British Psychological Society paper shows that detransition is incredibly low.

[ItsAllGoingToBeFine]

This was posted on Twitter by Jolyon Maugham.

He has helpfully posted a link to the paper ( shop.bps.org.uk/publications/journals-and-periodicals/counselling-psychology-review-vol-34-no-1-june-2019.html ) but you need to pay to view it.

The abstract states that they randomly chose 303 patient files, followed them up and found one case of detransition. They conclude that as detransition is so low there is no need to slow the "pathway".

I'd be really interested to know how rigourous the methodology is - for example the abstract does not state how many of the random patients were actually tracked down.

I know some folk on here are really good at critically analysing and deconstruction journal articles....

Detransition is not possible because the only cure is to transition. Once someone has transitioned they are cured. That’s the mantra. To acknowledge detransistioners is an admission that transitioning is not the cure. This is why they don’t want us to know. Reddit detrans has over 7000 members. Not all are detrans or desisters but the majority are. The Tavistock doctor should add these to their evidence gathering especially as we have been told that they use such info to inform policy and treatment.

My feeling re Maugham is that he realised ages ago that his is not the 'right side of history', but he is one of those people who just cannot admit being wrong.

The study in question was presented as a poster at Wpath (I think) and the conclusion was something like "the transgender community gets to decide what treatment should be provided so detransitioners are just collateral damage"

@FannyCann the article is here eprints.lse.ac.uk/32311/
The figure is on page 26 and it includes future loss of earnings etc.
But it's irrelevant if there's no decreased risk of suicide following transition and we'll never know that unless someone does an RCT which isn't going to happen I imagine.

Thank you drspouse and OP
I hadn't considered costs such as future earnings etc.

Agree Fanny Cann.

A cost per suicide statistic seems to imply that there is some kind of standard suicide with standard financial costs.

I dont think detransitioning is saying transitioning is not the cure.

Globally detransition rates are less than 1%, Australia has some excellent stats on this.

Transitioning is more likely to mean they were never trans.

Being trans can have a very complex presentation to untangle.
Sometimes people who are not trans may end up getting treated.

The good news is that the current methods are showing a 99% success rate. This accuracy is almost unparalleled in diagnosing any complex condition that can manifest in multiple symptoms.

Current treatments for trans people, on the whole, statistically, are one of the most successful treatments in medicine science.

Sorry, I meant.

I dont think detransitioning is saying transitioning is not the cure.

Globally detransition rates are less than 1%, Australia has some excellent stats on this.

DETransitioning is more likely to mean they were never trans.

Not really. It could just mean the person has accepted you cant actually change your sex.

Possibly, I think Occam's Razor is on my side, given the 99% vs 1%.

Australia has some excellent stats on this.

Do you have a link to these stats?

Sometimes people who are not trans may end up getting treated.

But if gender identity is a completely subjective concept, who decides that somebody else is not trans?

Transitioning is more likely to mean they were never trans.

What does 'trans' mean and how do we know whether someone is 'trans'?

Being trans can have a very complex presentation to untangle.
Sometimes people who are not trans may end up getting treated.

Why do you think this is? Could it be because there is no method for diagnosis, and there is no definition of 'trans'?

Also, since being trans is not an illness, why does it need to be treated at all?

Globally detransition rates are less than 1%

Link to the source for this?

Why is he so evangelical about it?

Either political reasons or lining up as the #1 lawyer for the trans community.

The BMJ gets thrown up and is never challenged if someone things it has an anti-trans bent to it.

They repeat and show evidence for a well known statistic within gender specialists, and suddenly everyone is suddenly a bigger expert than the BMJ on the validity of a study.

My take would be, reading/listening and absorbing information created by people in a better position than ourselves is a better way to get to the nub of an issue than instantly refuting it or making a convoluted reverse-engineered takedown.

If they found

Why is he so evangelical about it?

The background to Maugham is that he initially said something that challenged gender ID ideology, and he was then bullied for it, including by Clair Quentin (the non-binary tax lawyer who testified at Maya's tribunal). And then he suddenly become some huge TRA.

Maya, Quentin and Maugham all work on illicit tax flows. Both Maugham and Quentin are advisers to the Tax Justice Network. Not only did Maya lose her job, but members of the Tax Justice Network have been pretty vicious towards her (e.g. they pointedly refused to print her name when quoting her work, even when challenged on the fact that they hadn't) which I imagine is a pretty strong warning to everyone else that you don't dissent on this.

I could be wrong, but my guess is that this has something to do with Maugham subsequently putting in such an effort to show that he's a totally loyal servant of gender ideology.

The BMJ gets thrown up and is never challenged if someone things it has an anti-trans bent to it.

This study wasn't in the BMJ.

Do you have a link to the Australian studies?

How is talking about detransition anti trans?

My take would be, reading/listening and absorbing information created by people in a better position than ourselves is a better way to get to the nub of an issue than instantly refuting it or making a convoluted reverse-engineered takedown.
So don't ask questions, don't discuss?
And who found a 1 percent success rate?

And also, please could you clarify what you mean by trans. I think it's relevant to your suggestion that people who detransition were not really trans.

Richards has also written a book with MegJohn Barker, that numpty that wrote guidelines that suggested being Northern isn’t feminine.

*And who found a less than 1 percent detransition rate?

created by people in a better position than ourselves

You know know there are medical researchers on here? People who have spent years analysing academic papers and medical studies? Mumsnet is full of PhDs. People who do not have conflicts of interest. You should never read a research paper without doing a basic quality appraisal.

Or did you mean men?

And evidence for that 1%? Or did one of your betters tell you about it?

Thanks for that info AnotherLass, I had been wondering too. David Allen Green is another one where I can’t make sense of it.

Australia doesn’t have good stats at all. There is an oft quoted figure of 1% that was quoted in a legal argument and based on looking at rates of detransition in late teens. It doesn’t tell us anything useful.