Gender identity confusion is not hardwired into the brain

nylon

Tue, Dec 12 2017, 8:38 am

The identical twin analogy doesn't work. Biology is actually more complicated than that. If one twin is gay, there is a high probability the second twin will be, but it's not 100%. One, not all genetics are as simple as eye color, and two, biology doesn't just mean genetics.

The New Atlantis piece came in for a ton of criticism and is an extremely selective look at the research. It's not a peer reviewed journal and is published by a foundation that seeks to apply "the Judeo-Christian moral tradition" (and yes, I'm an observant Jew--that doesn't mean I like to muddy the waters about religion and science). The lead author USED to be head of gender identity at Hopkins. His colleagues all wrote to disassociate themselves from his stance. He stakes a lot on the idea that he shut down surgeries at Hopkins. They do them again now.

Say what you want about the SPLC: the ACP was explicitly set up to oppose trends in the AAP, beginning with allowing adoption by gay couples, and tries to confuse people by looking like one of the medical boards. (The group for internists is the American College of Physicians, also abbreviated ACP and some sources use ACPeds for the other group to avoid confusion)

Hormones can reduce fertility, but hormones alone are reversible IF the child has undergone puberty as their birth s*x. Trans men have gotten pregnant. If you use Lupron or other drugs to delay puberty, then use hormones so you only ever go through puberty as the other s*x, then that is NOT reversible and it renders you permanently infertile. (if you use the blockers, but then stop them without adding hormones, you will just go through puberty late.)

Chromosomes alone can't determine s*x for an inters*x child because of hormonal issues. It's determined by getting the full picture of hormones, chromosomes, and behavior. If you have, for example, complete androgen insensitivity, you're going to be female. (You will also appear completely female externally, and it usually won't be discovered until you fail to go through puberty. Almost all people with CAIS identify as straight women.)

PinkFridge

Tue, Dec 12 2017, 9:07 am

nylon wrote:

Hormones can reduce fertility, but hormones alone are reversible IF the child has undergone puberty as their birth s*x. Trans men have gotten pregnant. If you use Lupron or other drugs to delay puberty, then use hormones so you only ever go through puberty as the other s*x, then that is NOT reversible and it renders you permanently infertile. (if you use the blockers, but then stop them without adding hormones, you will just go through puberty late.)

So how in good conscience do any MDs do that kind of stuff before puberty?
I appreciate the pain someone might be in. But they need to think about what the totality of their life will be. What do they want out of life? Do they see family? Do they want biological children? Isn't the specter of possible regret over irreversible action enough to induce caution?
If parents are involved - and why shouldn't they be - what are they thinking?

FranticFrummie

Tue, Dec 12 2017, 10:21 am

marina wrote:

you know what else may cause infertility? Antidepressants. Like Prozac.

I am all fine with discussing whether these treatments for gender dysphoria in adolescents is or is not worthwhile, but let's discuss it like any other treatment with risks and benefits. Let's not flip out because we read an article or saw a video specifically designed to cause drama...

Exactly. That's why I posted the information up-thread. I'd rather we discuss this from a medical and scientific point of view, and leave out the pearl clutching and fainting spells.

Mommyg8

Tue, Dec 12 2017, 10:24 am

marina wrote:

Antidepressants cause infertility? Since when?

I'm NOT addressing the original issue, I'm just asking you to please qualify this statement.

marina

Tue, Dec 12 2017, 10:29 am

Mommyg8 wrote:

Antidepressants cause infertility? Since when?

I'm NOT addressing the original issue, I'm just asking you to please qualify this statement.

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/822276

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26827878

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub.....2.php

That is from a basic google search.

Note: I am not a doctor and no one should discontinue their antidepression medication because of something they read on imamother.

Mommyg8

Tue, Dec 12 2017, 10:32 am

marina wrote:

Marina, I'm not checking all the links... I know plenty of people who are on antidepressants and they have very nice size families.... so I just don't see this. If there is a tiny percentage - maybe. But surgery and hormone therapy is obviously much more than a tiny percentage.

