The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
7 Points

Dr. John Money should have been arrested for crimes against David and Brian Reimer.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 7/5/2015 Category: People
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,090 times Debate No: 77318
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)




Doctor John Money, Psychiatrist, was a direct factor in the death of Bruce/Brenda/David Reimer ( A victim of a cauterization and sex change at age 22 months, committed suicide, ) and his twin brother Brian (overdosed on antidepressants) And photographed the two of them in sexual positions until age 14.
Round 1 -Acceptance
Round 2- Arguments
Round 3- Conclusion


I accept.
I will represent that Dr. John Money shouldn't have been arrested for crimes against David and Brian Reimer.

Kind regards for this debate, I am looking forward to your arguments.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you Con, I look forward to a good debate. Also please note I may forfeit the next round due to a bad Internet connection.
List of crimes ( as alleged by the brothers and as results of his crimes)
WARNING-Potentially Explicit!
Murder of David Reimer (psychological damage from other crimes prompted suicide)
Murder of Brian Reimer (Overdose- psychological damage)
Molestation of both brothers
Possession of child pornography (alleged by the brothers, same with above)

Story of the Brothers
On August 22, 1965, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, Brian and Bruce (later Brenda/David) were born. Then, at six months, urination problems were revealed. In a bid to correct the problem, Circumcision was performed on Bruce (Brian was not operated on), but irreparable damage to the penis was done, prompting the family to see John Money, a doctor who worked with sex changes and intersex individuals. Money suggested that Bruce became Brenda. The family agreed, and at the age of 22 months, Bruce died, and became Brenda.

The doctor then, according to accounts of the family, (evidence was never found to prove this, as all those involved have since died) the doctor did "genital inspections" on the twins. These included "child sexual play" with Brenda playing the bottom role. The doctor was even said to have photographed this on at least one occasion. These then occurred once a year until the age of 11-15 ( I have not found the exact age), after which Brenda threatened suicide if she had to visit the doctor again. Brian later developed schizophrenia, which has been known to occur as a result of a traumatic event ( The family then confessed that Brenda was a male. Brenda then underwent an operation to revert back to a male, naming himself David.

Aftermath of the Brothers
In 2002, Brian committed suicide by overdosing on antidepressants. David was devastated. He tended the grave until his own suicide by being shot in the head with a sawed-off shotgun in 2004. These two died due to severe mental problems caused by PTSD caused by Doctor Money.

Aftermath of Doctor Money
Doctor Money died of Parkinson's Disease in 2006.


My apologies for my overuse of Wikipedia, as it was not the best of sources. It, however, was all I could glean on the subject that would give the full story.

With that, I pass it on to Con.


Kind Regards to Pro and their arguments.

I will represent that Dr. John Money should have not been arrested for crimes against David and Brian Reimer.

Opening Statement:

First of all I would to clarify that Dr. John Money is not a Psychiatrist, as alleged by Pro, but a Psychologist who holds a PhD. Thus Jon Money is not a (medical) doctor.

Also I would like to state that Pro seems to not be familiar with the legal system. Being arrested does neither imply guilt nor an offence. An arrest is simply conducted before you are convicted of a crime in a court of law and there is a believe that you are at flight risk or you committed a crime that requires a bail. These are normally serious crimes, such as assaults. However, you will have to be convicted or acquitted in a court of law and previously charged with committing a crime, however, this does not mean guilt. If John Money would have been arrested, this would have not meant that he either committed a crime, nor that he was guilty.
The definition of murder, according to The unlawful killing of another human being without justification or excuse. This was not done by John Money, nor was anything slightly similar committed by him

I as well want to point out that Pro seems to think that David Reimer was 'A victim of a cauterization'. I have had cauterization performed on myself before and am not a victim of anything. Cauterization is simply a surgical procedure, you are not a victim of it. The person at fault here was the doctor who performed the circumcision on David Reimer, a standard procedure.

As a non medical doctor, to clarify this, John Money was a lead Psychologist on the field of sexuality and gender identification. His work is still celebrated nowadays, especially because he was not biased towards homosexuality and gender identity, but took it as a (serious) psychological issue. This was most certainly, and seemingly is still not the case with the majority of people in the mid to late 20th century, nor nowadays.

