Huge new study of trans people released.

[crispbuttyfan]

thinkprogress.org/what-we-know-transgender-surgery-72ae4737545a/

1. The scholarly literature makes clear that gender transition is effective in treating gender dysphoria and can significantly improve the well-being of transgender individuals.

1. Among the positive outcomes of gender transition and related medical treatments for transgender individuals are improved quality of life, greater relationship satisfaction, higher self-esteem and confidence, and reductions in anxiety, depression, suicidality, and substance use.

1. The positive impact of gender transition on transgender well-being has grown considerably in recent years, as both surgical techniques and social support have improved.

1. Regrets following gender transition are extremely rare and have become even rarer as both surgical techniques and social support have improved. Pooling data from numerous studies demonstrates a regret rate ranging from .3 percent to 3.8 percent. Regrets are most likely to result from a lack of social support after transition or poor surgical outcomes using older techniques.

1. Factors that are predictive of success in the treatment of gender dysphoria include adequate preparation and mental health support prior to treatment, proper follow-up care from knowledgeable providers, consistent family and social support, and high-quality surgical outcomes (when surgery is involved).

1. Transgender individuals, particularly those who cannot access treatment for gender dysphoria or who encounter unsupportive social environments, are more likely than the general population to experience health challenges such as depression, anxiety, suicidality and minority stress. While gender transition can mitigate these challenges, the health and well-being of transgender people can be harmed by stigmatizing and discriminatory treatment.

1. An inherent limitation in the field of transgender health research is that it is difficult to conduct prospective studies or randomized control trials of treatments for gender dysphoria because of the individualized nature of treatment, the varying and unequal circumstances of population members, the small size of the known transgender population, and the ethical issues involved in withholding an effective treatment from those who need it.

1. Transgender outcomes research is still evolving and has been limited by the historical stigma against conducting research in this field. More research is needed to adequately characterize and address the needs of the transgender population.

"I kind of agree... but if I accept 'old school' transwomen as allies (assuming they support me/us) then I will fight for them too."

Any men can be a allies, does feminism have to fight for them, too?

Any men can be a allies, does feminism have to fight for them, too

No. I was referring to the anti-self ID battle specifically.

I do care though about women, the law, vulnerable children and free speech. When those intersect with trans I'll discuss those issues.

This. Exactly this.

The other thing I was referring to, I suppose, was that if we don't accept the old-school TS in the fight against self ID then we need to own this and not 'use' them as allies when it suits us.

YetAnotherSpartacus, who is encouraging children onto puberty blockers and young adults into surgery? It's not the self id crowd, it's not the men who will use the law to get into women spaces. Have you seen the Reddit threads? There have even been transsexual coming onto here, claiming that's the right path to take.

Lost Art - I am not sure you understand me. I am referring to the 'old school' transwomen who support us - such as JayCee, PeanutButter and Yetanothertranswoman even if a small part of me thinks she might have snitched part of my username :)

Are you sure that they all take a stand against childhood transitioning? I'm sure at least one of those has talked about the benefits of children taking puberty blockers.

I think the self id crowd do use children to further their cause. I think they often use images of sweet little trans children as ‘who could be frightened of these lovely children?’ diversions.
I think having transed kids fits the self id narrative that it’s innate and the way you’re born.

The old school transsexuals I’ve seen have been very keen that people don’t rush into it.

Are you sure that they all take a stand against childhood transitioning? I'm sure at least one of those has talked about the benefits of children taking puberty blockers

I haven't seen it, but if I do I will call it out and I suggest you do the same.

The other thing I was referring to, I suppose, was that if we don't accept the old-school TS in the fight against self ID then we need to own this and not 'use' them as allies when it suits us.

I understand you. I think the TS people do need to get their finger out, however, and start organising among themselves. We can be allies but our interests won't coincide exactly.

The point I was really making is that this is a feminist forum, so trans issues that don't impact on feminism - surgery satisfaction levels, as here, for example - don't really belong here. But because OP cannot conceptualise a pro-woman stance, only an anti-trans stance, OP doesn't realise that transgender surgery satisfaction levels aren't really of interest to us.

LangCleg - I utterly agree with you.

Totally daft question:

Because my initial reaction was the same as baby

so what? And why post this here?

I'm always happy if I see some news article saying some treatment for some illness or disorder works. I only really pay attention if it's something someone I know suffers from though. I rarely spend time debating it.

And whether or not treatment for GD works is neither here nor there when it comes to women's rights - which is what we do care about.

So shall we not engage then?

Babyitsawildworld at 15:16.
Yes. This post in its entirety (although I do care slightly more about classical musicians and people who live on barges than the op...[ grin] ..I could insert anglers and people who play sport in there instead) ..

@BabyItsAWildWorld. You have hit hit the nail on the head.

I think many people are of the impression that this forum has become centred on trans issues. It just so happens that some trans issues intersect some significant concerns held by feminists. Even where this is the case, our interests lay in the impact on our interests not transgender people per se.

I think it would be helpful all round if we bare this in mind. Linked to other threads about accusations of transphobia/ risks of debate on Mumsnet being shut down, I think we would all do well to think about how posts relate to interests of feminists on the board and to focus on our interests.

It's not a huge new study. It's a weak attempt at a systematic review using too small a number of flawed studies. A small number of large, robust, studies might make a good SR review if their methodologies were compatible enough. The numbers here are simply not large enough to aggregate. More research is needed, research which is rigorous, wide ranging, scientifically based.

