Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Article - In U.S. Gender Medicine, Ideology Eclipses Science. It Hurts Kids

31 replies

UtopiaPlanitia · 12/07/2024 14:57

There is an article in the New York Times today regarding American medical bodies’ refusal to accept the findings of the Cass Review. I’ve pasted what I think is an important part of the article below:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/12/opinion/gender-affirming-care-cass-review.html

https://archive.is/gq2ba

‘It’s hard to imagine another clinical protocol in which such serious medical decisions, with potential risks and permanent consequences, is so heavily grounded in a young patient’s self-diagnosis. In this light, gender transition treatments for minors can even be considered unethical.

This is not to say that doctors are in any way trying to harm children. Nor that all doctors and mental health professionals necessarily believe in every aspect of gender-affirming care or interpret it the same way. Many members of professional organizations, and many Americans, have embraced gender-affirming care because it has been portrayed as the most compassionate approach for an often marginalized group.

Already the gender-affirmation model is taught in leading medical schools, and all the major professional medical organizations in the United States have officially embraced it in their guidelines, a fact often cited by advocates as evidence of their validity.

This wholesale adoption of gender-affirming care is also a result of the differences between a centralized public health system like Britain’s and a privatized, diffuse health care system like ours. “Doctors are paid for each intervention, and thus have an incentive to give patients what they ask for,” The Economist noted in a recent editorial urging the United States to catch up with recent developments in gender medicine.

Given how entrenched the gender-affirmating model has become, reversing course won’t be easy. If the medical profession turns away from the notion that transitioning young people is necessary and lifesaving, it could open itself up to malpractice suits. Consider that in Britain, a lawsuit by a gay girl named Keira Bell against Britain’s leading gender clinic instigated the investigation that led to the Cass Review.

“I’m already hearing from the boards of directors and trustees of some hospital systems who are starting to get nervous about what they’ve permitted,” Erica Anderson, a former president of the U.S. Professional Association for Transgender Health and a transgender woman, told the British Medical Journal in May. In recent years, a number of detransitioners in the United States have brought suit charging malpractice or the failure to provide informed consent. If American doctors admit their approach was wrong, it’s going to be a costly and politically explosive practice to undo.’

OP posts:
lcakethereforeIam · 15/07/2024 17:20

I suspect they're coining it while they can. Having seen how slow and capricious the US court system can be they reasonably believe they'll either be safely dead or so elderly they'll just get a slap on the wrist.

DrBlackbird · 15/07/2024 20:16

If we’re continuing our Purdue analogy it’s true that theres evidence of the Sackler family withdrawing approx $10b from the company and putting that money into Swiss bank accounts so there is a precedence.

Omlettes · 15/07/2024 22:33

UtopiaPlanitia · 12/07/2024 14:57

There is an article in the New York Times today regarding American medical bodies’ refusal to accept the findings of the Cass Review. I’ve pasted what I think is an important part of the article below:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/12/opinion/gender-affirming-care-cass-review.html

https://archive.is/gq2ba

‘It’s hard to imagine another clinical protocol in which such serious medical decisions, with potential risks and permanent consequences, is so heavily grounded in a young patient’s self-diagnosis. In this light, gender transition treatments for minors can even be considered unethical.

This is not to say that doctors are in any way trying to harm children. Nor that all doctors and mental health professionals necessarily believe in every aspect of gender-affirming care or interpret it the same way. Many members of professional organizations, and many Americans, have embraced gender-affirming care because it has been portrayed as the most compassionate approach for an often marginalized group.

Already the gender-affirmation model is taught in leading medical schools, and all the major professional medical organizations in the United States have officially embraced it in their guidelines, a fact often cited by advocates as evidence of their validity.

This wholesale adoption of gender-affirming care is also a result of the differences between a centralized public health system like Britain’s and a privatized, diffuse health care system like ours. “Doctors are paid for each intervention, and thus have an incentive to give patients what they ask for,” The Economist noted in a recent editorial urging the United States to catch up with recent developments in gender medicine.

Given how entrenched the gender-affirmating model has become, reversing course won’t be easy. If the medical profession turns away from the notion that transitioning young people is necessary and lifesaving, it could open itself up to malpractice suits. Consider that in Britain, a lawsuit by a gay girl named Keira Bell against Britain’s leading gender clinic instigated the investigation that led to the Cass Review.

“I’m already hearing from the boards of directors and trustees of some hospital systems who are starting to get nervous about what they’ve permitted,” Erica Anderson, a former president of the U.S. Professional Association for Transgender Health and a transgender woman, told the British Medical Journal in May. In recent years, a number of detransitioners in the United States have brought suit charging malpractice or the failure to provide informed consent. If American doctors admit their approach was wrong, it’s going to be a costly and politically explosive practice to undo.’

Wow, thats strong stuff from NYT!
About flipping time and where is WAPO and all the other media who havent done their jobs, rather promoted this?
BBC Guardian Independent ABC etc all should be on their knees begging for forgiveness.

PermanentTemporary · 15/07/2024 22:40

I think the UK media's reporting of the Cass review has been perfectly fine tbh. Wirth remembering that the Guardian is frequently cited by activists as an example of transphobic media. I think it's come a long way since the article about Lauren Jeska in ?2007 (under Alan Rusbridger) which single handedly peaked quite a few by not mentioning the relevant fact of Lauren's sex.

UtopiaPlanitia · 15/07/2024 23:40

I came across a blogpost by a prominent UK sceptic regarding the difficulties involved in authorising clinical trials for puberty blockers and thought I’d post it here as it’s relevant to the discussion:

https://www.quackometer.net/blog/2024/07/what-would-an-ethical-clinical-trial-into-puberty-blockers-look-like.html

What would an ethical clinical trial into puberty blockers look like? – The Quackometer Blog

https://www.quackometer.net/blog/2024/07/what-would-an-ethical-clinical-trial-into-puberty-blockers-look-like.html

OP posts:
UtopiaPlanitia · 15/07/2024 23:42

DrBlackbird · 15/07/2024 20:16

If we’re continuing our Purdue analogy it’s true that theres evidence of the Sackler family withdrawing approx $10b from the company and putting that money into Swiss bank accounts so there is a precedence.

That’s chilling information to read - just how callous can they be in the face of the many people that were damaged in order to make some of that money.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread