Abbruzzese, E.; Levine, Stephen B.; Mason, Julia W. (2023-08-18). ”The Myth of “Reliable Research” in Pediatric Gender Medicine: A critical evaluation of the Dutch Studies—and research that has followed” (på engelska). Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy 49 (6): sid. 673–699. doi:10.1080/0092623X.2022.2150346. ISSN0092-623X. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0092623X.2022.2150346. Läst 8 november 2024. ”In our recent paper on informed consent for youth gender transition, we recognized a serious problem: the field has a penchant for exaggerating what is known about the benefits of the practice, while downplaying the serious health risks and uncertainties. As a result, a false narrative has taken root. It is that “gender-affirming” medical and surgical interventions for youth are as benign as aspirin, as well-studied as penicillin and statins, and as essential to survival as insulin for childhood diabetes—and that the vigorous scientific debate currently underway is merely “science denialism” motivated by ignorance, religious zeal, and transphobia. This highly politicized and fallacious narrative, crafted and promoted by clinician-advocates, has failed to withstand scientific scrutiny internationally, with public health authorities in Sweden, Finland, and most recently England doing a U-turn on pediatric gender transitions in the last 24 months.
The field of gender medicine has a short time to self-correct before a growing number of authorities step in and impose guardrails to safeguard youth. Public health authorities in Finland, Sweden, and most recently England have already done just that, sharply deviating from the WPATH’s poorly evidenced recommendations in “SOC 7”, with no apparent intention to follow the updated “SOC 8” either. NHS England’s decision to close GIDS/Tavistock—the world’s biggest pediatric gender clinic—and to place the care of gender-distressed youth in established clinical settings that “maintain a broad clinical perspective,” provide “strong links to mental health services,” and do not “exceptionalise gender identity issues,” is a vote of no-confidence in the WPATH-endorsed “gender-affirming” approach that dominates the “gender clinic” model of care.”.
Abbruzzese, E.; Levine, Stephen B.; Mason, Julia W. (2023-08-18). ”The Myth of “Reliable Research” in Pediatric Gender Medicine: A critical evaluation of the Dutch Studies—and research that has followed” (på engelska). Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy 49 (6): sid. 673–699. doi:10.1080/0092623X.2022.2150346. ISSN0092-623X. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0092623X.2022.2150346. Läst 8 november 2024. ”In our recent paper on informed consent for youth gender transition, we recognized a serious problem: the field has a penchant for exaggerating what is known about the benefits of the practice, while downplaying the serious health risks and uncertainties. As a result, a false narrative has taken root. It is that “gender-affirming” medical and surgical interventions for youth are as benign as aspirin, as well-studied as penicillin and statins, and as essential to survival as insulin for childhood diabetes—and that the vigorous scientific debate currently underway is merely “science denialism” motivated by ignorance, religious zeal, and transphobia. This highly politicized and fallacious narrative, crafted and promoted by clinician-advocates, has failed to withstand scientific scrutiny internationally, with public health authorities in Sweden, Finland, and most recently England doing a U-turn on pediatric gender transitions in the last 24 months.
The field of gender medicine has a short time to self-correct before a growing number of authorities step in and impose guardrails to safeguard youth. Public health authorities in Finland, Sweden, and most recently England have already done just that, sharply deviating from the WPATH’s poorly evidenced recommendations in “SOC 7”, with no apparent intention to follow the updated “SOC 8” either. NHS England’s decision to close GIDS/Tavistock—the world’s biggest pediatric gender clinic—and to place the care of gender-distressed youth in established clinical settings that “maintain a broad clinical perspective,” provide “strong links to mental health services,” and do not “exceptionalise gender identity issues,” is a vote of no-confidence in the WPATH-endorsed “gender-affirming” approach that dominates the “gender clinic” model of care.”.
Abbruzzese, E.; Levine, Stephen B.; Mason, Julia W. (2023-08-18). ”The Myth of “Reliable Research” in Pediatric Gender Medicine: A critical evaluation of the Dutch Studies—and research that has followed” (på engelska). Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy 49 (6): sid. 673–699. doi:10.1080/0092623X.2022.2150346. ISSN0092-623X. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0092623X.2022.2150346. Läst 8 november 2024. ”In our recent paper on informed consent for youth gender transition, we recognized a serious problem: the field has a penchant for exaggerating what is known about the benefits of the practice, while downplaying the serious health risks and uncertainties. As a result, a false narrative has taken root. It is that “gender-affirming” medical and surgical interventions for youth are as benign as aspirin, as well-studied as penicillin and statins, and as essential to survival as insulin for childhood diabetes—and that the vigorous scientific debate currently underway is merely “science denialism” motivated by ignorance, religious zeal, and transphobia. This highly politicized and fallacious narrative, crafted and promoted by clinician-advocates, has failed to withstand scientific scrutiny internationally, with public health authorities in Sweden, Finland, and most recently England doing a U-turn on pediatric gender transitions in the last 24 months.
The field of gender medicine has a short time to self-correct before a growing number of authorities step in and impose guardrails to safeguard youth. Public health authorities in Finland, Sweden, and most recently England have already done just that, sharply deviating from the WPATH’s poorly evidenced recommendations in “SOC 7”, with no apparent intention to follow the updated “SOC 8” either. NHS England’s decision to close GIDS/Tavistock—the world’s biggest pediatric gender clinic—and to place the care of gender-distressed youth in established clinical settings that “maintain a broad clinical perspective,” provide “strong links to mental health services,” and do not “exceptionalise gender identity issues,” is a vote of no-confidence in the WPATH-endorsed “gender-affirming” approach that dominates the “gender clinic” model of care.”.
