No it's not. It's what the medical community full of experts that know more than both of say as well as what the numbers actually say
And to go one step further I have a vested interest in it. And I didn't want to bring it up because others will use it against me because I am trans. I've struggled with it for my whole life and didn't take any medical steroids towards transitioning until in my 30s. I was depressed, suicidal, and attempted to kill myself multiple times throughout my teenage years and young 20s. Thank God we didn't have guns in the house because if we did I definitely wouldn't be here having this conversation. If I had access to proper healthcare I would've been able to work out all of those much sooner than I did.
Thank you for wanting to have a real conversation about it. And that's personal story is exactly why healthcare options being available is so important. Kids are just being out on hormones right away and why therapy is required. And even after therapy still needs approval by parents. And again surgery rates for minors are extremely low, and I agree that they really shouldn't be provided for minors besides extreme one off situations. And those are all primarily for female to male trans kids and only mastectomies.
Dude trans people don't only listen to to the doctors, it's something they have been thinking critically about for longer than you could possibly know. You act like they can just Willy nilly sign up for a surgery and get it done asap when that's not the case at all
And Tim Walz wants to remove custody of children from parents who do not consent or approve of these treatments.
And I don't agree with that, my stance has been consistent in that having healthcare options for transgender healthcare is important and not removing them all together for people both youth and adults.
And nothing I have seen actually supports that stance
I'd say that's older rhetoric. The stigma lately has been more towards trans women than anything.
Where did you come up with that? lol
Again I don't agree with that, but again operations for minors aren't really happening at the level claimed. And only for extreme situations and for teenagers. Again I don't agree with the state getting involved in custody issues, but how would that be different than what happens if a parent denies a child a procedure for cancer based upon religious beliefs? To reiterate again I don't agree with the state taking away children unless the child being with the parents is a detriment health wise. I'm strictly playing devil's advocate and trying to have a conversation
jamanetwork.com
You're fairly new to the board, but for clarification, we've had this discussion numerous times. No one on this board is against trans changes if acted upon properly. Bottom line is if the child is under 18, they should be cared for psychologically (no drugs or surgery) until they reach the age of consent. At that time let them make their own decision. Until then they are not mentally or physically ready. I don't care for rationalizing it because it's a very small number. One is one too many if they aren't the age of consent. We've already seen a few examples where the parent allowed the child to change and later the child regrets it.
I've been on the board since 2006 and have had previous handles before this one. Just was never active in conversations. I've seen the previous conversations, and felt like I could add a different perspective that may have been missing. Regret rate among transgender individuals and any procedure is astronomically low. Not saying it doesn't happen. Just that it's not common.
Then if 1 is too many you need to account for the transgender people that do want to go forward with treatment and those that do not get that treatment need to be worked into the risk/benefit analysis. Of course, on an anecdotal level there are cases that are brutal for the kids/families that do have these outcomes you describe. But in my opinion, you can't make broad policy based on anecdotes. In looking at the stats I believe that the people who get the treatment they desire outweighs those that go through with the treatment plan and are disappointed with the results. We'll likely disagree at this point because it's all dependent on acceptable risk threshold and most amount of good for the most amount of people.
Not arguing that, just trying to bring some nuance to the conversation that appears to be missing from the conversation hear. I work in Healthcare as well and have spent an absurd amount of timing researching as well. And i agree therapy is the most important part. I was in therapy for 3 years before I took the step to start medically transitioning. I'm just stating that removing that access is going to have negative effects for people.
Exactly. Studies show for kids that have questions, 4 out of 5 grow out of it by the time they become adults. The number is much lower for adults that decide to transition. That's why it's important that children don't make life altering changes.
I would say lets continue therapy, they can experiment with clothes to express their gender identity as well as name. Puberty blockers would open for discussion but not something I would immediately support. Hormones wouldn't be on the table
Exactly my point. It should be left to the doctor/family/patient to all agree. Nowhere have I or Colorado said that these medical treatments should be carried out willy nilly, actual medical treatments for gender dysphoria is slightly higher than malaria cases in the US ~2K per year.
I think puberty blockers are important to include. They've been proven safe for generations and prescribed for non trans kids, and helps buy time to make a determination for long term