Finnish study on transition and psychiatric outcomes in sex and gender shows increased psychiatric morbidity

But we know that a thirteen year old girl has very different reasons for dysphoria about her body than a forty year old man who likes wearing fishnets and bras.

Good question. Also worth noting disparity in outcomes between males and females. Its almost like sex matters.

Gosh that's quite something.
I'd be very concerned if I was considering transition and cared about objective truth.

I wonder if trans people fare any better if they are those who accept that gender identity is about who you are inside and separate from physical sex. If they don't think that woman = female/ man = male, are they happier?

What medical quals does this Erin chap have?

Aye, the Xters are a-buzz with supposed takedowns. It’s all a cope - the study is solid.

anyone wanting to use archive for that Erininthemorning piece, here is the link

https://archive.is/ppnvu

I think what is clear with this study and is undeniable, is that mental health does not improve with these treatments. The treatments being pushed by many heavily invested individuals and groups as being 'life saving' and to improve mental health.

'Among adolescents who underwent medical gender reassignment, psychiatric morbidity increased markedly during follow-up—rising from 9.8% to 60.7% in feminising gender reassignment and from 21.6% to 54.5% in masculinising gender reassignment. '

I don’t think a blanket veto on people with psychiatric conditions accessing gender reassignment treatment/surgery would stand up to legal challenge.

It stands up legally if having a particular psychiatric condition means that the treatment will make their condition worse. There are other treatments that are contra-indicated for certain psychiatric conditions - e.g. talk therapy is contra-indicated for some conditions (because it is harmful to the people who have them) and it's legal to refuse. Why would gender reassignment be different?

I have been party to many discussions where anxiety had been expressed about the potential ‘oppression’ of autistic people through denying them gender affirming treatment on the basis of being autistic. For many, it’s seen as a right!

Are those discussions with people who understand the law? People can think it's a "right" but that doesn't mean it legally is a right. People may believe they are being "oppressed" but self-decided "oppression" has nothing to do with the law or even whether they really are being oppressed. People in this country don't have a right to demand that doctors knowingly harm them. Refusal to harm someone is not oppression.

It's notably not printed in any notable scientific journals because it's junk science, have a read:

Fact Check: New Finnish "Study" Does Not Prove "Trans Youth Care Leads To Worse Outcomes"

I don’t think a blanket veto on people with psychiatric conditions accessing gender reassignment treatment/surgery would stand up to legal challenge.

Having said that, I struggle to get my head around it all because it’s all so contradictory and incoherent.

I have been party to many discussions where anxiety had been expressed about the potential ‘oppression’ of autistic people through denying them gender affirming treatment on the basis of being autistic. For many, it’s seen as a right!

However, this would likely be illegal due to discrimination against those with mental health conditions.

Not in this country it wouldn't. Preserving the mental health of people who already have a mental health condition is a legitimate aim. And refusing to give them medical treatments which are known to worsen their mental health outcomes is a proportionate means to that aim.

Some kinds of discrimination are sensible and legal.

A nice discussion by Stella O’Malley which includes reference to the above study:

stellaomalley.substack.com/p/the-cass-paradox

I don’t think that the Tavi was trying to cover up known or anticipated findings about poor outcomes. They were so ideologically captured/ driven that they thought that provision of ‘gender affirming care’ was a moral imperative that should not be questioned. I still can’t get over how they operated like this within the NHS - there is no other example of this across any other specialist services.

Fortunately, the Tavi no longer exists as an NHS Trust, it was taken over by the North London NHS Trust on 1st April.

QED

💯

The logical argument would be to only allow physical transition in cases where mental health issues aren’t skewing perception. However, this would likely be illegal due to discrimination against those with mental health conditions. It is also hard to imagine concluding that someone is mentally well when they are seeking to undermine their health and function through taking exogenous hormones and removing healthy tissue.

How is this not a bigger story? I can't find this anywhere on the BBC.

This is the first time ever this has been properly looked at - and it shows the exact opposite of what we've been told the last few years. Far from saving someone's life by affirming their gender identity - it actually increases the likelihood of them taking their own life SIGNIFICANTLY.

The research is a great start.

We need more long term reviews from existing records.

meanwhile this tweet is meme worthy.

x.com/lgbwiththet/status/2041234218081005925?s=46

Who could ever have predicted surgically removing the genitals of mentally ill people would not magically cure them.
Gee. Shocker.

From Julia Mason on X/Nitter:

Julia Mason MS MD@JuliaMasonMD1
7h
There's a key distinction in the new register study out of Finland that many people are missing: they didn't compare all types of psychological support, or even the use of psychiatric medications. They were looking at "specialist level psychiatric treatment" and this is a thing.

Apr 7, 2026 · 3:01 AM UTC
Julia Mason MS MD@JuliaMasonMD1
7h
They didn't track use of counseling, or routine ADHD medications, or SSRIs. Finland has a two-tiered mental health system, and only the difficult cases end up being referred for specialist level psychiatric treatment. An increase here is significant.