De-sexing the Medical Record? An Examination of Sex Versus Gender Identity in the General Medical Council's Trans Healthcare Ethical Advice

Individuals Treated for Gender Dysphoria with Medical and/or Surgical Transition Who Subsequently Detransitioned: A Survey of 100 Detransitioners

The study's purpose was to describe a population of individuals who experienced gender dysphoria, chose to undergo medical and/or surgical transition and then detransitioned by discontinuing medications, having surgery to reverse the effects of transition, or both. Recruitment information with a link to an anonymous survey was shared on social media, professional listservs, and via snowball sampling. Sixty-nine percent of the 100 participants were natal female and 31.0% were natal male. Reasons for detransitioning were varied and included: experiencing discrimination (23.0%); becoming more comfortable identifying as their natal sex (60.0%); having concerns about potential medical complications from transitioning (49.0%); and coming to the view that their gender dysphoria was caused by something specific such as trauma, abuse, or a mental health condition (38.0%). Homophobia or difficulty accepting themselves as lesbian, gay, or bisexual was expressed by 23.0% as a reason for transition and subsequent detransition. The majority (55.0%) felt that they did not receive an adequate evaluation from a doctor or mental health professional before starting transition and only 24.0% of respondents informed their clinicians that they had detransitioned. There are many different reasons and experiences leading to detransition. More research is needed to understand this population, determine the prevalence of detransition as an outcome of transition, meet the medical and psychological needs of this population, and better inform the process of evaluation and counseling prior to transition.

Transgender debates and healthcare: A critical realist account

The meta-theoretical resource of critical realism (CR) is deployed in order to examine transgender and healthcare. CR treads a middle way between positivism and postmodernism, within post-Popperian discussions of the philosophy of natural and social science. It focuses on the conditions of possibility for the emergence of a phenomenon under investigation. In this case, the focus is on the emergence of debates about transgenderism in healthcare. These have been technological (about the prospect of biomedical solutions to personal problems) and ideological, with the enlarged salience of identity politics and our currently unresolved "culture wars." Identity politics have brought a focus on epistemological privilege or "lived experience" and on rights to healthcare being driven by consumer choice. The current contestation and its history are discussed in relation to our four planar social being (nature, relationality, socio-economic structures, and our particular personalities) and future scenarios are rehearsed.

GnRHa ('Puberty Blockers') and Cross Sex Hormones for Children and Adolescents: Informed Consent, Personhood and Freedom of Expression

Ethical concerns have been raised about routine practice in paediatric gender clinics. We discuss informed consent and the risk of iatrogenesis in the prescribing of gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRHas) and cross sex hormones to children and adolescents respectively. We place those clinical concerns in a wider societal context and invite consideration of two further relevant ethical domains: competing rights-based claims about male and female personhood; and freedom of expression about those claims. When reflecting on the assessment and medicalization of children and adolescents presenting at gender clinics, the matters of informed consent and iatrogenic risk should be the most pressing for clinicians. However, this is not just a matter of medical ethics, it also implies the need for a full ethical debate on competing notions of personhood and the defence of freedom of expression about transgender and its implications within contemporary democracies.