To the case and the debate

Pro alleges a murder. This would imply that John Money killed the brothers. However, they committed suicide.
Pro also alleges 'other crimes'. These are apparently molestation and child pornography. However, these are just allegations by the brothers, as Pro states themselves 'evidence was never found to prove this'. In a court of law, this would most likely not arouse a conviction. Additionally, these allegations surfaced in the 2000's, and not when Money was seeing the brothers as children. If these allegations were true, wouldn't either of the brothers have voiced this prior? David seemingly was seeing a skilled Psychiatrist, as stated by John Colapinto (see below) "When Brenda was 14, a local psychiatrist convinced her parents that their daughter must be told the truth". This person, if advised of these alleged offences, surely would have done something, or not? But seemingly this was not the case.

Money was seeing David and Brian until their teens, when contact was stopped, about 24 years before their suicide. If these alleged 'crimes' were such an issue, wouldn't something have happened earlier?
In addition I would like to state, that their mother was "Brenda's .. mother attempted suicide; her father lapsed into mute alcoholism; the neglected Brian eventually descended into drug use, pretty crime, and clinical depression."

I furthermore would like to point towards the parents, who were lying to John Money about the issues of gender identification their then 'daughter' Brenda had. Why would they lie to the Psychologist? This is simply stupid. If Money would have known this, he could have suggested a different course of action, but he was not informed.

As for Brian's Schizophrenia, Schizophrenia is known to be caused from a wide array of issues. But as Pros source itself states, genetics are often an outline. I state this because 'His mother has been a clinical depressive all her life', as stated by John Colapinto, the author of the book 'As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised As A Girl' about David Reimer, a man who knew David Reimer quite well. He also states that Brian was using drugs, a major cause for the surfacing of Schizophrenia!

As for David's suicide, he states "David also had marital difficulties", "his cyclical depressions", "Genetics almost certainly contributed to David's suicide", he states that David was the victim of a financial fraud shortly before his suicide of 65.000$, which is quite a high amount, was unemployed and mostly, according to John Colapinto "sit around his house and brood", as well as "Just before he died, he talked to his wife about his sexual "inadequacy," his inability to be a true husband". This was a troubled man. So was his brother. To blame a man with whom both of them had no contact for around 22/24 years seems quite ridiculous, declaring this man committed murder seems even more fallacious.

According to Pros thesis, if a person was 'bullied' in their childhood and 25 years later commits suicide, you must charge the individuals, the 'childhood bullies', with murder. Imagine this!


Pro does not seem to know that a arrest has nothing to do with guilt, nor that somebody cannot be charged for murder if the person did not commit the act of murder. Furthermore, John Money had no contact with either of the boys for over 20 years! They also had their very own problems, and if we look at suicide, many individuals commit suicide for single reasons that were troubling David Reimer. People commit suicide because of money, marriage, death of a loved one, a bad childhood. The brothers were both troubled, as were their parents. I am not of the opinion that Money contributed towards the suicide of either of them, as:
1st) There is no proof
2nd) The parents had similar issues
3rd) Many factors were affecting them
4th) Money wanted to help, but was lied to by the parents
5th) No proof of PTSD as alleged by Pro
6th) Pros sources support my statement

In conclusion I cannot draw a connection between either of the suicides, and as a fact, neither can Pro. However, there were many more issues affecting the brothers, other than what John Money allegedly did. Note that these issues are not alleged, but factual. This all concludes to me, that John Money should not have been 'arrested' (nor would he have been charged for that matter) for crimes against David and Brian Reimer.

Kind Regards to Pro, I am looking forward to your argument.

I used the same 'sources' as Pro, but mostly
Debate Round No. 2


As per the outline, and as my arguments seem to have been misinterpreted, I will repeat the crimes alleged by the brothers, as well as the consequences. Also, I have limited knowledge, yes, but I do know a little about criminal justice and psychology.

Schizophrenia can be triggered by a traumatic event. ( and seeing as how both Brian and his mother both had no recorded issues, it would seem that Dr. Money was responsible for at least a portion of this.

The doctor who initially circumcised Bruce was to blame for his transition to female, but not for his suicide.

