The American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) has challenged the modern medical perspective of transitioning minors, asserting more research needs to be conducted regarding so-called “gender-affirming care.” In June, the American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds) called for an immediate halt on trans care for kids, condemning other US-based medical institutions who pushed the procedure on children, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Endocrine Society, the Pediatric Endocrine Society, the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. The ASPS, which represents more than 90% of plastic surgeons both in the US and in Canada — about 11,000 members in total, “has not endorsed any organization’s practice recommendations for the treatment of adolescents with gender dysphoria,” the society told the Manhattan Institute’s Leor Sapir, as published in the City Journal. “(There is) considerable uncertainty as to the long-term efficacy for the use of chest and genital surgical interventions,” said ASPS in a statement. “The existing evidence base is viewed as low quality/low certainty.” .Sapir in his article explained “low quality” in evidence-based medicine means “the true effect of an intervention is likely to be markedly different from the results reported in studies” and an “uncertainty about whether the long-term benefits outweigh the harms.” The harms in “gender-affirming care” are infertility, sexual dysfunction and deep psychological regret, he wrote. American medical bodies abandoning gender procedures, especially for minors, follows the release of the Cass Review in the UK in April, a thorough examination of the “gender-affirming care” process that made a huge splash and prompted England’s National Health Service (NHS) to review all transgender treatment.In July, even US President Joe Biden changed his stance on transitioning children, asserting the life-altering procedures should be reserved exclusively for adults. Pediatrician Dr. Hilary Cass, former president of the UK-based Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health, published the comprehensive review of the various forms of so-called “treatment” for people who suffer from gender dysphoria. “Gender medicine for children and young people is built on shaky foundations,” wrote Cass. “The reality is that we have no good evidence on the long-term outcomes of interventions to manage gender-related distress.”The Cass report warned of the dangers, especially for young people under 25, of undergoing transitional procedures and said “extreme caution” should be exercised with transgenderism. Researchers found there was widespread regret among transitioners later in life, with many children who say they identify as transgender suffering trauma, abuse or neglect earlier in life. .The Cass review also describes the cultural surrounding the trans fad: how parents face immense social pressure to go along with their child’s gender dysphoria lest they be called a “transphobe.” The “toxicity of the debate is exceptional,” wrote Cass. “There are few other areas of healthcare where professionals are so afraid to openly discuss their views, where people are vilified on social media, and where name-calling echoes the worst bullying behaviour.”“This must stop.”Included in the review is explicit criticism against WPATH (World Professional Association for Transgender Health), a group, along with the US Endocrine Society, responsible for perpetuating the narrative that all medical associations shared a common “consensus” on transing kids — not least by repeatedly citing each other’s claims. The “circularity” of this approach “may explain why there has been an apparent consensus on key areas of practice despite the evidence being poor,” wrote Cass. As it is now known that WPATH “suppressed systematic reviews of evidence” while concocting its “standards of care,” ASPS considers it necessarily “is reviewing and prioritizing several initiatives that best support evidence-based gender surgical care to provide guidance to plastic surgeons,” the society told Sapir. ASPS members, however, as “members of the multidisciplinary care team. … have a responsibility to provide comprehensive patient education and maintain a robust and evidence-based informed consent process, so patients and their families can set realistic expectations in the shared decision-making process.”
The American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) has challenged the modern medical perspective of transitioning minors, asserting more research needs to be conducted regarding so-called “gender-affirming care.” In June, the American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds) called for an immediate halt on trans care for kids, condemning other US-based medical institutions who pushed the procedure on children, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Endocrine Society, the Pediatric Endocrine Society, the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. The ASPS, which represents more than 90% of plastic surgeons both in the US and in Canada — about 11,000 members in total, “has not endorsed any organization’s practice recommendations for the treatment of adolescents with gender dysphoria,” the society told the Manhattan Institute’s Leor Sapir, as published in the City Journal. “(There is) considerable uncertainty as to the long-term efficacy for the use of chest and genital surgical interventions,” said ASPS in a statement. “The existing evidence base is viewed as low quality/low certainty.” .Sapir in his article explained “low quality” in evidence-based medicine means “the true effect of an intervention is likely to be markedly different from the results reported in studies” and an “uncertainty about whether the long-term benefits outweigh the harms.” The harms in “gender-affirming care” are infertility, sexual dysfunction and deep psychological regret, he wrote. American medical bodies abandoning gender procedures, especially for minors, follows the release of the Cass Review in the UK in April, a thorough examination of the “gender-affirming care” process that made a huge splash and prompted England’s National Health Service (NHS) to review all transgender treatment.In July, even US President Joe Biden changed his stance on transitioning children, asserting the life-altering procedures should be reserved exclusively for adults. Pediatrician Dr. Hilary Cass, former president of the UK-based Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health, published the comprehensive review of the various forms of so-called “treatment” for people who suffer from gender dysphoria. “Gender medicine for children and young people is built on shaky foundations,” wrote Cass. “The reality is that we have no good evidence on the long-term outcomes of interventions to manage gender-related distress.”The Cass report warned of the dangers, especially for young people under 25, of undergoing transitional procedures and said “extreme caution” should be exercised with transgenderism. Researchers found there was widespread regret among transitioners later in life, with many children who say they identify as transgender suffering trauma, abuse or neglect earlier in life. .The Cass review also describes the cultural surrounding the trans fad: how parents face immense social pressure to go along with their child’s gender dysphoria lest they be called a “transphobe.” The “toxicity of the debate is exceptional,” wrote Cass. “There are few other areas of healthcare where professionals are so afraid to openly discuss their views, where people are vilified on social media, and where name-calling echoes the worst bullying behaviour.”“This must stop.”Included in the review is explicit criticism against WPATH (World Professional Association for Transgender Health), a group, along with the US Endocrine Society, responsible for perpetuating the narrative that all medical associations shared a common “consensus” on transing kids — not least by repeatedly citing each other’s claims. The “circularity” of this approach “may explain why there has been an apparent consensus on key areas of practice despite the evidence being poor,” wrote Cass. As it is now known that WPATH “suppressed systematic reviews of evidence” while concocting its “standards of care,” ASPS considers it necessarily “is reviewing and prioritizing several initiatives that best support evidence-based gender surgical care to provide guidance to plastic surgeons,” the society told Sapir. ASPS members, however, as “members of the multidisciplinary care team. … have a responsibility to provide comprehensive patient education and maintain a robust and evidence-based informed consent process, so patients and their families can set realistic expectations in the shared decision-making process.”
