The Gender Affirmative Treatment Model for Youth with Gender Dysphoria: A Medical Advance or Dangerous Medicine?

Supporting autonomy in young people with gender dysphoria: psychotherapy is not conversion therapy

Opinion is divided about the certainty of the evidence base for gender-affirming medical interventions in youth. Proponents claim that these treatments are well supported, while critics claim the poor-quality evidence base warrants extreme caution. Psychotherapy is one of the only available alternatives to the gender-affirming approach. Discussion of the treatment of gender dysphoria in young people is generally framed in terms of two binary approaches: affirmation or conversion. Psychotherapy/exploratory therapy offers a treatment option that lies outside this binary, although it is mistakenly conflated with conversion therapies. Psychotherapy does not impose restrictive gender stereotypes, as is sometimes claimed, but critically examines them. It empowers young people to develop creative solutions to their difficulties and promotes agency and autonomy. Importantly, an exploratory psychotherapeutic process can help to clarify whether gender dysphoria is a carrier for other psychological or social problems that may not be immediately apparent. Psychotherapy can therefore make a significant contribution to the optimal, ethical care of gender-dysphoric young people by ensuring that patients make appropriate, informed decisions about medical interventions which carry risks of harm and have a contested evidence base.

Gender detransition: A critical review of the literature

Gender detransition is the act of stopping or reversing the social, medical, and/or administrative changes achieved during a gender transition process. It is an emerging phenomenon of significant clinical and social interest.

Developmental Pathway Choices of Young People Presenting to a Gender Service with Gender Distress: A Prospective Follow-Up Study

This prospective case-cohort study examines the developmental pathway choices of 79 young people (13.25-23.75 years old; 33 biological males and 46 biological females) referred to a tertiary care hospital's Department of Psychological Medicine (December 2013-November 2018, at ages 8.42-15.92 years) for diagnostic assessment for gender dysphoria (GD) and for potential gender-affirming medical interventions. All of the young people had attended a screening medical assessment (including puberty staging) by paediatricians. The Psychological Medicine assessment (individual and family) yielded a formal DSM-5 diagnosis of GD in 66 of the young people. Of the 13 not meeting DSM-5 criteria, two obtained a GD diagnosis at a later time. This yielded 68 young people (68/79; 86.1%) with formal diagnoses of GD who were potentially eligible for gender-affirming medical interventions and 11 young people (11/79; 13.9%) who were not. Follow-up took place between November 2022 and January 2023. Within the GD subgroup (n = 68) (with two lost to follow-up), six had desisted (desistance rate of 9.1%; 6/66), and 60 had persisted on a GD (transgender) pathway (persistence rate of 90.9%; 60/66). Within the cohort as a whole (with two lost to follow-up), the overall persistence rate was 77.9% (60/77), and overall desistance rate for gender-related distress was 22.1% (17/77). Ongoing mental health concerns were reported by 44/50 (88.0%), and educational/occupational outcomes varied widely. The study highlights the importance of careful screening, comprehensive biopsychosocial (including family) assessment, and holistic therapeutic support. Even in highly screened samples of children and adolescents seeking a GD diagnosis and gender-affirming medical care, outcome pathways follow a diverse range of possibilities.

Breastfeeding grief after chest masculinisation mastectomy and detransition: A case report with lessons about unanticipated harm

An increasing number of young females are undergoing chest masculinsation mastectomy to affirm a gender identity and/or to relieve gender dysphoria. Some desist in their transgender identification and/or become reconciled with their sex, and then revert (or detransition). To the best of our knowledge, this report presents the first published case of a woman who had chest masculinisation surgery to affirm a gender identity as a trans man, but who later detransitioned, became pregnant and grieved her inability to breastfeed. She described a lack of understanding by maternity health providers of her experience and the importance she placed on breastfeeding. Subsequent poor maternity care contributed to her distress. The absence of breast function as a consideration in transgender surgical literature is highlighted. That breastfeeding is missing in counselling and consent guidelines for chest masculinisation mastectomy is also described as is the poor quality of existing research on detransition rates and benefit or otherwise of chest masculinising mastectomy. Recommendations are made for improving maternity care for detransitioned women. Increasing numbers of chest masculinsation mastectomies will likely be followed by more new mothers without functioning breasts who will require honest, knowledgeable, and compassionate support.

Editorial Perspective: Medical body modification in youth with gender dysphoria or body dysmorphic disorder - is current practice coherent and evidence-based?

In recent decades, there has been a steady increase in the number of people, including adolescents, undergoing medical body modification (MBM) to alter their physically healthy bodies in invasive and nearly irreversible ways through medical treatment (e.g. surgery). While MBM is often recommended for youth with persisting gender dysphoria (GD), in body dysmorphic disorder (BDD) it has been considered contraindicated. Here, we outline the current controversies surrounding MBM practice and recommendations in adolescents with GD versus those with BDD in order to better understand under what circumstances we may or may not support adolescents who want to change their bodies medically and often irreversibly. We compare the two disorders in terms of the overlap and uniqueness of their behavioural and psychological features. In doing so, we discuss limitations of the existing (often low-quality) evidence for and against MBM in young patients. We conclude that the currently available evidence is too preliminary and far from conclusive to make any robust recommendations in terms of benefits and harms of MBM in youth with persisting GD or BDD. However, we strongly recommend further urgent scientific discussions and systematic research efforts into more robust evaluations and the identification of more precise psychological characteristics that may serve as decision criteria for or against MBM - particularly in those adolescents who did not respond to non-MBM, that is, psychiatric/psychological treatment and psychosocial support, if available at all. This will greatly benefit youth healthcare professionals in their challenging clinical practice of making decisions regarding MBM today and in the future.

Commentary on Levine et al.: A Tale of Two Informed Consent Processes

This commentary compares two recently published informed consent recommendations for gender dysphoria. One key difference identified is in their assessment of the strength of the evidence base for the gender affirming treatment model. An evaluation of both authors' citations supports the claims of a weak evidence base for the use of puberty blockers and gender affirming hormonal treatments in youth with gender dysphoria. This commentary then reflects on the implications of this. In particular, it asks whether it would be best practice to provide gender affirming treatments for youth only under clinical research conditions, rather than as routine clinical practice.