On January 11, Avvenire, the newspaper owned by the Italian Bishops’ Conference (CEI), published an article by Luciano Moia examining how parents respond when a child does not identify with his or her biological sex, using two family stories to discuss gender affirmation and “desistance” in the context of adolescent transgender identification and recent legal developments in Italy.
“Local Churches, overcoming the discriminatory attitude sometimes found in ecclesial settings and in society, should commit themselves to promoting the recognition and accompaniment of same‑sex-attracted and transgender persons,” the article states, quoting the final document of the Italian Church’s recent synodal assembly.
The article appeared without editorial disclaimers, indicating that its framing is consistent with the paper’s editorial line established by bishops. In particular, the head of the CEI, Cardinal Matteo Maria Zuppi, is a strong promoter of pro-LGBT teaching in the Catholic Church.
Moia’s article was prompted by a judicial case in La Spezia, northern Italy, in which a court ordered the alteration of the birth certificate of a 13-year-old minor who identified as the opposite sex, recognizing the chosen name and gender identity.
The article also centres on two mothers of LGBT-identifying children linked to different associations, whose children followed divergent paths.
One, a board member of the group GenerAzioneD who requested anonymity, acknowledged the existence of people who are “authentically transgender” but urged caution before any “gender-affirmation” process in minors.
She argued that “there is no objective diagnostic test for gender dysphoria and that assessments rely largely on subjective feelings,” questioning their reliability in children aged 10 to 12 and their ability to grasp the long-term consequences of a supposed transition, including those related to sexuality and fertility.
She cited a German study published in spring 2025 which, based on a large sample, found that more than 90 percent of cases of childhood gender dysphoria later resolved into acceptance of biological sex. She also stated that “it is difficult to find psychologists – as well as endocrinologists or pediatricians – willing to slow down the rush toward transition” and to consider desistance as a real possibility.
The second account is that of Giovanna, the mother of Chanel, an allegedly transgender adolescent. The article reports that Chanel displayed preferences traditionally associated with girls from early childhood, which remained consistent through adolescence and led to a “coming-out” between middle and high school, according to Avvenire. “A clear preference, with well‑defined colors and symbols of a gender identity different from one’s biological sex,” Moia writes.
With professional support, Chanel embarked on a path of gender affirmation, while the family experienced episodes of social isolation, including “within their parish community in the Diocese of Padua.” Giovanna rejected the hypothesis of “social contagion,” asserting that the stigma faced by supposedly transgender youth is too severe to be endured merely to follow a trend.
The broader context outlined in the article begins with the Italian bishops recent synodal assembly, whose final document called on local churches to overcome discriminatory attitudes and to recognize and accompany homosexual and transgender persons and their families within Christian communities.
Throughout the piece, the anthropological vision traditionally proposed by the Catholic Church – rooted in a binary view of sexual identity, in the unity of mind and body, and in the correspondence between biological sex, gender identity, and attraction to the opposite sex – is not developed or expounded. When mentioned indirectly, it appears marginal or secondary to personal experience.
The article’s method relies primarily on personal narratives and observable situations, presenting them as the main criteria for understanding what is good or appropriate. In accessible terms, the underlying approach suggests that if a particular experience or identity exists and is sincerely lived, it should be accepted and supported, rather than evaluated against a prior moral or anthropological framework.
“It is called ethical phenomenology: reality, by the very fact of being real, justifies itself ethically. Everything that happens, simply because it happens, is good,” Tommaso Scandroglio stated in the Italian Catholic newspaper La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana in response to Moia’s article.
“According to this view,” he continued, “it is concrete cases that tell us what is good and what is evil. Good becomes equivalent to usefulness, to pleasure, and therefore – in our case – to the satisfaction of having undertaken a certain path. Ethical judgment is ultimately entrusted to the individual’s perception. Only the one who inhabits the fact is the judge of that fact. Others are incompetent precisely because they are external to that particular experience.”