Cornell University Public Policy Research Portal.
"We are an online research portal that marks a path-breaking convergence of scholarship, public policy and new media technology. Focusing on public policy debates around inequality, What We Know brings together in one place the preponderance of scholarly evidence that informs these debates"

The scope of their research -
whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/topics/
Topics

LGBT Equality
What does the scholarly research say about:
The well-being of children with gay or lesbian parents?
Whether conversion therapy can alter sexual orientation without causing harm?
The link between family acceptance and LGBT youth well-being?
The effect of gender transition on transgender well-being?

Anyone see an agenda there?!

How can we study the effects when TRAs campaign to close down studies on detransitioning? Surely if they actually cared they would want to know about the adverse affects of transitioning?

Lostart, childhood transitioning is a tricky area.

On the one hand I know that it is possible to be aware that you are trans at primary school, as I was. On the other, that you do not really understand fully what is happening until probably you are around the start of puberty.

The high drop out rate of those who switch gender as young children shows that often it is just experimenting or being a child or role playing. All healthy parts of being that age. And so it would be disastrous if we overplayed this hand with children because it could create (and I suspect is creating) situations where peer pressure and social contagion are playing a part in the sheer number of children who are considering these things.

Quite clearly this leads to two conclusions.

Firstly, that you have to be very, very careful and take it slowly. Nothing drastic should be done quickly. And that includes blockers. Give the child time to find themselves and grow out of it. As it looks as if many will.

Secondly, find a way to properly identify which children are in that small percentage with real and deep gender dysphoria. There is plenty of data from transsexuals most of which knew something was wrong by about 3 or 4 and what that something was by about 8 or 9. Child psychologists and social workers should carefully assess those cases and blockers do not need to be an issue that early anyway.

We certainly should not be issuing blockers lightly. We also don't know enough about any possible long term consequences and that research is urgent. I do think that there is a case in rare instances where the depth of dysphoria is obvious and has been repeated and persistent over several years to consider this route.

Because it can make such a huge difference and is a one off opportunity where you cannot turn back the clock once you miss the window. But equally you also have to avoid any inappropriate consideration as it will be tempting to do that too often.

I am not opposed to blockers per se. If they had existed in 1961 I would have wanted them 100%. And they would have really helped my life in many ways. However, I also know that the risk is real of using them where they should not be and creating a disaster. So I am rather split at the moment and think we need more study first. And I definitely believe in 90% of cases they should never even be considered and probably if they are considered should require a judicial review first to ensure all aspects are thought through.

I am also 100% sure that nothing that we know is irreversible - which means cross sex hormones and surgery - should be sanctioned until the child is legally an adult.

WTAF Terfmore am I reading this right?

Whether conversion therapy can alter sexual orientation without causing harm?

Does this mean what I think this means?

The point I was really making is that this is a feminist forum, so trans issues that don't impact on feminism - surgery satisfaction levels, as here, for example - don't really belong here. But because OP cannot conceptualise a pro-woman stance, only an anti-trans stance, OP doesn't realise that transgender surgery satisfaction levels aren't really of interest to us.

Precisely. It occurred to me though that what's actually being argued is that female compliance with trans people's sense of their own "gender" and what they'd like to happen based on that is being framed as essential to trans people's mental health, and that this is a very core part of the conflict, the question of whether or not women should be (socially, legally) required to comply on that basis.

It was inevitable that radical feminists were going to say no. The general trend that I'm seeing is that we're not the only ones.

We're not. It's just that it has to affect people before they will take a strong view. Otherwise they will just ignore it.

I would be suspicious of the overly positive results with no disclaimers, e.g. we found this negative result for this group of people. Also most of the studies aren't comparing SRS with alternative treatments, and many of the outcomes may be as a result of someone doing something rather than the actual thing being successful longer term (I think early studies of CBT had this problem, longer term it's showing fewer effects, but the novelty of a new exciting treatment had an impact in the early days).

Here's a Guardian article reporting that research demonstrates SRS is not positive - yes really! - it's 13 years old though! www.theguardian.com/society/2004/jul/30/health.mentalhealth

One of the problem with studies like the one from the Guardian are that when you search for a small population (we are talking under 10,000) who have had GRS in the UK in 50 years in order to do follow up studies you tend to attract responses from anyone disaffected.

And those for whom it has been a success and have just got on with life and are living happily might have blended in and disappeared off radar or not be that fussed in replying to invites.

I have never once been asked to take part in any follow up study despite transitioning totally through the NHS, making videos at their request for the NHS doctor training in the 70s, and having surgery at the main NHS hospital in London where this has been done for 50 years.

I do not know a lot of other trans people but none of them I do still know from those days have been asked to do a study either.

So I have my doubts about the accuracy of any of this data and do suspect it underrepresents the success stories. Especially as I have never met a single trans person who did have regret. I am sure they exist. But I suspect that they are more common now than they were under the much more rigorous testing of the old days.

And if that is so that someone needs to do such a study of those who went through the 'old school' whilst we are still around to find out why that created less cases of regret despite mostly living with no rights at all versus more modern transitioners where rights are accessible.

Seems an important question to ask.

CharlieParley -

"Whether conversion therapy can alter sexual orientation without causing harm?

Does this mean what I think this means?"

yes it does indeed. It's like doing research into "is sugar bad for you?".

I think they do research to fit their agenda (LGBT rights) so for the conversion therapy research the graphic link says that 83% of states have no laws to ban conversion therapy. The research seems linked to campaign to bring about such a ban in those states.

So the research into transition is likely to have been written with a conclusion already in mind.

plus I'm not sure it is relevant to 90% of the debate on this forum, which is not about trans rights but about womens rights.

Aah, I didn't read it right then. I thought it was about changing the sexual orientation of lesbians to include transwomen.