Here's what the gays think of TS hormone treatments

[justatransgirl]

Here's a link to an editorial in the San Diego Gay and Lesbian Times - what passes for the GLBT newspaper here in the 10th largest city in Amerika. Below is a copy of my editorial rebuttal for what it's worth which will come out later in the week.

I'd be interested in your comments, particularly from girls who transitioned very early (early teens or earlier).

http://www.gaylesbiantimes.com/?id=10843

Hugs,
TS Jamie :-)

Dear Editor:
Your editorial of Nov. 1st, "Cross-sex hormone treatment of transgendered children," shows the misconceptions between those involved in the treatment of such children and the gay and lesbian community and the public at large.

Being transgendered is not a choice a parent or child makes. It just is. When a 4 year old says he's a girl, and insists on this through puberty, the child is probably correct in their gender perception. Parents and medical providers should listen to the child and take the appropriate corrective action.

Certainly every case is unique, but when a child's rights to medical intervention are denied for legal, economic, religious, or social reasons the effects are often catastrophic. By age 17 the body has completed most of it's development. In a genetic female the breasts have developed. In a male to female transsexual early hormonal treatment is the difference between their ability to live undetected in their perceived gender or not. The voice will have dropped to a lower octave, a male muscle pattern, bone and facial structure, and body hair have developed.

While Lupron to delay puberty would usually be the treatment of choice until a child is of age to make their own legal decisions, the effects of delaying treatment because of the cost can be devastating. In cases with medical and psychological consensus where economics make Lupron impossible, hormone treatments at the onset of puberty are preferable to no treatment at all. Early intervention is the best way to support a successful life.

To say that depression, health, and suicide can be addressed by community support, shows a lack of understanding of trans youth. You can provide all the "support" in the world and when a young trans girl starts growing chin whiskers with no option to stop it, she may choose the only solution she sees available to her. When a large percentage of young transsexuals commit suicide or die of Aids by age 30, cancer is the least of our concerns.

Your editorial stance to support the denial of medical treatment of transgendered children based on social viewpoint, is wrong and intensifies the unnecessary gap between the GLB and T communities.

Thanks,
Jamie S.

[SarahG]

The stories we’ve read are, at times, heart wrenching, and, in a perfect world, there would be a safe, affordable treatment for transgender children – but until that treatment is available, parents and doctors should not rely on a treatment that will harm the child in the long run.

Affordable treatment? A bilaterial orchi before puberty would save more than a hand full of pennies.

As to safety? Likewise, HRT certainly has its assorted health risks, note I am NOT saying that is an argument against HRT. Again another fact that makes orchis more appealing- the safety factor.

Realistically that last sentence describes this author's real views on the subject. The author doesn't really care about the cost factor.

Honestly, I wouldn't waste your time trying to rebuttal that uncited garbage, it would just be falling on deaf ears. If someone takes that "for the children" safety argument, their perspective isn't going to change no matter what you throw to counter their false assertions.

It's no different from the "all surgeries are risky so we shouldn't allow trans patients to harm perfectly normal & healthy reproductive organs" of the past.

[Nowhere]

I find it amazing that gays have the audacity to bash young treatment when there hasn't been a single instance of early hormone treatment chosen by the girl that has turned out negatively.

Not one.

All instances of young transition / hormones turning out bad have been by people forcing it upon them (like famous intersexed cases).

So, again, they don't know what they're talking about and prove that they don't care for, or about the TS Community.

Great job at doing the necessary rebuttal.

[Rod la Rod]

{"The stories we’ve read are, at times, heart wrenching, and, in a perfect world, there would be a safe, affordable treatment for transgender children – but until that treatment is available, parents and doctors should not rely on a treatment that will harm the child in the long run."

"The other factors parents worry about – violence, depression, and suicide – are very legitimate concerns, but, they can be addressed by increasing support and resources for transgender children in the family and in the GLBT community."

"Further, GLBT organizations need to develop resources, safe spaces, for these children to learn and grow in tolerant environments.
The stories we’ve read are, at times, heart wrenching, and, in a perfect world, there would be a safe, affordable treatment for transgender children – but until that treatment is available, parents and doctors should not rely on a treatment that will harm the child in the long run."}

Who is we? There is no attribution for the author of this outrageous, ignorant and dangerous drivel.

What will harm the child in the long run is irreversible changes, (masculinization), that in many cases will make it impossible for the MTF child to lead a happy life. "They" want to deprive a child of a chance for a happy life because it costs too much?

Let's face it a FTM can become completely masculine and pass as a male starting from any point in life.

Masculinization is irreversible. Once a MTF goes through puberty it is too late. It cannot be reversed.

Was this article was written by a LESBIAN WHO HAS NO IDEA WHAT IT IS LIKE TO BE A MTF youth.

Gay people{lesbians}, in many cases are the WORST ENEMY OF THE TS community.

[justatransgirl]

I should qualify the background of this thread.

The article link above was an Editorial - attributed to the Editors of the magazine. This is their publications stance, not an individual writer.

The "GLT" in recent weeks has had sevearal editorials and articles on transgendered issues, starting with the ENDA debacle. Two weeks ago they ran a feature on transgendered children, - where the primary subject was an MtoF girl - and throughout the article they called her "he and him," This current editorial stemmed from that.

Historically the publication hasn't had a clue about TG issues. Example - two years ago to commemorate the Day of Rememberence they ran a full cover photo of a naked trans woman. And until I raised hell and threatened a lawsuit they had an ad for a bathroom company that depicted what appeared to be a trans woman standing up to pee in a urinal which while eye catching I found demeaning and insensitive in a GLBT publication.

So I don't let them get away with ignorance, and at least they tend to publish my drivel so we do get a small voice.

Hugs,
TS Jamie :-)

[MrsKellyPierce]

The LGBT has taken a different route cutting off the T as of late

[MacShreach]

The article is sloppy and poorly edited, but it is NOT an attack on transgender people.

The article does NOT condemn the use of Lupron. It is in fact fairly positive about it, saying its effects are "entirely reversible." It does not, I grant you, wholeheartedly endorse the therapy but it does not come out against it either.

The main thrust of the article regards alternatives to Lupron which may have to be considered because of the high cost of that drug. Drugs in their patent phase (1st 10 years) are always expensive, and the article points out that for some families the cost of Lupron is too much. It then goes on to discuss the issues this causes for poorer families.

It reminds us that in the case of a minor therapy decisions have to be taken by the parent or guardian.

It proposes that using what it calls "cross-sex hormones" in the case of a minor should not be allowed on the grounds that permanent damage may be caused.

It's a point of view that may be debated, but prima facie it has merit, and is by no means an outright condemnation of transgender people or their need to deal with the position they find themselves in.

As a matter of fact, the position of a parent in a situation like this is extremely difficult because not only are there health, social and moral issues that may or may not affect their decision, there are legal ones. If the parent recklessly were to allow "cross-sex hormonal treatment" which caused irreversible changes or health issues, then that parent and the doctors treating the child could find themselves on the receiving end of litigation by the child in the future.

Since the child does not have the legal authority to make such a decision, the standard applied is that all decisions must be "in the best interest of the child."

You may regard this as an unlikely scenario but were a child to decide in later life that he or she was not in fact transgender, that inappropriate treatment had caused damage and believed that such treatment had "not been in his or her best interest," as opposed to just being what he or she wanted at the time, then believe me, this will end in court. Therefore parents and doctors have to tread very, very carefully.

I really sympathise with the difficulties that TG people have with these issues but unless you can come up with a proof-positive test that determines without any doubt that a child is transgender, and you can demonstrate that treatment will have no long-term side-effects that are not reversible, then doctors and parents have little choice but to be conservative in their approach.

I think the article was just saying this, albeit in a very clumsy way. ("Ed's office NOW, Scoop," sort of clumsy IMO. 8) )

[SarahG]

It reminds us that in the case of a minor therapy decisions have to be taken by the parent or guardian.


HAVE to? I highly disagree. Some parents would never, ever agree to any kind of GID related treatment whatsoever. Should a kid with a clear cut case of GID be forced to go through puberty and masculate until they turn some random age between 15 & 21 just because they have bad parents?

I was making all of my medical decisions at 10, should I have had to endure a life without doctors if my parents were christian scientists?



It proposes that using what it calls "cross-sex hormones" in the case of a minor should not be allowed on the grounds that permanent damage may be caused.


Lots of drugs and surgeries, no matter what condition we are talking about, can result in permanent damage. That's just the risk side of it. I don't see how that is evidence to indicate that minor's opinions regarding treatments is a bad thing.

We agree that a minor's opinion is worth caring about when the minor OBJECTs to the treatment (like when IS patients are forced into one sex- which isn't always a one time surgery at infancy). So howcome our society refuses to listen to minors when it is the other way around (when they want it and their parents do not)? Seems kinda hypocritical to me.



