THE CASE of Nancy Verhelst is one more horror story that is all too true.

First Belgian doctors consented to Verhelst’s delusional desire to be a man. They treated her with synthetic hormones; cut off her breasts and constructed phony male genitalia. Verhelst, 44, apparently realized she was the creature of a  Frankenstein-like hoax. A Belgian doctor then consented to her desire to end her life and killed her by lethal injection in a hospital.

It’s all legal in Belgium, where someone who attests to psychological suffering can be put to death by doctors.

Now after all this, journalists reporting on Verhelst’s case refer to her as “Nathan,” her chosen male name. Even when she is dead, the world plays along with this woman’s disastrous confusion and defiance of nature. She was surrounded by lies, in life and in death. First she was told she had no immutable nature. Then she was told she had no immutable soul.

— Comments —

Jane writes:

“Belgium recorded a record number of 1,432 cases of euthanasia in 2012, up 25 per cent from the previous year and the country is currently deciding whether to extend “mercy killing” legislation to children.”

Laura writes:

Male is female. Mutilation is “surgery.” And murder is considered good.

Doug writes:

Jesus warned us to beware of those who called evil good and good evil. Talk about doublespeak!

Buck writes:

I am reminded of a story that was discussed at VFR nearly two years ago, about a young white male “in transition” to, and dressed as, a “female”. “She” was savagely beaten by a gang of savage black females while others watched and did nothing. Multiple issues came into play, but to me the primary issue was that this lost soul was deemed a sub human freak worthy of destruction.

The photo of Nancy Verhelst sitting on the beach is just a snapshot, and I shouldn’t read too much from a simple snapshot, but this one struck me. I can’t imagine the pain and misery behind that sad creatures eyes. She must have felt a total freak worthy of destruction. Her tortured soul could have been helped somehow, early in life, rather than to be subjected to experimentation by sick and evil medical and death merchants.

I don’t know. That particular image, of that lost soul sitting on a beach strikes me as one of the saddest things that I’ve seen in some time. What enlightened places the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg must now be.

Karl D. writes:

It gets even worse. According to the Daily Mail, the mother of Verhelst was a real prize. Not only did she reject her daughter, but told her she wished she had been born a boy! Any shrink worth his salt could have figured this one out.

Ingrid writes:

Laura writes:

Verhelst’s mental illness makes some sense in light of her mother’s rejection of her.

How much sexual confusion has been caused by a lack of attention and care by mothers? We will never know the answer.

Sunshine Mary writes:

In researching a recent article I wrote for my blog, The feminist obsession with transgender children., I came across a site that I believe you may find interesting: Sex Change Regret.  It is the story of a man who went through sexual reassignment surgery, only to regret his decision and transition back to living as a man.  He has compiled a great deal of research and resources on his site about this evil hoax.  His “Things I’ve Learned” page is both fascinating and sad.  He writes:

“Sex change regret, sadly, can and has resulted in suicide. We only need to remember Mike Penner, aka Christine Daniels, staff writer for the Los Angeles Times, who committed suicide in late 2009.  In a U.S.A. Today article dated 2/26/09 Steve Friess says: “(Mike) Penner’s story, heralded in its early days as a triumphant example of transgender progress, has instead become a cautionary tale of the lesser-known phenomenon: transgender regret.”

The warning signs of suicide are often difficult to see, and for transsexuals, the high rate of suicide has been underreported. An article in Metabolism says that the suicide rate among transsexuals was five times greater than was expected when compared to a similar group.

The number of deaths and morbidity cases in 425 transsexual patients treated with cross-gender hormones were evaluated retrospectively and compared with the expected number in a similar reference group of the population. The number of deaths in male-to-female transsexuals was five times the number expected, due to increased numbers of suicide and death of unknown cause. (see the reference below)

Mike Penner, a very talented staff writer for the Los Angeles Times for 25 years, announced he was a female transsexual and began living as Christine Daniels in April, 2007. Except that the transition to female didn’t last. In mid-October 2008, after a lengthy leave of absence, Penner, then 51, returned to the Los Angeles Times sports pages and the Times newsroom as a man. In a shadow of regret, he committed suicide only 13 months later.

