I would add that Wpath self appointed itself to create guidelines, the current guidelines did poorly in a rigorous guideline review (Dahlen et al, 2021). 5 reviewers said do not use, one said only if modified, None recommended use as is. They're called standards of care but are not, those words mean something. See Malone et al, 2021, in jcem.
And the UK also reviewed evidence for hormones for minors, same conclusion. Very low quality certainty.
You are already braver than the journalists who refuse to look at this, to think about it!
You don't need to be braver, they do!
Thank you for your insights and your voice, they are badly needed in this medical and misinformation crisis.
The truth is what matters, and yes it is nuanced. Families deserve better information so that they are able to support their gender non conforming children in many ways, not simply by affirming a son who was a daughter 16 years and one day ago without being labeled as transphobic. And to use the term dead name!? It’s so disrespectful of loving parents trying to find their way here. The Wild Wild West of gender affirming medicine must stop! Do no harm … remember that WPATH? Who gains from the misinformation? No one.
I have a different question, which is what does an ordinary family do in the meantime. I have a 6 year old being told that not liking princesses means she might be non-binary, that everyone has an innate gender identity and the only way to feel good is to embrace that gender identity. She thinks, based on books read at school, that transgender boy will grow up naturally to be a man (we talked about DNA but not cross sex hormones or surgery). How do I build her confidence and her future without creating transphobia (as defined by her school and peers) and help her to understand nuance in matters she barely understands?
Another brilliant essay!
Thank you!
I would add that Wpath self appointed itself to create guidelines, the current guidelines did poorly in a rigorous guideline review (Dahlen et al, 2021). 5 reviewers said do not use, one said only if modified, None recommended use as is. They're called standards of care but are not, those words mean something. See Malone et al, 2021, in jcem.
And the UK also reviewed evidence for hormones for minors, same conclusion. Very low quality certainty.
You are already braver than the journalists who refuse to look at this, to think about it!
You don't need to be braver, they do!
Thank you for your insights and your voice, they are badly needed in this medical and misinformation crisis.
The truth is what matters, and yes it is nuanced. Families deserve better information so that they are able to support their gender non conforming children in many ways, not simply by affirming a son who was a daughter 16 years and one day ago without being labeled as transphobic. And to use the term dead name!? It’s so disrespectful of loving parents trying to find their way here. The Wild Wild West of gender affirming medicine must stop! Do no harm … remember that WPATH? Who gains from the misinformation? No one.
I have a different question, which is what does an ordinary family do in the meantime. I have a 6 year old being told that not liking princesses means she might be non-binary, that everyone has an innate gender identity and the only way to feel good is to embrace that gender identity. She thinks, based on books read at school, that transgender boy will grow up naturally to be a man (we talked about DNA but not cross sex hormones or surgery). How do I build her confidence and her future without creating transphobia (as defined by her school and peers) and help her to understand nuance in matters she barely understands?
"I know some people want me to be didactic, but the main thing I’m didactic about is nuance."
:-)