Recently, there have been significant developments in the field of youth gender medicine that have raised concerns among medical professionals. Secret files exposed the fact that children and adolescents undergoing gender-affirming medical procedures were unable to give informed consent. Additionally, a report from the UK criticized the lack of scientific evidence supporting the use of hormones and surgery for gender questioning minors, leading to a ban on puberty blockers for those under 18. Calls are now being made to prioritize counseling as the initial approach for children uncertain about their gender, rather than immediate medical intervention.
One aspect of concern is the promotion of “Gender-Affirming Psychiatric Care” as the first textbook dedicated to providing affirming and evidence-informed care for transgender individuals. However, this textbook has been criticized for putting children on a fast track to hormones and surgery, using methods that have not kept up with scientific developments in the field. The text underscores the necessity for psychiatrists to affirm the self-diagnosis of patients, presenting nonaffirmation as leading to depressive symptoms and suicidal ideation, thereby pressuring young patients into medical interventions over other treatment options.
There are growing concerns about gender-affirming care using the fear of suicide as a strategy to coerce parents and young patients into immediate medical intervention. The emotionally manipulative tactics employed by medical specialists raise significant ethical questions about the care provided to children questioning their gender. The textbook not only advocates for gender affirming care but also endorses dangerous and outdated procedures, citing sources that have been largely discredited and perpetuating misinformation about the reversibility of puberty blockers.
The decision by the APA to publish such a controversial textbook has raised questions about the transparency and ethics of their peer review process. The editor of the textbook, Teddy Goetz, is a transgender psychiatric resident with a history of publishing radical works promoting diverse gender beliefs. By pushing for “prioritizing lived experience” over scientific evidence, the textbook highlights the marginalized experiences of gender-diverse individuals, urging healthcare professionals to overcome unconscious biases and support a wide range of gender identities.
Calls for the APA to withdraw the controversial textbook have gone unanswered, reflecting a lack of accountability and transparency within the organization. Despite concerns raised by thousands of healthcare professionals, the APA is choosing to ignore the backlash, risking its reputation as a reliable source of gender-related psychiatric care. The silence from the APA raises ethical questions about their commitment to providing safe and evidence-based care, potentially leading to legal liability and discrediting the organization. This issue highlights the need for greater scrutiny and ethical oversight within the medical community.
The dismissal of dissenting voices within the APA reflects an insular and problematic approach to gender-affirming care, ignoring valid concerns from healthcare professionals. While there have been efforts to hold the organization accountable, the lack of response from the APA calls into question their commitment to medical ethics and patient safety. As the field of youth gender medicine continues to evolve, it is crucial for medical professionals to prioritize evidence-based care and ethical practices to ensure the well-being of all patients.