Currently the acceptable treatment for gender disorders is to assist the patient to change gender. The doctor who originated the radical irreversible treatment in the 1960s, John Money, became best known for his fraudulent research, pedophilia activism and a long-held belief that gender was a learned behavior and not innate at birth.

I want to challenge the status quo of that accepted “treatment.” Because suicide is not a passive consequence when changing genders. Mike Penner became a media darling for changing genders. But changing genders remains without adequate support of quality research studies that objectively conclude the medical and psychological effectiveness of changing genders as a treatment.

Dr. John Money became highly controversial among his medical colleagues when he was one of the first in the U.S.A. to advocate for surgically changing men into women at the Johns Hopkins Gender Clinic in 1966. Ten years later, a follow-up study published by Dr. Jon Meyer, chairman of the Gender Clinic, evaluated 50 transsexuals who had been patients at the Gender Clinic. The findings were a warning sign about the treatment. The report concluded that no improvement was noted in the patients’ psychological functioning as a result of Money’s gender change treatment. The clinic at Hopkins was then closed.  This one psychologist, John Money, set in motion an inexhaustible controversy that continues today between activist groups for gender change as a treatment and psychologists who prefer to have more “objective” medical findings that gender change treatment is beneficial and psychologically effective. I did speak to Dr. John Money in the early 1990’s regarding my concerns for the gender changing treatment; nothing he said resolved my concerns.

It should be noted, no conclusive “objective” research at any time in the last 40 years has demonstrated changing genders is an effective treatment for all gender disorders and suicide among this population remains a problem.  The accepted standards of care for most ailments are scrutinized and tested. Extensive studies are published in the medical literature over a long period of time to objectively evaluate the effectiveness of the treatment. But in the case of gender change, the standards of care were developed, adopted and promoted quickly, pushed by people like John Money, Dr. Paul Walker and Dr. Stanley Biber.

John Money’s follow-up study in the 1960s was shown to be questionable, fraudulent and/or misleading. In the forty years since, the effectiveness of changing gender as a treatment for gender issues has not been thoroughly questioned by the medical community through scientific study. No clear coherent knowledge or understanding of how changing genders can be an “effective treatment” in helping the good people with GID exists.  The acceptable standard for treating gender issues was developed and used quickly by one single man without the benefit and credible broad support of his medical colleagues at Johns Hopkins; in fact, it was quite the opposite.

The accepted standard treatment of GID is controversial, its effectiveness is unsubstantiated, and it has no basis in science. Is it any wonder the controversy continues and suicide remains a dark shadow of proof that no real progress in the treatment of GID has been made?”

Jane S. writes:

According to the CIA World Factbook, the fertility rate of Belgium is 1.65 births per woman (2013 est.). Replacement rate for a population, not getting any bigger, not getting any smaller, is 2.1 births per woman. And while the Belgian government debates whether or not to allow children to commit suicide, birth rates in Belgium continue to fall.

The good news? Belgium has greater diversity!

“Almost one in four new-born children in our region comes from a household where another language is normally spoken than Dutch. . . Around 20% of mothers of new-born children in Flanders were not Belgian nationals when they were born. Mothers with Moroccan, Turkish and Dutch nationality form the largest groups of foreign mothers. In Antwerp, almost a third of mothers of new-born children are foreign nationals. The most frequently spoken other languages used in Flemish households are French, Arabic and Turkish.”

Coincidentally:

“The number of children being born into a disadvantaged family rose by 0.7% in 2012.”

Diana writes:

I saw the article about this unfortunate woman and thought of sending it to you but didn’t. I figured you’d find out about it, or if you didn’t, what’s the loss. There’s only so much we can take.

I’ve had the same internist for 25 years. Over the years we have become closer and although we are both careful not to overstep the lines of professional impersonality, we occasionally discuss outside issues as they relate to the medical profession.

One day we discussed “transsexualism.” She told me she was aghast at this. I wonder how many other doctors are similarly horrified – but they feel as powerless as we do to stop it. I think that every doctor who is opposed to this insane, murderous form of cosmetic surgery should make their feelings known to the AMA. It may accomplish nothing but it’s still acting as a medical professional should: “First, do no harm.”

I didn’t tell her that, though. I was being tactful – or perhaps, a coward.

A reader writes:

Why is it enlightened nations no longer execute criminals but do execute the innocent?

And don’t they remember the Nazis?

Please follow and like us: