The "medical" practice of handing out out puberty blockers and arbitrary hormones to every confused teenager who even suggests not fitting within traditional gender norms, is going to end up in the same chapter in the history books as when Inuits (apocryphally) drilled holes in skulls to let out the bad spirits.
Sometimes doing nothing (at least for a while) is good medicine.
From brief reading it seems like therapy and ensuring that the young person has arrived at a mental state and maturity prior to beginning any medical treatment while proceeding prior getting too far into puberty is the current ethical standard. Maturity isn't binary its a spectrum. I don't understand why we can't proceed sensibly according to ethical standards and help people without giving random confused preteens hormones based on a 10 minute interview. This article reads as alarmist.
this is interesting as it is harder for an adult to get treatment to become infertile than it is for a child to get hormone drugs that can do the same thing
this seems to be in the interest of not having parents make knee jerk and unhelpful reactions, instead of the doctors actually evaluating potential underlying conditions of the patient
from my understanding, we are trying to accommodate body dysmorphia because it is easy to accommodate: give people what they want and the rest of us just say a pronoun so that they don’t feel marginalized, but for science this is a stopgap solution and there is interest in understanding and preventing the dysmorphia to begin with. It seems this message gets lost because people don't want to be seen as transphobic or don’t want the “mental health” research to be misconstrued as “I want to ignore those crazy people”, as a lot of transphobes do consider things that way. While this is inherently a mental incongruence, it is easy to accommodate while we work to avoid it happening.
Infertility as a result of puberty blockers (and hormones, but it is incredibly uncommon to prescribe them to kids in the US or the UK) is actually fully-reversible. The only long-term effect is a (very slightly) lower bone density, if you're on them for ten years. [Note on this at the end of comment for pedantic people]
Pretty much nowhere is it standard practice to administer hormones to anyone below 18, and few people are advocating for that.
The rate of attempted suicide in people yet to transition with gender dysphoria is 41%. That is the highest rate of any physical or mental condition we have on the books. This rate drops when you put them on hormone blockers (in cases of minors) and it drops when you put them on cross-sex hormones (in cases of adults).
Getting HN to come around on this issue is likely impossible, but if you want to hear from an actual expert (effectively the expert on the topic), here's a presentation you might find interesting from a medical doctor:
If not for compassion, you should check it out for intellectual curiosity. The talk goes into a lot of detail on how a general human's endocrine system works, has some interesting medical information even if you're not trans, and takes a really balanced approach to the issue.
-----
[Note] Fertility returning by simply stopping anti-androgens isn't necessarily a given, but getting it back is actually entirely doable. If you take the time to watch the talk, the doctor goes into how he's managed to get 100% of patients desiring it fertility back.
you use the term gender dysphoria, is it more productive if I use that instead of body dysmorphia?
there seems like there can be significant overlap in an individual, but when discussing transitioning exclusively is it that gender dysphoria conveys the topic more specifically?
Transphobia is common and widely accepted in the UK right now, and the UK is very culturally influential despite their current isolationist tendencies, so I suspect we're going to see a lot of transphobic misinformation here in the comments.
So here's one thing that is important to remember: Lupron, also known as Leuprorelin or Leuprolide, has no permanent side effects when taken alone. It stops puberty, but it doesn't prevent it. If you stop taking the drug, the process of puberty will resume completely as normal. Its purpose is not to begin the sex change process, but to allow time for planning what the next steps are (usually, hormone replacement therapy), so you are not racing against a biological clock.
As a transgender person I find HN members to be somewhat transphobic in previous discussions unrelated to this article about transgender issues. So unsure if it's a good place for discussion here. It would be nice if articles like the submitted one were moderated better. Feels like HN takes a stance of ignoring these gender topics or flagging them and while being more defensive of other non-gender topics that are controversial.
Puberty blockers are used for other medical issues and aren't considered dangerous or life damaging. Anyway this topic is somewhat meaningful to me because I really don't think people know how truly valuable it can be for someone to stall puberty when they desire to.
I find it appalling that cis society is quick to make sure no confused cis kid is harmed while ignoring trans kids that end up permanently disfigured by their voice & appearance from the wrong puberty. It's basically comparable to a cis kid having the wrong hormones damaging their body through puberty like a boy growing breasts and people just shrug their shoulders when it's a trans kid.
