Gender Affirming Hysterectomies advertised by Boston CHILDREN’s Hospital

[icanthearyou 4,462]

5 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Ok, since you're about as easy to nail down as Jello, is this just some personal belief, or like marriage and sexual activity, do you believe there should be a minimum age for all gender related surgical therapies that's actually encoded in law?

Please remain civil.  There is no need for the personal attack.

Yes, that is what I said.

[TitanTiger 20,482]

3 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

Please remain civil.  There is no need for the personal attack.

Yes, that is what I said.

So you do believe that we should be able to encode in law a minimum age before gender affirming surgery can be performed on a minor child.  Then what the hell are you arguing with me over?  This is exactly what I've been saying this entire time and you keep telling me that it should just be left up to the parents and doctors.

Is it that your minimum age is something insanely low like a 5-year old or something?  

Someone else help me out here...what am I missing?

[icanthearyou 4,462]

47 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

So you do believe that we should be able to encode in law a minimum age before gender affirming surgery can be performed on a minor child.  Then what the hell are you arguing with me over?  This is exactly what I've been saying this entire time and you keep telling me that it should just be left up to the parents and doctors.

Is it that your minimum age is something insanely low like a 5-year old or something?  

Someone else help me out here...what am I missing?

Yes, of course.  What I have been arguing is, using the government to ban any treatments until the age of 18.

The medical profession is way ahead.  The vast majority believe that 16 is an appropriate age.  I would support that idea.

What I do not support is the hysteria that bans all treatments for anyone under the age of 18.  I oppose the idea of making this an ideological, religious, political issue.  This is much more of a personal issue and, there are many nuances. 

I apologize if I have caused you any frustration.  Not my intent.

[TitanTiger 20,482]

31 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

Yes, of course.  What I have been arguing is, using the government to ban any treatments until the age of 18.

Literally the first time in 4 pages you've said anything resembling this or giving a specific age.

 

31 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

The medical profession is way ahead.  The vast majority believe that 16 is an appropriate age.  I would support that idea.

I think this needs citation.

But that goes back to my previous question on age of consent for sexual activity.  We have states in the union, including California and New York, who set the age of consent at 18 years old for marriage or sexual activity.  Most set it at 16 and a few set it at 17.  And this is for actions that can either be completely annulled or reversed, or often don't have any serious long term, permanent, physical or health effects.  But you're proposing the youngest of those options for being able to sterilize an otherwise healthy child as well as introduce a host of other long-term, permanent health consequences?

 

31 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

What I do not support is the hysteria that bans all treatments for anyone under the age of 18.  I oppose the idea of making this an ideological, religious, political issue.  This is much more of a personal issue and, there are many nuances. 

I apologize if I have caused you any frustration.  Not my intent.

First, no one said "all treatments."  We were discussing a specific major surgery that is irreversible and has a host of permanent health side effects and consequences including sterility, early menopause and other things.

But that said, even setting the minimum age at 16, you've already made it ideological and political.  We are both agree that this shouldn't be a decision left only to doctors and parents.  All we're disagreeing over now is where to set the age limit.  Some say 21, others 18, you say 16.  I'm sure others would say 13 or even younger such as first onset of puberty.  There is no avoiding the ideological and political here.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

4 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I think this needs citation.

AMA website. 

[icanthearyou 4,462]

5 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Literally the first time in 4 pages you've said anything resembling this or giving a specific age.

 

I think this needs citation.

But that goes back to my previous question on age of consent for sexual activity.  We have states in the union, including California and New York, who set the age of consent at 18 years old for marriage or sexual activity.  Most set it at 16 and a few set it at 17.  And this is for actions that can either be completely annulled or reversed, or often don't have any serious long term, permanent, physical or health effects.  But you're proposing the youngest of those options for being able to sterilize an otherwise healthy child as well as introduce a host of other long-term, permanent health consequences?

 

First, no one said "all treatments."  We were discussing a specific major surgery that is irreversible and has a host of permanent health side effects and consequences including sterility, early menopause and other things.

But that said, even setting the minimum age at 16, you've already made it ideological and political.  We are both agree that this shouldn't be a decision left only to doctors and parents.  All we're disagreeing over now is where to set the age limit.  Some say 21, others 18, you say 16.  I'm sure others would say 13 or even younger such as first onset of puberty.  There is no avoiding the ideological and political here.

If you do not understand my position, I am sorry. 

[TitanTiger 20,482]

16 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

AMA website. 

