This issue is cultural. People for some reason have a hard-on for transhumanism and a religious drive to protect special gender souls. They fall for TV puff pieces and the decadent romantic notion of truly finding your special self.
This was the weak point of Cass, she didn't emphasize the cultural layer and left open this medical ideas laundering that there are truly trans kids. Nevermind that it might be abused children, or autistic children or those with OCD or even just a particular temperament. Nevermind the other contingent factors like whether the parent is progressive and political, or whether the physician is a true believer, or how much internet and what sites they visit and who their friends are.
Of course it's not ethical. There are much more important research questions that could build a genuine epistemic understanding of this issue. The desire to compromise in treating some children as if they were in the wrong body without even asking basic research questions shows the parlous state of medicine and culture in general.
Even in the context of a so called clinical trial children can no more "consent" to have their healthy breasts and genitalia removed or take puberty blockers than they can "consent" to have sex with an adult. Similarly, parents and doctors can no more approve such permanent mutilation simply because a minor child desires it than they can approve their participation in pedophilia. Ultimately society will see the truth and ban (or as in the case of the UK continue to ban) the practice as we have banned female genital mutilation. Do people support that practice if the parents consent? I truly hope not. It is monstrous to believe otherwise and those who do will ultimately be held to account for their actions. In the US, the obscene (now happily fired) bureaucrat Rachel (Richard) Levine among those in the dock.
I suspect this issue will not be laid to rest until there is a clinical trial, and even then the ones who say it's about supporting embodiment preferences will not be satisfied. To them, patients are customers and major surgery the equivalent of a tattoo: if you regret it later, that's on you.
You are right that the root of the problem is the lack of resources for proper therapeutic support. This is not simply a matter of money. There are not enough therapists trained to p provide proper support and many therapists have been taught the psychotherapy for gender dysphoria is useless or even harmful. However, leaving the option of puberty blockers open will only make it more difficult to resolve these problems. That is why it is important to get better psychotherapeutic support in place first. If there are patients who genuinely do not benefit from psychotherapy they may be candidates for a puberty blocker trial.
This issue is cultural. People for some reason have a hard-on for transhumanism and a religious drive to protect special gender souls. They fall for TV puff pieces and the decadent romantic notion of truly finding your special self.
This was the weak point of Cass, she didn't emphasize the cultural layer and left open this medical ideas laundering that there are truly trans kids. Nevermind that it might be abused children, or autistic children or those with OCD or even just a particular temperament. Nevermind the other contingent factors like whether the parent is progressive and political, or whether the physician is a true believer, or how much internet and what sites they visit and who their friends are.
Of course it's not ethical. There are much more important research questions that could build a genuine epistemic understanding of this issue. The desire to compromise in treating some children as if they were in the wrong body without even asking basic research questions shows the parlous state of medicine and culture in general.
Even in the context of a so called clinical trial children can no more "consent" to have their healthy breasts and genitalia removed or take puberty blockers than they can "consent" to have sex with an adult. Similarly, parents and doctors can no more approve such permanent mutilation simply because a minor child desires it than they can approve their participation in pedophilia. Ultimately society will see the truth and ban (or as in the case of the UK continue to ban) the practice as we have banned female genital mutilation. Do people support that practice if the parents consent? I truly hope not. It is monstrous to believe otherwise and those who do will ultimately be held to account for their actions. In the US, the obscene (now happily fired) bureaucrat Rachel (Richard) Levine among those in the dock.
I suspect this issue will not be laid to rest until there is a clinical trial, and even then the ones who say it's about supporting embodiment preferences will not be satisfied. To them, patients are customers and major surgery the equivalent of a tattoo: if you regret it later, that's on you.
You are right that the root of the problem is the lack of resources for proper therapeutic support. This is not simply a matter of money. There are not enough therapists trained to p provide proper support and many therapists have been taught the psychotherapy for gender dysphoria is useless or even harmful. However, leaving the option of puberty blockers open will only make it more difficult to resolve these problems. That is why it is important to get better psychotherapeutic support in place first. If there are patients who genuinely do not benefit from psychotherapy they may be candidates for a puberty blocker trial.