For context I went through the wrong puberty (I'm only 30 years old) and recently have been diagnosed with cancer. I'm choosing not to get treatment for the cancer and so I can get Medical Assistance in Dying because Gender Dysphoria sucks while all surgeries to possibly fix voice or appearance is like putting a downpayment for a house. Also was disowned by parents and struggled through university years because of constant bullying. Anyway I really hope people can take the time to consider that some kids truly know they're trans and it's not a fad to them.
A lot of the pushback is because, for you, it’s a choice that you hope will make you feel better and more accepted in the world. To the rest of us, it’s a psychiatric disorder and you need serious, long term help. No amount of surgeries, or hormone blockers is going to change that. As much as you may disagree, it’s science, and it’s absolutely irrefutable.
You’ve picked a really fun example and I’m glad you asked!
You are exactly correct; the value of the speed of light is not science because it cannot be refuted. (Although this was not always true!)
You see, in 1983 the definition of the length of a meter was changed to be the distance that light travels through vacuum in 1/299,792,458 of a second, precisely. Or to put that differently, that the speed of light through vacuum is pinned at 299,792,458 meters per second, precisely. Not “by current technological standards”; that’s the exact value of the speed of light in SI units, and presumably always will be.
So light now always travels at that speed because we’ve defined it that way, and if (when) we develop better methods to more accurately measure how far light travels over a period of time, it changes the length of a meter, not the speed of light. Light would still be travelling at 299,792,458 m/s; those meters would just be a little longer or shorter to compensate for whatever errors we discovered. (And similarly, if we discovered that our measurements of certain specific vibrations of caesium-133 atoms were wrong, it doesn’t change the measured length of a second; it changes the length of a meter. The duration of a second relative to the caesium-133 atoms is fixed by fiat, the same way that the speed of light is fixed by fiat)
But if you’d asked before 1983, then I’d have said that yes, the value of the speed of light was easily refutable, simply by following the standard everyday process of science. (and in fact this happened in 1972, 1958, 1950, 1926, 1907, etc and so on all the way back to the mid-1600s)
If you wanted to ‘refute’ the currently accepted speed of light, then all you had to do was run an experiment to measure the speed of light and find out that it had a different speed than everybody thought previously.
Once you did that, you of course needed to get a bunch of other scientists to inspect your methodology and results and then repeat your experiment and do other variations of your experiment, and eventually come into agreement with your new, improved measurement. Boom! Refuted. Science, bitches. :D
The whole point of science is that every single one of its findings can be refuted if new experiments determine that our previous understanding was incorrect. If something can’t be refuted, it’s not science. By definition.
That’s the core distinguishing feature between science and dogma/opinions/whatever.
But yeah. The speed of light? Not science any more. We’ve declared a value by fiat and no experimental results can change it from here on out.
> In the philosophy of science, falsifiability or refutability is the capacity for a statement, theory or hypothesis to be contradicted by evidence. For example, the statement "All swans are white" is falsifiable because one can observe that black swans exist.
> The observation of a black swan falsifies the hypothesis "All swans are white".
> (...) Popper argued for falsifiability and opposed this to the intuitively similar concept of verifiability. Whereas verifying the claim "All swans are white" would require assessment of all swans, which is not possible, the single observation of a black swan is sufficient to falsify it.
It's not a choice, I didn't choose the sex I was born with in this world and similar for having gender dysphoria. It's like being born without legs and using what has been developed from science to correct the problem. Have the right hormones be distributed in the body and so I could've mimic'ed a somewhat normal life like a cis woman that cannot get pregnant. Unsure why you writing it a psychiatric disorder and then arguing it's not a real thing while expressing your view as it's science. A successful transition doesn't need lifelong help and I have friends that are transgender that never have seen a therapist or a psychiatrist. They were ones that were lucky to get on puberty blockers or HRT young with good genetics to pass as their identity.
My understanding is that therapy alone is less effective at securing long term happiness compared to therapy and transitioning. Anything to do with your brain is simultaneously all in your head by definition and also real.
> As much as you may disagree, it’s science, and it’s absolutely irrefutable.
Just checking that you know that any relevant healthcare professional disagrees with you. This includes WPATH, USPATH, CPATH, AusPATH, PATHA, AsiaPATH, EUPATH, WHO, CDC, ICD11
>It's basically comparable to a cis kid having the wrong hormones damaging their body through puberty like a boy growing breasts and people just shrug their shoulders when it's a trans kid.