The Endocrine Society does not recommend genital surgery (what we're discussing here) on minors (younger than 18 years old).

And I don't see this recommendation or statement that the "vast majority" hold this view on the AMA website anywhere.  If you've got a specific link, I'd love to see it.

According to the NIH, there are mixed views on when it's appropriate to allow gender-affirming surgeries...far from any "vast majority" consensus:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8496167/

[AUDub 11,148]

6 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

We clearly define “robust” very differently. I’ve heard from numerous detransitioners how easy it was to get approvals.

There will be unscrupulous practitioners out there, but that's a small number and you're still talking about a serious minority of post-op trans people.

6 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

How many primary care physicians have expertise in this area? Or any specialized area, especially one so relatively new without great data?

They don't. It's "PRIMARY CARE." It has a wide scope by nature. WPATH engineered redundancy into the standard, which is why the therapist letter is generally required as well.

6 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Any behavioral health provider? MSW? Recent master’s degree graduate? These are the most minimal requirements to CYA.

Providers can set the own standards, but the bare minimum is a fully licensed therapist with a MSc. 

Some will require the writer of the letter of recommendation to hold a doctorate. 

[TexasTiger 12,865]

59 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

The medical profession is way ahead.  The vast majority believe that 16 is an appropriate age.  I would support that idea.

 

This is total hogwash on par with the craziest assertions made by Trump supporters.

[TexasTiger 12,865]

1 minute ago, AUDub said:

There will be unscrupulous practitioners out there, but that's a small number and you're still talking about a serious minority of post-op trans people.

They don't. It's "PRIMARY CARE." It has a wide scope by nature. WPATH engineered redundancy into the standard, which is why the therapist letter is generally required as well.

Providers can set the own standards, but the bare minimum is a fully licensed therapist with a MSc. 

Some will require the writer of the letter of recommendation to hold a doctorate. 

If you think that’s sufficient, that’s your right, but it’s nothing approaching a rational definition of “robust.” Getting a letter from a primary care physician is a mere formality for most. 

[AUDub 11,148]

23 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

If you think that’s sufficient, that’s your right, but it’s nothing approaching a rational definition of “robust.” Getting a letter from a primary care physician is a mere formality for most. 

If following WPATH, the pediatrician is the one that should be monitoring the patient through the process of transitioning on the physiological side of things. You know, watching their blood work and growth during HRT, determining their ability to process what's happening and whether the consent to the treatment is informed. 

In most cases, yes, this would be a formality assuming the patient is cognizant of the situation, dysphoria notwithstanding.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

26 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

The Endocrine Society does not recommend genital surgery (what we're discussing here) on minors (younger than 18 years old).

And I don't see this recommendation or statement that the "vast majority" hold this view on the AMA website anywhere.  If you've got a specific link, I'd love to see it.

According to the NIH, there are mixed views on when it's appropriate to allow gender-affirming surgeries...far from any "vast majority" consensus:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8496167/

I cannot find it again either.  You win.

No surgeries.

https://www.endocrine.org/news-and-advocacy/news-room/2021/endocrine-society-applauds-ama-resolution-supporting-access-to-gender-affirming-care

I would be cautious as to what constitutes the consensus.  There are opinion polls of all medical professionals that will align with your position.  There are more thorough interviews of specialists that will not.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

If you care to know reality:

https://news.yahoo.com/death-threats-made-childrens-hospital-150146483.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

[homersapien 11,373]

10 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

If you care to know reality:

https://news.yahoo.com/death-threats-made-childrens-hospital-150146483.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

So here we are as a country: JK Rowling getting death threats, Boston Children's Hospital getting death threats.

No room for sober sincere debate or discussion of the issue.

God help us all.

[TexasTiger 12,865]

2 hours ago, icanthearyou said:

If you care to know reality:

https://news.yahoo.com/death-threats-made-childrens-hospital-150146483.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

The “reality” of this claim in the article conflicts with the “reality” of the hospital’s own video.

Despite online allegations, children under 18 cannot undergo genital surgery at Boston Children's. 

[TexasTiger 12,865]

19 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

The “reality” of this claim in the article conflicts with the “reality” of the hospital’s own video.

Despite online allegations, children under 18 cannot undergo genital surgery at Boston Children's. 

@icanthearyou You’re appropriately named. You really can’t stand to hear anything that differs from the position you take, even when it’s purely fact based.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

4 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

@icanthearyou You’re appropriately named. You really can’t stand to hear anything that differs from the position you take, even when it’s purely fact based.

Yes, you are correct.  Again, I apologize.