Fox

Tue, Dec 12 2017, 11:53 am

marina wrote:

I am all fine with discussing whether these treatments for gender dysphoria in adolescents is or is not worthwhile, but let's discuss it like any other treatment with risks and benefits. Let's not flip out because we read an article or saw a video specifically designed to cause drama...

I'm a bit lost on what you're advocating . . . or opposing.

* Are you in favor of diagnosing prepubescent children with gender dysphoria, given current medical knowledge?

* Are you in favor of puberty blockers and/or hormone therapy for minors?

* Are you in favor of discontinuing research into the causes and potential treatments for gender dysphoria if they contradict transitioning as an effective treatment?

It seems pretty clear that (a) hormone treatments have serious side effects and we don't know much about the long-term impact on adolescents; (b) a significant portion of children and early adolescents who believe themselves to suffer from gender dysphoria grow out of it; and (c) gender dysphoria has been glamourized in the media. Given those facts, waiting until 18 or 21 to diagnose and treat gender dysphoria seems pretty reasonable.

marina

Tue, Dec 12 2017, 12:15 pm

Fox wrote:

This is like asking:

* Are you in favor of lithium for minors?
* Are you in favor of corpus callosotomy for minors?

Every case is different and it depends on what your other feasible options are. Of course, hormones have serious side effects, just like any other medications that adolescents take for a myriad of other conditions.

And just like I'm not going to definitively announce that all children with bipolar or seizures should wait until 18 or 21 to get lithium or brain surgery, the same way I'm not going to announce that all adolescents with gender dysphoria need to wait until that age. It depends on the other factors, the risks involved, other options, etc. and I'm not sure why we can't just assume that these parents and their children and their doctors have done the research and looked at their options and came to the conclusion that is best for them.

Fox

Tue, Dec 12 2017, 1:24 pm

marina wrote:

I'm not sure why we can't just assume that these parents and their children and their doctors have done the research and looked at their options and came to the conclusion that is best for them.

In a perfect world, I'd agree 100 percent.

The problem, however, is that trans activism has jumped the shark, going well beyond advocating for civil rights and respectful treatment. Transitioning is increasingly presented as a first resort rather than a last resort, and no distinction is made between cases of extreme and minor gender dysphoria.

In fact, a great many parents and children seem to be a bit confused about what "gender" means. For example, virtually every account involves something like, "I don't feel like a girl. I like boy stuff. I hate pink and frilly dresses. I like to build things outside."

Honey, that doesn't mean you have gender dysphoria. That means you don't like pink, frilly dresses and that you like to build things outside.

Now, is it possible an individual complaining about dresses does indeed suffer from gender dysphoria? Of course. But we usually apply Occam's Razer to such situations. If I wake up with a cough, I don't rush to the hospital because I obviously have pneumonia.

More ominously, trans activists are shutting down research into issues related to gender dysphoria. Universities are loathe to fund such work because of the attention it might draw if it reaches the "wrong" conclusion. Dreger's book documents this in some detail, and one researcher in the U.K. was openly told that such research was simply too "hot" to fund.

So the current atmosphere is not particularly conducive for parents to make cautious, sober judgments about the risks and benefits of adolescent transitioning.

southernbubby

Tue, Dec 12 2017, 1:31 pm

marina wrote:

But then you have to ask yourself these questions:

1)How long has the gender dysphoria been apparent? If a 15 year old realizes that his or her lifelong unhappiness is due to gender dysphoria, would they be better off waiting until they turn 21 to be sure, before doing something permanent and life altering, as opposed to a child who had been living as the opposite gender since age 3 or 4 and can't remember when he or she actually lived as the original biological gender?

2)Do people know what all their options really are? For example in very progressive countries, are people apprised of options that don't involve transitioning? Are they even offered psychological counseling and group therapy to help them live as their birth gender while coping with the dysphoria? Are we living in such a progressive climate even here in America where people are labeled as bigots if they advocate taking a conservative approach to the management of gender dysphoria and possible suicide?