...by no means an outright condemnation of transgender people or their need to deal with the position they find themselves in.


It certainly sounds that way in the case of hrt & minors.

There is also the issue of what constitutes a minor. Look at the variation in age of consent laws, in some states kids can get married at 12.... what kind of illogical system do we have if you can get married or have sex but can't decide what happens in your medical treatments? There is no consistancy across the board in the US per what defines a minor. Even when it is the same state, the age of consent for marriage, the age of consent for sex, the min age to drive a vehicle, the min age to move out from their guardian's house, the age of which they'd be tried as adults in the courts, the age in which they can drop out of school, the age in which they can vote, the age in which they can drink are all different things varying between as low as 12 through 21 years.



As a matter of fact, the position of a parent in a situation like this is extremely difficult because not only are there health, social and moral issues that may or may not affect their decision...


I am not debating it is hard for parents, BUT it being hard for them does not give them the right to try to prevent or sabotage their child's transistion or medical needs.



...parent and the doctors treating the child could find themselves on the receiving end of litigation by the child in the future.


True, but doctors can find them self in lawsuits over allowing treatment for someone who is trans down the road anyway if the patient decides transitioning was a bad idea. But think about that for a moment, how often do we actually hear about such cases? They're certainly well in the minority. The one or two (IF that) that occur a year aren't justification from preventing ALL GID patients from receiving formal medical treatment.



Since the child does not have the legal authority to make such a decision, the standard applied is that all decisions must be "in the best interest of the child."


Actually that is not true, minors CAN legally make their medical decisions in the US. It is done all the time, and you know where it is done the most?

Cancer treatments. Minors even before age 10 regularly decide how they are treated in cancer and especially terminal situations.

The "best interest of the child" is a very arbitrary thing, that's the kind of argument used to advocate video game regulation. I would think that lowing your kid's chances of killing themself would be in their best interest, the psychological damage that can result from untreating GID certainly most be taken into consideration, don't you agree?

I can understand the need for cation, especially in the event of cases that aren't clear cut. But what of those where there is no doubt by anyone involved (parents, child, doctors, etc) that the kid is trans?

[MacShreach]

The "best interest of the child" is a very arbitrary thing, that's the kind of argument used to advocate video game regulation. I would think that lowing your kid's chances of killing themself would be in their best interest, the psychological damage that can result from untreating GID certainly most be taken into consideration, don't you agree?

Whether or not I agree is totally irrelevant, but I do-- it has to be taken into account. That's not necessarily to say it's the over-riding factor.

As for minors making decisions about cancer treatment in terminal cases, well yes; but that's an extreme situation where the child is not going to live anyway.

The age of majority may be arbitrary and inconsistent, but that is something to take up with legislatures, not me, or the reporter who wrote the piece that started this. That reporter needs his arse kicked for writing vague, misleading copy and his Editor needs a damn good talking to for letting it through--but they were NOT having a go at transsexuals!

The real issue highlighted in the piece--which was totally confused--is the cost of treatment and the nature of health-care. Whether you live in a country where you have to pay for health-care, as you do, or in one where the state does, as I do, somebody has to pay; clearly those who pay have to be persuaded to allow the prescription of Lupron or similar therapy in appropriate cases, despite the cost. As a matter of fact the incidence of transsexualism, though much higher than often suggested (I agree with Lynn Conway's assessment,) is still so low that, over the population, the added burden of a couple of years' treatment with Lupron in appropriate cases is not going to make a lot of difference. Health insurers, whether private or the State, have to be persuaded of this.

It is obviously inappropriate that in a qualifying case no therapy is prescribed, but is it appropriate that a more dangerous therapy with irreversible long-term consequences is prescribed instead simply because it is cheaper? Essentially that was what the article was saying, albeit badly.

To quickly fast-forward to your last point, (sorry about this, Sarah, I just don't have a lot of time,) you're agreeing with me. Produce a proof-positive, fail-safe test and you've absolutely cracked it. No doctor or pharmacologist will argue with the result of an established, evidence-based test, and that will allow the prescription of more radical therapies safe in the knowledge that they are appropriate, possibly even as far as surgical reassignment procedures at a very early age. But I'm not aware of the existence of any such test.

[SarahG]

As for minors making decisions about cancer treatment in terminal cases, well yes; but that's an extreme situation where the child is not going to live anyway.


That is not true, it doesn't have to be a case where they are "just going to die anyway."

If it works in extreme cases, it should also work in less extreme cases- or so I would think.