I never wanted kids and would argue that sperm banking is an option if that's a fear. I don't see your argument any different than forcing one's beliefs on others to prevent a medical treatment that oneself desires as well. Lastly, majority of people I know nowadays aren't even having kids.
Of course, for some people sterility is not a problem. For some, it is a massive problem.
Parents have a right to force their beliefs onto their children if their beliefs are reasonable. Their children will often thank them for it when they've become adults.
You're dismissing sterility as a non-issue when it is a massive issue for many people, and moreover, you're obfuscating the fact that this is about children, and the potential to undergo life-altering treatment with no psychiatric evaluation and little-to-no consultation.
What's bad faith is claiming that what myself and the OP were discussing is merely PB, when in reality it's about the full hormone therapy treatment regiment involved in gender transitioning.
But way to score a point on pedantic grounds.
>This court case said that combined parental consent and child consent was not enough
I was responding to the OP's point, that claimed I was arguing for forcing my beliefs on others. I was making the point that in principle, it can be perfectly okay for parents to force their beliefs on their children.
It depends on the circumstances and the specific details of the case. I was not making an argument for or against parental privilege for any specific case.
Is your life really not worth saving if you cannot receive the surgeries? I cannot know how you feel about your life and its impossible for me to decide how you ought to feel but I also can't help but feel like there is always some degree of hope.
Could a case be made that they failed to get you the help you needed earlier and thus ought to foot the bill now?
Is it reasonably possible that you might earn enough to pay for it?
Could you raise money from others to do so?
Why not all 3 raise and earn money for it while trying to recoup expenses in court?
Thanks but I've never been a person to accept charity. Basically, I grew up in USA as a Canadian Citizen cause parents moved to USA when I was young. Lived in a really bad area of Michigan from childhood to adulthood. I now finally live in Quebec away from that dreaded past. Yah life isn't worth living as my other comments somewhat explain.
In Canada I haven't had success getting surgeries coverage for fixing either my voice or face from what characteristics people gender me. I tried for a few years to get coverage and even appealed my insurance's decision against my psychiatrist's letter saying the surgeries are medically necessary. I went to a surgeon that's the head surgeon for the surgeries transwomen get and he said none of his colleagues understand Gender Dysphoria to know why the surgeries should be medically necessary. The public insurance only cares about the surgeon's opinion.
So I've basically given up on coverage. I find it even more irritating nowadays since I've read about the common cancers when I was diagnosed. Women that get breast cancer have no problems getting full coverage for breast reconstruction under the public insurance. I think that obviously should be a thing but it feels like added sting to my situation since I've not even had success with breasts from HRT by starting after puberty.
Anyway I tried enough I think and worked hard, but life just never wanted things to work out. I think I'm just cursed in life so MAiD makes sense. The judgement is found here for the coverage request if you're interested: http://citoyens.soquij.qc.ca/php/decision.php?ID=C97168147E6...
I've been told by my Oncologist I only have a year left to live if I don't get treatment. That was back in October. There's really no reason to live as a disfigured person for all people. Some people can do it and I respect those individuals. I rather continue just taking morphine (otherwise I cannot walk) and get assisted dying after the snow melts. I feel like I've enjoyed enough of this life that I could. I'll email you if you don't mind my mentality, I always like to write to someone about anything. It's my favorite way to pass the time.
I truly feel bad for you. At the same time I look at my own kids and find that the “want” is often temporary but the result is permanent. Of course they want a puppy but are very unlikely to be able to take care of it properly for 15 years. And the “want” is very much real, they firmly believe it to be their utmost desire. So how do I, as a parent, tell the difference between something they can and cannot take responsibility for, they can or cannot learn to live without?
I knew when I was around ~7 and that never went away. I don't really think of it like a "want" of a puppy because I had wants like a puppy too and those go away after a few weeks or months in childhood. It's not something like years and years of never going away.
Btw, most people don't consider that being denied something like I was and that has life long consequences as way more hurtful while knowing you were right; and others prevented you. Thinking about things in my life I've been wrong about, such events are way less painful because it felt like my fault when people weren't involved by stoping me from what was right. The painful events are when people involved prevent what was right for you. Basically, it's way more awful when you undergo the wrong circumstances because of someone else that prevented what you knew was right instead of undergoing what was wrong by your own mistake. I tried my best to make that not confusing before I go to sleep.
