Ever Heard Of Gender Affirming Care?

[ToraToraTora]

[naomi24]

But no one can make them wait indefinitely so that's just nonsense. Once they're adults they make their own choices. The question was about children.

[ClareTG0ld]

// But no one can make them wait indefinitely so that's just nonsense. Once they're adults they make their own choices. //

Firstly, yes they can be made to wait indefinitely, as you could make the decision to ban transgender care altogether; and, even if not an explicit ban, then you could take it so unseriously as to make it effectively inaccessible to all but the wealthy (see, for example, the recent BBC feature https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-61605588 , and even this picture is out-of-date in some regions, with waiting times for new GIC referrals in some regions measured not in years but in decades).

Secondly, one thing I had thought about adding but didn't, and perhaps should have in retrospect, is that there are three broad aspects to transgender medical care. Firstly, puberty blocking -- this is fully reversible, and proper mental health support would help guide them through it in the meantime for those who wish either to stop this or to continue on. Secondly, there is active hormone replacement -- taking testosterone or estrogen supplements, depending. Thirdly, there's surgery. Both of these latter two steps lead to irreversible changes, or at least to changes that are only partially reversible with yet more surgery later in life.

As a rule, then, the second and third steps deserve more consideration, and shouldn't be taken lightly. Ultimately, this is a decision between doctor and patient, and I don't think it's my place or anybody else's to say that the decision has or hasn't been "rushed" in any given case; but it's kind of clear that if a patient says to a doctor that they think they are trans, then if the doctor whisks them off immediately to the operating table then they're doing it wrong.

[naomi24]

A few 'coulds' in there and none relevant.

//Ultimately, this is a decision between doctor and patient, and I don't think it's my place or anybody else's to say that the decision has or hasn't been "rushed" in any given case; //

I disagree - as I think most parents would. There is no way I would entrust decisions of this nature to a child and a doctor alone. Too many loonies out there only too eager to embrace this appalling travesty - as is evidenced by the utter tragedy of the case in question.

[lankeela]

Surely if it is illegal to give someone a tattoo until they are 18 then for any surgery that transforms their gender they should be at least that age. Parents are responsible for making decisions for their children so no child should be allowed to make such life changing decisions. Whether that be 16 or 18 is debatable but under 16 it should be illegal.

[Zacs-Master]

A tattoo is decoration. Comparing it to surgery to address psychological issues is misguided, to say the least.

[ClareTG0ld]

// I disagree - as I think most parents would. There is no way I would entrust decisions of this nature to a child and a doctor alone. //

Well, let's throw the parents in then as well. But if all parties are supportive then at some point you're advocating for throwing the decision over to somebody with no connection to anyone involved, who doesn't see people but only names on paper, and that's also wrong: such a person can only judge by political standards. Healthcare in general is a private matter, and whether you think the decision reached in private is right or wrong the first duty is to support people to get the care *they* need in the moment.

Also, my "coulds" are the reality in some places. Russia has recently banned all transgender healthcare at any age (or at least it only awaits a rubber stamp, I can't now remember what stage it reached in the process), and while we in the UK are nowhere near that then, as I outlined, in practice transgender healthcare is inaccessible in this country to many in any reasonable time period.

[naomi24]

//But if all parties are supportive then at some point you're advocating for throwing the decision over to somebody with no connection to anyone involved, who doesn't see people but only names on paper//

What on earth are you talking about? I'm advocating no such thing.

[ToraToraTora]

ZM: "A tattoo is decoration. Comparing it to surgery to address psychological issues is misguided, to say the least. " - that's the whole point we make people wait until they are 18 for a tattoo, a drink, smoke etc yet we can drug them and chop their bits off at any age, Lankeela is pointing out the juxtaposition of that.

[Zacs-Master]

There is no juxtaposition. One is decoration and serves no medical purpose, one is an attempt to address someone’s psychological issues. Comparing the two is facile.

[ClareTG0ld]

//
What on earth are you talking about? I'm advocating no such thing. //

Let's say that a young transgender patient wants hormone treatment. Let's say that the parents agree. Let's say that the doctor also agrees (after some suitable minimum period of assessment, let's say a couple of appointments). At this point, what barriers should exist to stop the treatment from proceeding?

[naomi24]

Age should be the barrier. What we think we want even at 18 is often very different to what we want at 30.

[ClareTG0ld]

Maybe so, but again that amounts in effect to refusing certain medical treatments because *you*, someone disconnected from the individual case, think that that treatment may be a mistake. That's using the law to moralise.

[Zacs-Master]

What if the problems are so severe there’s a danger of the person not making it to 18, or 30?

[ToraToraTora]

ZM I'm pretty sure the urge alone (to transition) is not life threatening.

[naomi24]

I'm not advocating refusing medical treatment for mental health issues.

[Zacs-Master]

You’re so confused, Naomi. Time you made you’re mind up for once.