The lunacy in Texas reveals eternal truths

Jude and James Younger

In a Dallas family court last Thursday (October 24, 2019), Judge Kim Cooks read out her ruling granting joint custody and joint decision-making to the parents of James and Jude Younger. Such decisions are routinely handed down in courtrooms throughout America. This one, however, captured national attention both because of the nature of the case and because of the startling conclusion.

Jeff Younger was married to Anna Georgulas in December 2010. Soon afterwards, they decided to use In Vitro Fertilization with donor eggs to have children. In 2012 Anna gave birth to twin boys who were named after the first-century pastors of the Christian Church in Jerusalem, James and Jude. By February 2015 Anna asked Jeff to move out which he did in April. Not long after that, the marriage was annulled.

When James was three years old, his father learned that Anna was teaching him that he was a girl and was making him dress that way in her home. This despite expert testimony at trial that the idea of gender does not develop in a child’s mind before one is five to seven or eight years old.


James with Dr. Anna Georgulas

When he was five, she enrolled him in kindergarten under the name Luna and falsified his school documents to claim he was a girl. She never obtained a legal name-change for the child—Jeff would not consent. Nevertheless, she slapped a restraining order on Jeff that prevented him from coming onto school grounds or talking to any parents of James’ classmates. The entire school staff conspired to treat James only as a girl named Luna.

Through all this, Jeff testified that James wants to be called by his real name and that he refuses to wear dresses while living with him. Nevertheless, his mother, Anna, went to court seeking sole custody of the boy so that she could proceed with his transition without need of the father’s consent.

Those are the basic facts of the trial that began on October 15. Georgulas took Younger to the 255th Family District Court to limit the boys’ ability to stay overnight at their dad’s home and to force Jeff to call his son, Luna. She also sought to force him to take a class on transgenderism and to complete two years of counselling.

Jeff Younger and James

On Monday, October 22, the jury reported an 11-1 decision that Georgulas should have Sole Managing Conservatorship of the twin boys. This decision electrified the nation. It meant that Georgulas would have the power to force everyone in James’ life to treat him as if he were a girl. The jury also opened the door to allowing his mother to start the off-label use of dangerous hormone blockers as early as next year.

Jeff Younger was devastated. He was overheard saying, “I’ve lost my boys!” The trial, which had been sparsely attended and little-reported, suddenly became national news. Judge Kim Cooks, who reportedly had already written her own verdict, took the unusual step of recessing the trial after hearing the jury but before reading her final decision.

Life Site News launched a petition seeking 25,000 signatures to save James from the ideological lunacy of transitioning a person who is incapable of informed consent. By Friday morning, there were more than 76,000 signatures.

Texas Governor, Greg Abbot, tweeted that James’ situation would be investigated by the Attorney General and by the Department of Family and Protective Services. Other Texas politicians, from Ted Cruz to the Speaker of Texas’ House of Representatives, called for state and federal laws protecting children from irreversible chemical and surgical transitioning prior to the age of consent.

Three days passed before Judge Cooks read out her verdict. Although scores of people assembled to hear her final judgment, including several reporters who had covered the trial from the beginning, only one TV news crew was allowed into the courtroom to hear the final verdict.

Judge Kim Cooks

Cooks’ verdict set aside the jury’s conclusion. Instead, she gave 50 / 50 joint conservatorship to Younger and Georgulas – including joint medical decision-making. For the moment, at least, James will be spared chemical castration. However, the judge also slapped a gag order on both parents. It is unclear what will happen regarding the indoctrination of the boy at school, church and other social settings. Nor do we know if his father will be forced to call him by his non-legal name and pronouns.

There are many aspects of this case that require serious reflection. Throughout the trial, the courtroom was filled with confusion about what to call the boy. This may seem a minor point, but it is alarming. His legal name is James. No one has ever contested this. His obvious sex is male—as it is listed on his birth certificate and shared with his twin brother.

You would think that a court of law would simply stick to these facts. Nevertheless, throughout the trial, the court allowed legal falsehoods to be spoken by attorneys and witnesses. This does not bode well for the survival of the rule of law.

Second, the trial put a spotlight on the travesty of family courts generally. When marriages fail, kids suffer and government is empowered. Stop and think about it. How did we ever get to the place where a government entity has the power to approve or reject the mental abuse of a boy, or to inject a healthy, male minor with chemicals that are not approved by the FDA?



For that matter, what lunacy is it that a judge is given the power to force a man to call his own child by a name and to speak about him with pronouns that are neither legal nor factual? When did we give a judge the right to curtail the First-Amendment speech of two parents by slapping them with a gag order?

Family court is the result of no-fault divorce laws. Courts hold plumbers to their contracts with greater diligence than they hold couples to their marriage vows. Unable even to determine who is at fault for depriving children of a stable home, courts are put in the position of micromanaging two different households and policing everything from the length of a haircut to conversation around the kitchen table.

Nor should we overlook how Artificial Reproductive Technologies (ARTs) commodify children. James and Jude were not conceived in the marriage bed but in a laboratory dish. The eggs were bought and paid for from some woman who was willing to let her body be exploited because she needed the money.

Last January HB 289 “Codification of marital rights” was introduced into the Wyoming legislature. It was not about preserving the natural rights of parents. It was, rather, about using the force of government to transfer rights from the real parents to “adjudicated parents” who have no biological or adoptive ties to the children. Mercifully, it died in committee. James’ story should impel us to defeat it again.

The vast amounts of money that people lay out for IVF also creates a mindset. Time and again we see people who pay for IVF sue because they are unsatisfied with the “product.” The Texan reported that the IVF order was for two boys. Did Georgulas change her mind? If sex is customizable in babies, why not in toddlers?

Beyond the general problems with IVF, it is even more important for children to know and be loved by their own married parents. We owe them that. If Wyoming wants to be a just society, all family law should be directed toward that goal. Marriage is for the sake of children as much as for their parents—perhaps more so.

One day James will be an adult and he will still be dealing with the psychological and physical trauma of this lunacy. One day both James and Jude will want to know their genetic mother. Even if records of her existence are destroyed, the rapid advance of genetic testing will likely enable them to find her.

No matter how children are commodified and marketed today, we cannot erase a person’s deep-seated longing to know his or her parents. Every last one of us is wired for family. It’s only human.