Just adopt a puppy from a shelter and give it back when/if the kids get bored of it (maybe even donate them so that they have money to keep the dog). I also wanted a dog when I was a child, my parents didn't let me have it, but now I have living conditions when I wouldn't be able to, so it's too late to have one.
You see if that desire has been a fixed and constant part of their life since a young age. You check whether they can relieve their distress using any other methods. You check the severity of their distress.
This is a touchy subject, but I feel the need to state the obvious, that 12 year old children think and do a lot of foolish things because they are figuring out themselves and the world. We need to trust parents to help them and protect them, that is our job. We know them better than anyone, we have experience, we even share DNA with them.
I know there are exceptions, but the default state should be to trust parents with their own children. Nobody is perfect and mistakes will be made. That’s life, we try to do our best. And no committee, politician, doctor, even therapist is going to be able to ensure they won’t make mistakes that are worse. And I love my kids much more than they ever could.
I disagree. Parents make irrational decisions because of emotion and stress. Children should absolutely not be transitioning anything until they’re 18. The risks are too great, and the parents are too easily manipulated by society.
I think even 18 year old are too young. When I was 18 I would do all the stupid things. I would not trust this person at all. I think something around 25 or so is a good age. Not just this subject but in general.
I agree with the sentiment that mistakes get made, which is exactly why puberty blockers are an ideal treatment option at that age: to give kids time to figure themselves out and make an informed decision when they're old enough. Puberty blockers are reversible; puberty itself isn't.
No, they have permanent effects. This is exactly why the court ruled this way. And in a touchy and sensitive topic like this I think it is reasonable to assume the courts looked at as many facts as possible to make their decision.
You seem to misunderstand this court case. It did not say that PBs can cause infertility. It said that people who take PBs often go on to take hormones, and the hormones cause infertility.
In the UK you cannot get hormones if you're under 18.
I don't understand the point you're trying to make and it doesn't appear to have any relevance to this court case.
In England if you're 16 or older you can consent to get any medical treatment. If you're 18 and older you can decline any medical treatment if you're competent to do so. If you're 16 or 17 you cannot decline life-saving medical treatment, the courts will decide.
If you're under 16 your healthcare team will test to see if you're Gillick Competent. If you are Gillick Competent you can consent to any medical treatment. Doctors will always try to get the parents involved, and will always try to get agreement of the parents, but sometimes that's not possible and in those cases they can use the child's consent.
However, for treatment with puberty blockers there was a different protocol: the child, and the parents, and two different healthcare teams had to all agree that PBs were the right thing and that the child had capacity to make this choice.
This court case is saying that this is not sufficient, and that even if the parents and children and treatment teams all agree the courts still need to rule.
Your common sense sentiment is now becoming increasingly rarely expressed, because there is a pretty militant sub-culture that wants to impose their views on society without debate.
This thread was even flagged, no doubt by members of this group who consider any attempt to have an open discussion on the issue as a threat to their agenda.
I'd guess it's only your love for your children that compelled you to express your views on this issue in the face of potential hostility.
I'll add that this trans-rights radicalism is borne out of a justified fear of discrimination against a group that faces tremendous hardship in society: people who self-identify as a gender they were not born as.
But I have no doubt that the damage done by trying to suppress open discussion, both directly by not allowing people to intelligently discuss critically important trans-related issues like children undergoing gender transition hormone therapy, and indirectly in degradating the customs and institutions that guarantee free speech, will vastly outweigh the good it does.
The problem with sex reassignment surgeries, is that they do not work:
”Ten to fifteen years after surgical reassignment, the suicide rate of those who had undergone sex-reassignment surgery rose to twenty times that of comparable peers."
Dr. Paul McHugh, the university distinguished service professor of psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University
Non-surgical medical treatment is generally the most fruitful. (SRS, or GCS, is a surgical procedure involving construction of genitalia, and up until very recently there weren't any decent options for it.)
Unfortunately, therapy alone generally isn't shown to make suicide rates or gender dysphoria go away.
Elsewhere in this thread I posted a link to a great talk that has the leading expert in transgender care go into extreme depth on methods of treatments for transgender patients. If you want a doctor's perspective, and one that has probably the most experience tied to it (he sees an incredible volume of transgender patients), I definitely recommend checking it out.
You should read the study, their methodology for regret was only to account for people that requested a reversal:
"The regret rate is
defined as the number of sex reassigned individuals at the time
period when they did their first application that will later apply
for reversal to the original sex"
The study also did not account for suicides or being sanctioned in their regret rate.
