We can't say anything concrete about how Jim Molan voted on transgender children and young people having access to gender affirming healthcare
How Jim Molan voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should not restrict access to gender affirming healthcare for transgender people under the age of eighteen, rather they should leave healthcare matters in the hands of the professional bodies responsible for administering such healthcare (e.g., the Australian Medical Association, the Australian Psychological Society, etc.)
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for transgender children and young people having access to gender affirming healthcare” which Jim Molan could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Jim Molan on this policy.
| Division | Jim Molan | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for transgender children and young people having access to gender affirming healthcare” which Jim Molan could have attended.
| Division | Jim Molan | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
30th Nov 2022, 4:18 PM – Senate Committees - Community Affairs References Committee; Reference - Puberty blockers and disproven theory |
absent | No |
15th Jun 2021, 4:50 PM – Senate Motions - Gender Dysphoria - Treating gender diverse children |
absent | No |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Normally a person's votes count towards a score which is used to work out a simple phrase to summarise their position on a policy. However in this case Jim Molan was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.