Re Devin - The Gender-affirming Care and Treatment Model and the "Best Interests" of an 11-year-old Child.

Abstract

In Re Devin [2025] the Family Court of Australia considered a case of an 11-year old biologically male child whose mother argued was gender dysphoric and should be prescribed puberty blockers. Strum J found that despite the child attending for six years, the gender clinic failed to make a diagnosis of gender dysphoria until court proceedings had commenced. He also raised concerns about the Australian Standards of Care and Treatment Guidelines of the Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne which endorsed a gender-affirming model of care. In finding that gender dysphoria could be influenced by external factors, Strum J was critical of the expert witnesses called by the mother whose model of care to gender affirm "unreservedly" was an "oddly binary approach." Strum J held that in exercising its jurisdiction, the Family Court was not concerned with the cause of transgender people, but only with what was in the best interests of the child.