Even if that were a rigorous study, not an anecdote, as the sibling commenter mentioned, you would have to compare the suicide rate of those who had undergone gender confirmation surgery with that among other trans people—including those who were still in the closet, which complicates the matter significantly.
Where does this end? Bestiality? How about post birth abortion. Keep the baby for a few days to determine if you really want to abort or not. How about multi-gender where the left half of your body is cis and the right is transgender?
64 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 120 ms ] threadSometimes doing nothing (at least for a while) is good medicine.
this seems to be in the interest of not having parents make knee jerk and unhelpful reactions, instead of the doctors actually evaluating potential underlying conditions of the patient
from my understanding, we are trying to accommodate body dysmorphia because it is easy to accommodate: give people what they want and the rest of us just say a pronoun so that they don’t feel marginalized, but for science this is a stopgap solution and there is interest in understanding and preventing the dysmorphia to begin with. It seems this message gets lost because people don't want to be seen as transphobic or don’t want the “mental health” research to be misconstrued as “I want to ignore those crazy people”, as a lot of transphobes do consider things that way. While this is inherently a mental incongruence, it is easy to accommodate while we work to avoid it happening.
Pretty much nowhere is it standard practice to administer hormones to anyone below 18, and few people are advocating for that.
The rate of attempted suicide in people yet to transition with gender dysphoria is 41%. That is the highest rate of any physical or mental condition we have on the books. This rate drops when you put them on hormone blockers (in cases of minors) and it drops when you put them on cross-sex hormones (in cases of adults).
Getting HN to come around on this issue is likely impossible, but if you want to hear from an actual expert (effectively the expert on the topic), here's a presentation you might find interesting from a medical doctor:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fefu33e8O-0
If not for compassion, you should check it out for intellectual curiosity. The talk goes into a lot of detail on how a general human's endocrine system works, has some interesting medical information even if you're not trans, and takes a really balanced approach to the issue.
-----
[Note] Fertility returning by simply stopping anti-androgens isn't necessarily a given, but getting it back is actually entirely doable. If you take the time to watch the talk, the doctor goes into how he's managed to get 100% of patients desiring it fertility back.
there seems like there can be significant overlap in an individual, but when discussing transitioning exclusively is it that gender dysphoria conveys the topic more specifically?
Gender-related body dysmorphia is somewhat unique because unlike the general case, therapy hasn't been shown to be effective in treating it.
Gender dysphoria is a broader term and includes body dysmorphia.
It is not possible for children in the UK to get cross sex hormones.
Currently we're talking about at most a couple of hundred children (out of a population of 60m people in UK). Very many more adults have vasectomies.
> I think I'm a different gender
> I'm going to try and change my sex
Explain to me how this isn't absurd?
So here's one thing that is important to remember: Lupron, also known as Leuprorelin or Leuprolide, has no permanent side effects when taken alone. It stops puberty, but it doesn't prevent it. If you stop taking the drug, the process of puberty will resume completely as normal. Its purpose is not to begin the sex change process, but to allow time for planning what the next steps are (usually, hormone replacement therapy), so you are not racing against a biological clock.
Puberty blockers are used for other medical issues and aren't considered dangerous or life damaging. Anyway this topic is somewhat meaningful to me because I really don't think people know how truly valuable it can be for someone to stall puberty when they desire to.
I find it appalling that cis society is quick to make sure no confused cis kid is harmed while ignoring trans kids that end up permanently disfigured by their voice & appearance from the wrong puberty. It's basically comparable to a cis kid having the wrong hormones damaging their body through puberty like a boy growing breasts and people just shrug their shoulders when it's a trans kid.
For context I went through the wrong puberty (I'm only 30 years old) and recently have been diagnosed with cancer. I'm choosing not to get treatment for the cancer and so I can get Medical Assistance in Dying because Gender Dysphoria sucks while all surgeries to possibly fix voice or appearance is like putting a downpayment for a house. Also was disowned by parents and struggled through university years because of constant bullying. Anyway I really hope people can take the time to consider that some kids truly know they're trans and it's not a fad to them.
The known speed of light is 299,792,458 m/s, or thereabouts. That's measured, and (by current technological standards) irrefutable.
That cannot be science, because it is irrefutable?
