Differences in Sex Development (DSD) and related conditions: mechanisms, prevalences and changing practice

Satisfaction with a new patient education program for children, adolescents, and young adults with differences of sex development (DSD) and their parents

Objective

Evaluation of the participant satisfaction with a newly developed interdisciplinary, modular education program for children, adolescents, and young adults with differences of sex development (DSD) and their parents.

Methods

The two-day program including tailored medical information, peer consultation and psychological support aimed to improve diagnosis-specific knowledge and empowerment. Post-training satisfaction was measured using an adapted ZUF-8 questionnaire, scoring from 5 (worst) to a maximum of 26 (best) for persons aged 6-17 and from 10 to 40 points for adults, including 2 open-ended questions.

Results

The questionnaire, completed by 89 children (6-13 years), 92 adolescents (14-17 years), 47 young adults (18-24 years), and 345 parents, revealed consistent high satisfaction with the program regardless of age or diagnosis (children 24.4 ± 2.1, adolescents 23.5 ± 2.7; young adults 36.0 ± 4.0, parents 36.6 ± 3.4). Neither sociodemographic factors nor diagnosis burden, shame, or informedness showed relevant associations with satisfaction levels. Participants highlighted exchange and open atmosphere as key satisfaction elements.

Conclusion

Satisfaction with the new education program was high in all examined groups. Implementing it in routine care requires further analysis to determine the program's long-term effects on well-being and knowledge.

Innovation

The first educational program for young people with DSD addressing their specific challenges through inclusive language, an open approach to sex and gender and the inclusion of self-help groups.

Beyond Suppressing Testosterone: A Categorical System to Achieve a "Level Playing Field" in Sport

Regulations implemented by World Athletics (WA) require female athletes with differences of sexual development to suppress their blood testosterone levels in order to participate in certain women's sporting competitions. These regulations have been justified by reference to fairness. In this paper, we reconstruct WA's understanding of fairness, which requires a "level playing field" where no athlete should have a significant performance advantage based on factors other than talent, dedication, and hard work over an average athlete in their category. We demonstrate that by placing regulations only on testosterone levels, while ignoring physical as well as socioeconomic advantages, WA consistently fails to meet its own definition of fairness. We then discuss several ways in which this definition could be met. Our analysis shows that a categorical system, in which athletes are divided into categories based on properties leading to significant performance advantages, is best suited for meeting WA's definition of fairness.

Genital Modifications in Prepubescent Minors: When May Clinicians Ethically Proceed?

When is it ethically permissible for clinicians to surgically intervene into the genitals of a legal minor? We distinguish between voluntary and nonvoluntary procedures and focus on nonvoluntary procedures, specifically in prepubescent minors ("children"). We do not address procedures in adolescence or adulthood. With respect to children categorized as female at birth who have no apparent differences of sex development (i.e., non-intersex or "endosex" females) there is a near-universal ethical consensus in the Global North. This consensus holds that clinicians may not perform any nonvoluntary genital cutting or surgery, from "cosmetic" labiaplasty to medicalized ritual "pricking" of the vulva, insofar as the procedure is not strictly necessary to protect the child's physical health. All other motivations, including possible psychosocial, cultural, subjective-aesthetic, or prophylactic benefits as judged by doctors or parents, are seen as categorically inappropriate grounds for a clinician to proceed with a nonvoluntary genital procedure in this population. We argue that the main ethical reasons capable of supporting this consensus turn not on empirically contestable benefit-risk calculations, but on a fundamental concern to respect the child's privacy, bodily integrity, developing sexual boundaries, and (future) genital autonomy. We show that these ethical reasons are sound. However, as we argue, they do not only apply to endosex female children, but rather to all children regardless of sex characteristics, including those with intersex traits and endosex males. We conclude, therefore, that as a matter of justice, inclusivity, and gender equality in medical-ethical policy (we do not take a position as to criminal law), clinicians should not be permitted to perform any nonvoluntary genital cutting or surgery in prepubescent minors, irrespective of the latter's sex traits or gender assignment, unless urgently necessary to protect their physical health. By contrast, we suggest that voluntary surgeries in older individuals might, under certain conditions, permissibly be performed for a wider range of reasons, including reasons of self-identity or psychosocial well-being, in keeping with the circumstances, values, and explicit needs and preferences of the persons so concerned. Note: Because our position is tied to clinicians' widely accepted role-specific duties as medical practitioners within regulated healthcare systems, we do not consider genital procedures performed outside of a healthcare context (e.g., for religious reasons) or by persons other than licensed healthcare providers working in their professional capacity.

Genetic control of typical and atypical sex development

Sex development relies on the sex-specific action of gene networks to differentiate the bipotential gonads of the growing fetus into testis or ovaries, followed by the differentiation of internal and external genitalia depending on the presence or absence of hormones. Differences in sex development (DSD) arise from congenital alterations during any of these processes, and are classified depending on sex chromosomal constitution as sex chromosome DSD, 46,XY DSD or 46,XX DSD. Understanding the genetics and embryology of typical and atypical sex development is essential for diagnosing, treating and managing DSD. Advances have been made in understanding the genetic causes of DSD over the past 10 years, especially for 46,XY DSD. Additional information is required to better understand ovarian and female development and to identify further genetic causes of 46,XX DSD, besides congenital adrenal hyperplasia. Ongoing research is focused on the discovery of further genes related to typical and atypical sex development and, therefore, on improving diagnosis of DSD.