Brian killed himself after a battle with depression brought on (at least partially) by Dr. Money.

David killed himself due to similar circumstances.

Many victims also do not come forward until after they reach adulthood (
Also, my apologies for violating my own outline, however I felt I should clarify myself, also a reminder that this is a CONCLUDING round.

In conclusion, as I have found some evidence (again , no proof, just citing Con's source) as to the abuse, I would state that Dr. Money was at least partially to blame for these two brothers' deaths, it is reasonable to conclude that, at least on the molestation charge, Dr. Money should have been arrested.
"David did eventually marry a big-hearted woman named Jane, but his dark moods persisted. He was plagued by shaming memories of the frightening annual visits to Dr. Money, who used pictures of naked adults to "reinforce" Brenda's gender identity and who pressed her to have further surgery on her "vagina." "

Also in Con's source is another refutation of his own point.
"In some press reports, financial problems were given as the sole motive in David's suicide. While this is absurdly reductive, it is true that last fall David learned that he was the victim of an alleged con man who had hoodwinked him out of $65,000"a loss that ate at him and no doubt contributed to his despair. "

Con's own sources contradict his points.

Also, I forgot this source in my listing, which validates much of my Wikipedia points.

Thanks go to Con, for the simulating educational debate, my apologies for my poor wording and violation of the outline to Con and the voters.

With that, I pass it off to con, and recommend that Con use this round for rebuttals of my points if he should wish.


Pro alleges a misinterpretation. This is incorrect. I have taken everything as stated by Pro, thus meaning that if 'misinterpretation' has taken place this was done by Pro themselves.

Rebuttals and Final Statement:

Pro alleges that "and seeing as how both Brian and his mother both had no recorded issues" in context to Schizophrenia. Several mistakes are to be pointed out.
First of all, Brian was the one of the two boys who had Schizophrenia. 'It was the start of mental disturbance that would develop into schizophrenia', (
This clearly indicates that, 'recorded', Brian had Schizophrenia. His mother had similar issues, as pointed out before but blatantly ignored by Pro. 'His mother has been a clinical depressive all her life', as stated in the previous round.

I will dismiss the doctor who performed the 'circumcision', as this is quite unrelated to the current debate.

"Brian killed himself after a battle with depression brought on (at least partially) by Dr. Money.". Where is the proof for this? It is not even proven that Brian even committed suicide! It may have been an accidental overdose, this is not known. A court of Law would not have speculated on a probability like this. This does not even add up for an arrest. Nor for any charge. So Brian is out of the picture.

What about David? According to Pro "David killed himself due to similar circumstances". Once again, there is no proof Brian committed suicide. Also as for reasons of David's suicide, I provided money, marriage, death of a loved one, a bad childhood. Lets add loneliness, fear of separation, unemployment (though money was not an issue for David, having a job was something he did desire). That's 7 reasons vs one John Money reason. 7 vs 1. And that one reason was over 20 years prior. This just does not add up.

It is correct that many children keep quiet about what allegedly happened, however these children are not under psychiatric supervision. David made a grand step in his teens challenging as what he was brought up and resuming living as a boy, such an individual would have had no issue, at least in my opinion, to report something like this.

"I have found some evidence as to the abuse". What abuse? This is the first time I have heard of any abuse. Also none of my sources mention any 'abuse'. So seemingly this was simply pulled out of thin air by Pro.

"it is reasonable to conclude that, at least on the molestation charge, Dr. Money should have been arrested". Once again, an arrest does neither imply guilt nor a conviction. Also, I do not even know where Pro has this alleged molestation from. Neither any of Pros, nor any of my sources state any molestation. Also, molestation being defined as 'to make indecent sexual advances to' (, which is something Money did not, to anyone's knowledge, do. As for the 'annual visits', once again, all this was alleged many years after it apparently happened and there is neither proof nor evidence for any of this.

As for my apparent 'refutation', cited here as 'another', first of all, there were no 'other' refutations, nor was this one. I stated that 'David was the victim of a financial fraud shortly before his suicide of 65.000$'. I agree with the source that this is 'absurdly reductive', however, I stated this together with many other possible reasons. The author of the source, John Colapinto, the man who wrote the book about David, with David, by a man who knew David quite well, states that this caused him despair and was not the only possible reason for his suicide. This does not 'refute' my position at all.