You are exactly correct; the value of the speed of light is not science because it cannot be refuted. (Although this was not always true!)
You see, in 1983 the definition of the length of a meter was changed to be the distance that light travels through vacuum in 1/299,792,458 of a second, precisely. Or to put that differently, that the speed of light through vacuum is pinned at 299,792,458 meters per second, precisely. Not “by current technological standards”; that’s the exact value of the speed of light in SI units, and presumably always will be.
So light now always travels at that speed because we’ve defined it that way, and if (when) we develop better methods to more accurately measure how far light travels over a period of time, it changes the length of a meter, not the speed of light. Light would still be travelling at 299,792,458 m/s; those meters would just be a little longer or shorter to compensate for whatever errors we discovered. (And similarly, if we discovered that our measurements of certain specific vibrations of caesium-133 atoms were wrong, it doesn’t change the measured length of a second; it changes the length of a meter. The duration of a second relative to the caesium-133 atoms is fixed by fiat, the same way that the speed of light is fixed by fiat)
But if you’d asked before 1983, then I’d have said that yes, the value of the speed of light was easily refutable, simply by following the standard everyday process of science. (and in fact this happened in 1972, 1958, 1950, 1926, 1907, etc and so on all the way back to the mid-1600s)
If you wanted to ‘refute’ the currently accepted speed of light, then all you had to do was run an experiment to measure the speed of light and find out that it had a different speed than everybody thought previously.
Once you did that, you of course needed to get a bunch of other scientists to inspect your methodology and results and then repeat your experiment and do other variations of your experiment, and eventually come into agreement with your new, improved measurement. Boom! Refuted. Science, bitches. :D
The whole point of science is that every single one of its findings can be refuted if new experiments determine that our previous understanding was incorrect. If something can’t be refuted, it’s not science. By definition.
That’s the core distinguishing feature between science and dogma/opinions/whatever.
But yeah. The speed of light? Not science any more. We’ve declared a value by fiat and no experimental results can change it from here on out.
Please check out https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability
> In the philosophy of science, falsifiability or refutability is the capacity for a statement, theory or hypothesis to be contradicted by evidence. For example, the statement "All swans are white" is falsifiable because one can observe that black swans exist.
> The observation of a black swan falsifies the hypothesis "All swans are white".
> (...) Popper argued for falsifiability and opposed this to the intuitively similar concept of verifiability. Whereas verifying the claim "All swans are white" would require assessment of all swans, which is not possible, the single observation of a black swan is sufficient to falsify it.
Just checking that you know that any relevant healthcare professional disagrees with you. This includes WPATH, USPATH, CPATH, AusPATH, PATHA, AsiaPATH, EUPATH, WHO, CDC, ICD11
One mistake leaves a person sterile. One doesn't.
Parents have a right to force their beliefs onto their children if their beliefs are reasonable. Their children will often thank them for it when they've become adults.
You're dismissing sterility as a non-issue when it is a massive issue for many people, and moreover, you're obfuscating the fact that this is about children, and the potential to undergo life-altering treatment with no psychiatric evaluation and little-to-no consultation.
Either you know that and don't care, or you don't know that, but either way it means you're not discussing in good faith.
> Parents have a right to force their beliefs onto their children if their beliefs are reasonable.
This court case said that combined parental consent and child consent was not enough, and that the court could ignore the wishes of the parent.
> and the potential to undergo life-altering treatment with no psychiatric evaluation and little-to-no consultation.
Simply untrue.
But way to score a point on pedantic grounds.
>This court case said that combined parental consent and child consent was not enough
I was responding to the OP's point, that claimed I was arguing for forcing my beliefs on others. I was making the point that in principle, it can be perfectly okay for parents to force their beliefs on their children.
It depends on the circumstances and the specific details of the case. I was not making an argument for or against parental privilege for any specific case.
Could a case be made that they failed to get you the help you needed earlier and thus ought to foot the bill now?
Is it reasonably possible that you might earn enough to pay for it?
Could you raise money from others to do so?
Why not all 3 raise and earn money for it while trying to recoup expenses in court?
In Canada I haven't had success getting surgeries coverage for fixing either my voice or face from what characteristics people gender me. I tried for a few years to get coverage and even appealed my insurance's decision against my psychiatrist's letter saying the surgeries are medically necessary. I went to a surgeon that's the head surgeon for the surgeries transwomen get and he said none of his colleagues understand Gender Dysphoria to know why the surgeries should be medically necessary. The public insurance only cares about the surgeon's opinion.
