Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

M4053946 t1_irg68pw wrote

> Parents, Healthcare workers, psychiatrists, etc do care for these kids.

Here's the story from one de-transitioner. Read it and get back to me if you still agree with your statement:

https://twitter.com/TullipR/status/1536422533230206976

Not enough, then watch this video, or read this, or this, or this.

>If you are beyond faith being restored

I've repeatedly said there's little to no evidence to support these treatments for teenagers. That's admitted to in the Times article, and a new article from reuters says the same thing. One bit: "But when families decide to take the medical route, they must make decisions about life-altering treatments that have little scientific evidence of their long-term safety and efficacy".

So, how did you get to the point where you think I'm the odd one for wanting solid research before doing major surgery on kids? You talk about me not being able to be reasoned with, but I'm the one asking for research and for kids to be treated with basic decency.

> If you are beyond faith being restored

I'm an optimist. As noted, the Times and Reuters came out with stories this month that state how little research there is for all this. A number of countries have put the brakes on these medical treatments for kids, and several states here in the US have legislation pending to do the same. And, the lawsuits are starting to increase in other countries, and eventually those lawsuits will be in full gear here in the US. So yes, I'm confident these practices will be shut down, but I'm concerned for the kids who will be caught up in the process in the mean time.

0

MildlyInfuria8ing t1_irghgct wrote

https://fenwayhealth.org/new-study-shows-transgender-people-who-receive-gender-affirming-surgery-are-significantly-less-likely-to-experience-psychological-distress-or-suicidal-ideation/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7317390/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1122101

I read through most of the Reuters link, as I trust them. You painted their coverage as negative, or so it felt like you did, but it was just being informative and cautionary, while not calling a negative light to the procedure. What a story should do, to be honest. It does raise good points that there is no long term studies available, but it is also a newer procedure with little chance for long term studies. That should change over time. If the long term data points to more harm then good, than I'd say it should remain a restricted procedure. The article also states that because the demand far outpaces the supply of caretakers, critical steps are being missed in order to try and care for more patients. That is wrong, and that is why regulations and laws are in place. If a for profit place pops up and abuses patients by not implementing proper steps, that facility should come under scruity by government and lawsuits.

I'd also like to clear up some misconceptions you may have about the medical field.

  1. One thing you stated seemed to indicate you felt the medical professionals were 'fear selling' families into procedures to make money. That is false. It is legally required for a provider to be up front about the risks of a procedure, and the risks that could happen if you hold off on the procedure. It is no secret that those affected by dysphoria have a greater chance of suicide than the general population. So telling a parent the risk of NOT doing the procedure is suicide, is factually correct. If the child or person is mentally distressed by their orientation, and they become mentally fatigued, they can get to a low point and commit suicide. The same for standard depression, and common for those physically and mentally abused.

  2. Along the lines above, a provider must provide the patient a clear picture of the risks and possibilities of a procedure within reason. The Twitter thread trans woman is an example. Neither you nor me can confirm her providers let her and her family know of the risks. If they did not, there is legal recourse and they should enact it. While not perfect, the laws and regulations in our healthcare industry are pretty robust. The penalties for breaking patient/provider trust is generally high as well, as in losing license to practice, hundreds of thousand dollar fines, and jail time.

  3. Patients and families are always encouraged to get second opinions by quality Healthcare facilities, especially for large decisions such as this. I am not sure if the same can be said for 'at profit' hospitals.

All of this still does not mean a SCHOOL should interfere with any of this, and it should not be used for culture war political crap, and should not care what is in a child's pants. It should care about education, and creating a warm welcoming environment so kids can relax and learn.

2

M4053946 t1_irh13n2 wrote

Interesting how you ignore everything I write and simply press your agenda. The NY Times and Reuters says the quality of data is low, but you think links to three old studies proves your point? The first study uses data from 2015 and looks at people who had surgery at least 2 years before. This is before the current explosion of cases. Interviews from trans folks who had surgery back then describe a rigorous process with lots of therapy prior to being approved for hormones or surgery. A carefully screened group is a very different matter than the current situation where teenagers are self diagnosing themselves and getting hormones after 1 or two appointments. Your third study uses the same 2015 data and has the same issues. Your second study is from the dutch, where these medical treatments originated, and has data starting from 1972.

>It is legally required for a provider to be up front about the risks of a procedure,

Like they did with oxycontin? Your faith in the medical community is higher than mine. Again, numerous detransitioners are coming out with stories that contradict you, numerous clinicians are starting to speak out, and the clinic in england was recently shut down due to these types of ethical problems, and there's a big class action lawsuit getting filed.

>All of this still does not mean a SCHOOL should interfere with any of this

Agreed!!! But they chose to get involved, and many schools around the country have been discovered to have helped with a kids social transition behind the parents' backs, even lying to parents about what was going on.

0