"Con's own sources contradict his points.". No they don't. Where is Pros evidence as to this or where does Pro even suggest this in a non fallacious way?

Once again, all of Pros theses, statements and claims were all proven to be fallacies and incorrect. Pre seems to just want to persecute an individual on no basis.


With this conclusion I would like to question this whole debate. What is Pro actually trying to achieve? Once again, the title, as well as what Pro wants makes no sense. An arrest does neither imply guilt nor conviction, and John Money would not have been convicted on anything related to this case.

Furthermore, Pro seemed to be very misinformed and basically made up statements, without checking if they were sound, as well as Pro not having any evidence connected to anything regarding John Money.

Pros statements about 'abuse' and 'molestation' are ridicule, as neither Pros, nor Cons sources show any indication, nor even use any of those words, and as such are simply made up by Pro, seemingly to hype up their case.

Pros conduct, in regards to neither challenging nor even mentioning Cons suggestions as to many more likely reasons for suicide than John Money, 22/24 years prior, are simply disregarded or stated as being 'contradicted', while no actual proof for this is presented.

Pro seems to deny the grand probability that these 'suicides' (one not even being known if it was a suicide) have no relation to John Money, but were committed by very distressed and mentally ill individuals for a grand number of reasons. There is no proof nor even any evidence as to these two individuals allegations against John Money, but Pro blatantly ignores this fact.

In conclusion I would like to state that I am still of the opinion that John Money should not have been arrested for crimes against David and Brian Reimer.

The main reason for this is that there is no proof nor evidence for any connection between the suicide(s) of these individuals and John Money, nor is there any proof nor evidence, nor even suggestion towards Pros 'abuse' or 'molestation'. This is not how the justice system works, and I am glad that it doesn't.

Con has provided 7 reasons for suicide that were all issues for David Reimer, and even when being fair on Pro, Con provided 4 in the previous round, of which Pro tried to refute one but was not able to do so. That is still 4 vs 1. If you see so many contributors, one reason becomes quite small. How about we charge the conman who committed the fraud on him for his suicide? Or his wife, because she left him, he was feeling inadequate to her? Or his parents for a bad childhood? Or his brother for contributing to his despair? Or the slaughter house in which he was working, because they closed down and he lost his job? These are all reasons very similar to what Pro suggested about Money, however, note, that these are not allegations, as there is evidence for every single one of these. Do we 'arrest' these people? No, because it is ridiculous.

John Money was a well respected Psychologist and was and still is praised about his work. He wanted to help David Reimer, but was lied to by his parents.

Lets put a face to this debate. The face of David Reimer. A troubled individual who committed suicide out of despair. Out of many reasons. And not just simply because of one single man, who Pro wants to push all the blame on. This is why John Money should not have been 'arrested'. Nor anyone else.

Kind Regards to Pro for this Debate, Kind Regards to all Readers and Voters

Have a nice day!
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by TheChristian 5 years ago
Imabench-no, and there is a reason I am not a high contributer-not enough internet and not enough time.
Posted by imabench 5 years ago
Hey Christian I know you have a very busy schedule of not contributing to the site at all, but if you could go ahead and remove your bullsh** vote on my debate, I promise to make sure not to return the favor on any and all of your future debates. ;)
Posted by WAM 5 years ago
Don't worry about it, I wont penalize you for forgetting to include it.
Posted by TheChristian 5 years ago
This source also, I forgot to include it-
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 5 years ago
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: The debate seems pretty straightforward to me. Dr. Money should have been arrested if there was any substantial case against him, i.e. some form of proof. It's not Pro's burden to show that he should be convicted, so he doesn't have to provide proof enough to warrant a conviction. However, he does still have to provide more than just claims made by the victims and their families to warrant an arrest. What he does is present allegations and no substantive proof of any kind. Much as Dr. Money may indeed be guilty of crimes worthy of arrest and even conviction, there was insufficient information presented by Pro to make that determination. Con provides enough alternate causes for every single harm Pro provides that I can't nail down Dr. Money as more likely. Ergo, due to Pro's failure to meet his BoP, I vote Con.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.