
“Who told you you’re a girl?” the father asks.
“Mommy,” the child answers.
Mr. Younger asks, “When did she tell you you were a girl?”
“Because, I love girls!” the three-year-old says.
“Oh, I see. So mommy told you you’re a girl?”
“Mhmm,” James answers in the affirmative.
The child tells Mr. Younger that his mother puts dresses on him, buys him headbands and hair clips, and paints his nails because he likes nail polish.
“So mommy puts you in a dress and puts nail polish on you?” Mr. Younger says.
“Mhmm,” James replies.
“And what does mommy tell you?”
“She tells me I’m a girl,” the child responds.
In 2019, a Texas judge awarded joint custody of James, then seven years old, and his twin to Younger and Georgulas. During her testimony, Georgulas admitted that she might have “over-affirmed” James’s female identity, which didn’t seem to bother the jury, who actually wanted to award custody to Georgulas and seemed to be on board with the transgender train. Luckily, the lady with the gavel disagreed. “The state of Texas has no compelling interest to justify such interference requiring the father to affirm the child and honor the child’s choices,” Dallas County District Judge Kim Cooks said in court.
It was also in 2019 that Gov. Greg Abbott announced on Twitter that the state would investigate the effort to transition James as a child abuse case. In true Abbott fashion—all hat and no cattle, as they say—nothing came of it. And two years later, a judge gave full custody of James to Georgulas.
During the time of the joint custody, Younger had refused to comply with certain court orders regarding James’s upbringing, such as required counseling and educational decisions. That counted against him in court—but he said he had good reason. “When the child is brought to [the counselors], the child comes from the mother’s custody and is always dressed up as a little girl,” explained David Hanschen, Younger’s attorney.
Dad only has possession on Fridays, and neither of the two professionals have office hours on Fridays. And so he thinks, and I would agree with him, that it’s really quite unfair that the presentation of the child to the counseling system is only done under the auspices and control of one parent.
Younger also refused to participate in supervised visitation, where his son was forced to dress like a girl and where he was expected to address the boy as “Luna.” Younger argued that it was tantamount to being complicit in the brainwashing of his own child.
In short, while Younger had joint custody of his child, Georgulas had complete control over the boy’s mind and body. The court and school systems were tilted against Younger and James, leaning in favor of Georgulas and Luna.
Last December, Younger appealed to the Texas Supreme Court after his ex-wife moved with James to California just before California’s Senate Bill 107 went into effect, on Jan. 1. The bill prohibits “the enforcement of an order based on another state’s law authorizing a child to be removed from their parent or guardian based on that parent or guardian allowing their child to receive gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming mental health care.”
Younger worries that Georgulas will subject James to the full battery of medical interventions—surgeries and hormones—despite a court order prohibiting her from doing that, because the court that issued the order is in Texas. When the Texas Supreme Court threw out his appeal to stop Georgulas, it argued that she would still be subject to the previous ruling prohibiting her from subjecting James to specific interventions. Younger isn’t holding his breath.
Munchausen syndrome by proxy may explain not only the Younger case but a variety of other left-wing pathologies imposed on individuals and society at large. And if there is a name for a regime that marries neuroticism and rule, it would be “neurotocracy.”
This is a long, sad story. But it is a reminder that running from the neurotocracy is no longer an option. In this case, it wasn’t a California jury that was more zealous than the judge about turning a little boy into a girl. This happened in Texas. Stories like these should disabuse people of the notion that America’s political problems are limited to blue states, for that is not the case. It doesn’t matter now where you go; woke pollution poisons every river and reaches over every hill in modern America.