A Reykjavik father claims he was stripped of custody of his 10-year-old autistic son last December after refusing to let the child undergo gender transition and identify as a girl. His emotional video explaining the situation has since gone viral across social media.
Father Fights Back After Court Removal
Alexander Rocha said, “Last December, by the decision of the court, my son was taken away from me. The reason? Because I did not want to allow my son to undergo a gender transition and identify as a girl at the age of 10.”
He voiced serious concerns about medical treatments like puberty blockers and hormone therapy. “As a father, I do not want to see happen to my child, who was already diagnosed on the autism spectrum. I believe that my child should not be exposed to life-altering procedures, such as puberty blockers or hormone therapy. These things will alter his body drastically, but also his mind.”
“I have not been able to see my son in months, and my family is absolutely devastated, as you can imagine. Because of this, I’m not able to be the parent that I know I am,” Rocha added.
He confirmed he is appealing the court’s decision to regain custody. “Today, I’m fighting to appeal this court decision and win back my child. No parent should go through this. Children deserve to live free from radical gender ideology, which pressures them to make life decisions they don’t even understand yet.”
Iceland’s Legal Maze on Gender Treatment
Under Iceland’s Patients’ Rights Act No. 74/1997, children under 16 require parental consent for medical treatment, while those aged 12 and over must be involved in decisions affecting them. However, if parents refuse what doctors deem “necessary treatment,” child protection authorities can be called in, potentially overriding parental consent.
Gender healthcare is governed by the Gender Autonomy Act No. 80/2019, establishing specialist teams and appeal procedures. But it does not explicitly allow or ban puberty blockers. Instead, puberty blockers fall under general medical law and child welfare rules.
This means medics can petition authorities if they believe parents are blocking “necessary” treatment. The system pits parental rights against medical authority — especially tricky in cases like Rocha’s, where autism is also a factor.
What’s Next for Rocha and His Son?
The exact details of the court’s ruling and medical advice remain undisclosed. Rocha’s appeal will decide if he regains custody or if the original decision stands. The timeline and whether he can see his son during the appeal are still unknown.
This high-profile case could set a precedent in Iceland for how clashes over gender treatment for minors are handled between parents and medical professionals. The outcome will be watched closely by families and the courts alike.
More news from Over