So I've basically given up on coverage. I find it even more irritating nowadays since I've read about the common cancers when I was diagnosed. Women that get breast cancer have no problems getting full coverage for breast reconstruction under the public insurance. I think that obviously should be a thing but it feels like added sting to my situation since I've not even had success with breasts from HRT by starting after puberty.
Anyway I tried enough I think and worked hard, but life just never wanted things to work out. I think I'm just cursed in life so MAiD makes sense. The judgement is found here for the coverage request if you're interested: http://citoyens.soquij.qc.ca/php/decision.php?ID=C97168147E6...
I am sure you have so much good to experience in this world if you find the right environment and people around you.
If you want to talk please send a hi and we can go from there, email is in my profile.
Btw, most people don't consider that being denied something like I was and that has life long consequences as way more hurtful while knowing you were right; and others prevented you. Thinking about things in my life I've been wrong about, such events are way less painful because it felt like my fault when people weren't involved by stoping me from what was right. The painful events are when people involved prevent what was right for you. Basically, it's way more awful when you undergo the wrong circumstances because of someone else that prevented what you knew was right instead of undergoing what was wrong by your own mistake. I tried my best to make that not confusing before I go to sleep.
I know there are exceptions, but the default state should be to trust parents with their own children. Nobody is perfect and mistakes will be made. That’s life, we try to do our best. And no committee, politician, doctor, even therapist is going to be able to ensure they won’t make mistakes that are worse. And I love my kids much more than they ever could.
Someone's ability to join the army and be used as cannon fodder is hardly proof of their ability to think intelligently for themselves.
(I am trans, and also a parent.)
You seem to misunderstand this court case. It did not say that PBs can cause infertility. It said that people who take PBs often go on to take hormones, and the hormones cause infertility.
In the UK you cannot get hormones if you're under 18.
In England if you're 16 or older you can consent to get any medical treatment. If you're 18 and older you can decline any medical treatment if you're competent to do so. If you're 16 or 17 you cannot decline life-saving medical treatment, the courts will decide.
If you're under 16 your healthcare team will test to see if you're Gillick Competent. If you are Gillick Competent you can consent to any medical treatment. Doctors will always try to get the parents involved, and will always try to get agreement of the parents, but sometimes that's not possible and in those cases they can use the child's consent.
However, for treatment with puberty blockers there was a different protocol: the child, and the parents, and two different healthcare teams had to all agree that PBs were the right thing and that the child had capacity to make this choice.
This court case is saying that this is not sufficient, and that even if the parents and children and treatment teams all agree the courts still need to rule.
This thread was even flagged, no doubt by members of this group who consider any attempt to have an open discussion on the issue as a threat to their agenda.
I'd guess it's only your love for your children that compelled you to express your views on this issue in the face of potential hostility.
I'll add that this trans-rights radicalism is borne out of a justified fear of discrimination against a group that faces tremendous hardship in society: people who self-identify as a gender they were not born as.
But I have no doubt that the damage done by trying to suppress open discussion, both directly by not allowing people to intelligently discuss critically important trans-related issues like children undergoing gender transition hormone therapy, and indirectly in degradating the customs and institutions that guarantee free speech, will vastly outweigh the good it does.
”Ten to fifteen years after surgical reassignment, the suicide rate of those who had undergone sex-reassignment surgery rose to twenty times that of comparable peers."
Dr. Paul McHugh, the university distinguished service professor of psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University
https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/06/15145/
They actually have a lower rate of patient regret than LASIK.
This is a study:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-014-0300-8
n = 767. Over fifty years. Lower rate of patient regret than LASIK.
Further, sex reassignment surgeries aren't the only treatment, and they aren't even one relevant to the article.
Unfortunately, therapy alone generally isn't shown to make suicide rates or gender dysphoria go away.
Elsewhere in this thread I posted a link to a great talk that has the leading expert in transgender care go into extreme depth on methods of treatments for transgender patients. If you want a doctor's perspective, and one that has probably the most experience tied to it (he sees an incredible volume of transgender patients), I definitely recommend checking it out.
"The regret rate is defined as the number of sex reassigned individuals at the time period when they did their first application that will later apply for reversal to the original sex"
The study also did not account for suicides or being sanctioned in their regret rate.
Seriously, what's next?