Because this is not just a medical decision but a political decision it is not the same as deciding if a morbidly obese teenager should have stomach bypass surgery. We as a society could prosecute parents who neglect medical needs for religious reasons, which I agree with, but are we headed that way in the care of adolescents who want their gender changed, or are parents still allowed to seek medical care for transgender children from the doctor in my original post? Are parent's choices in this regard about to be dictated by the political climate, rather than by valid choice?

southernbubby

Tue, Dec 12 2017, 1:37 pm

Fox wrote:

The most progressive parents go as far as to not tell anyone what gender their child actually is and to be politically correct, the child must be given a gender neutral name, uni-gender clothing and toys, and never be addressed by gender obvious pronouns. The subway system is doing away with the "ladies and gentlemen" announcement and school principals and teachers are not supposed to address the student body as "boys and girls". Children someday will probably use the same restrooms and locker rooms so that there is no more difference between genitalia than by shoe size.

And society is doing all of this supposedly, to protect what is considered a very small segment of society.

Optimystic

Tue, Dec 12 2017, 4:58 pm

Every one of us has our own mix of masculine and feminine, and if it were my son or daughter who thought they were the other gender, that is the first thing I would tell them. 'You don't have to change your gender to fully be who you are.'

Now, I have not stood in the place of every child or every family. Permanent and certainly irreversible measures (giving male hormones to a girl for example) should wait until at least 18. On the other hand, blockers that delay puberty might possibly save someone from an expensive chest surgery later or an irreversible deep voice. I can understand why a parent whose child truly and consistently believes herself to be the other gender would want to make that kind of decision at a young age.

Whether it is for religion, nutrition, health, or a health issue, parents make irreversible decisions for their young children all the time, and it should stay that way. On this issue, there are families that will not consider any measure that would interfere with their child's birth gender, and there are other families that make it too easy. The government has no place intervening one way or the other.

southernbubby

Tue, Dec 12 2017, 5:09 pm

Optimystic wrote:

We make irreversible decisions but do you consider bris milah to be the same type of irreversible decision and gender reassignment surgery or puberty blockers? We take a chance on whether or not vaccinations are the right thing to do, or we allow our children to eat foods that might harm their long term health, but is that irreversible in the same way that changing genders is?

33055

Tue, Dec 12 2017, 6:29 pm

southernbubby wrote:

I consider gender reassignment surgery for minors the same as female circumcision.

southernbubby

Tue, Dec 12 2017, 6:38 pm

[I]The question is no longer whether gender reassignment is an option, but rather, how young should it begin. While no law prohibits minors from receiving relations-change hormones or even surgery, insurers have generally refused to extend coverage for these procedures to those under 18.

the above statement is from this article:

http://health.heraldtribune.co.....ment/

which goes further to state:

The debates invoke biology, ideology and emotion. Is gender dysphoria governed by a wiring of the brain or by genetic coding? How much does it stem from the pressure to fit into society’s boxes? Has the Internet liberated teenagers like Kat from a narrow view of how they should live, or seduced them by offering an answer they might later choose to reject?

It also states that :

Given that there are no proven biological markers for what is known as gender dysphoria, there is no medical consensus on the central question: whether teenagers — habitually trying on new identities and not known for foresight — should be granted an irreversible physical fix for what is still considered a psychological condition.

Basically, to sum it up, there are no laws, only what society dictates is fair, progressive, humane, etc.

Optimystic

Tue, Dec 12 2017, 7:20 pm

southernbubby wrote:

I think we agree that gender reassignment surgery should be withheld from minors, no matter how much that family believes it is necessary.

I think we can also agree it is not the government's place to interfere in a family's every religious, medical, or nutrition decision.

Should the government prevent gender reassignment surgery on a fifteen-year-old? Absolutely. (I thought the U.S. already did.) Stop hormones that would cause a teenage girl to grow facial hair and develop a deep voice? Absolutely.

On the other hand, if blocking hormones only delays puberty and lets the child decide if she's sure after she is an adult, then whether the parents want to leave that open for the confused child or not is the family's decision. I hope that makes what I meant a little clearer.