As a matter of fact the incidence of transsexualism, though much higher than often suggested (I agree with Lynn Conway's assessment,) is still so low that, over the population, the added burden of a couple of years' treatment with Lupron in appropriate cases is not going to make a lot of difference.


I don't agree on the prevailance guesstimations but I do agree with you highly that it won't make any real life difference to the cost of healthcare systems. Like I said, the author really had no reason to bring money into their essay.

[/quote]
To quickly fast-forward to your last point, (sorry about this, Sarah, I just don't have a lot of time,) you're agreeing with me. Produce a proof-positive, fail-safe test and you've absolutely cracked it. No doctor or pharmacologist will argue with the result of an established, evidence-based test, and that will allow the prescription of more radical therapies safe in the knowledge that they are appropriate, possibly even as far as surgical reassignment procedures at a very early age. But I'm not aware of the existence of any such test.[/quote]

There is no such test, nor could there be (at least in any easy way I can think of). BUT, lots and I mean lots of psychological conditions have no clear cut easy litmus test for diagnosis.

Is that to mean that minors with such psy conditions can not be treated due to concerns over side effects? I don't think so. A litmus test is not critical in identifying a clear cut case of a given condition.

You think HRT is risky? I know a girl who is bipolar, and had to go on lithium before she could drive a car (this is a GG if anyone is curious). The doctors basically said "look, because this is a life long treatment, and you require so much of it, if you stay on this drug which is a toxin you'll be dead by 50"

The only reason why GID treatments are so harshly controlled when it comes to minors is because its still such a taboo issue, but amplifying that is the fact it results in sterilization and our society- at least in America has always been extremely volatile when dealing with reproductive rights (not even talking abortion here but that is an extended example).

I mean shoot, look at all the parents that want to ensure minors can't be given contraceptive or cervical cancer vaccines all the while KNOWING some minors will be having sex and without such tools to protect themselves, some will DIE without it. Even if it weren't a life or death situation, in the case of HPV even if it doesn't result in cancer, there are quality of life concerns. Ever see a GG have to freeze off the damage HPV can cause to their genitalia?

That vaccine btw, won't do anything if the patient has already been exposed to HPV, so say the over protective parents get their wish and prohibit it for minors. Now a lil girl gets raped, gets exposed to it- she won't be able to take advantage of the vaccine even as a young ADULT.

I am not trying to accuse you of taking any of this positions btw, I think for the most part we agree but not fully.

[MacShreach]

[

I don't agree on the prevailance guesstimations but I do agree with you highly that it won't make any real life difference to the cost of healthcare systems. Like I said, the author really had no reason to bring money into their essay.



Well, I can't find a flaw in Lynn's methodology so I'd be interested to know on what grounds you disagree with it. If anything her method will still produce a low result, but it's a statistically justifiable low result.

If you're saying the author had no reason to bring money into it then I think you missed the point, which is no criticism of you because the article, as I have said, was so badly written. In essence the author noted that a therapy that delayed puberty and had no known ill effects (Lupron) was being used in cases involving TG minors. The author then said this therapy was expensive and because it was expensive, HRT was being used instead and this had irreversible long-term consequences. He then went on to say that he believed that HRT should not be used in this way.

Now I know he didn't say as much, but his article implied that while he had no problem with people being prescribed Lupron he took issue with minors being prescribed HRT because it is cheaper. (Any decent editor should have been all over him for this, but anyway.)

The author was not against therapy per se, but appeared to be saying it would be better to use Lupron to delay the onset of puberty until the child had become older and was more able to decide its future.

I do have to say that seems, speaking as a parent, to be a reasonable approach and one I would want to explore if, as a parent I ever have to deal with this.

[Rod la Rod]

[

I don't agree on the prevailance guesstimations but I do agree with you highly that it won't make any real life difference to the cost of healthcare systems. Like I said, the author really had no reason to bring money into their essay.



Well, I can't find a flaw in Lynn's methodology so I'd be interested to know on what grounds you disagree with it. If anything her method will still produce a low result, but it's a statistically justifiable low result.

If you're saying the author had no reason to bring money into it then I think you missed the point, which is no criticism of you because the article, as I have said, was so badly written. In essence the author noted that a therapy that delayed puberty and had no known ill effects (Lupron) was being used in cases involving TG minors. The author then said this therapy was expensive and because it was expensive, HRT was being used instead and this had irreversible long-term consequences. He then went on to say that he believed that HRT should not be used in this way.

Now I know he didn't say as much, but his article implied that while he had no problem with people being prescribed Lupron he took issue with minors being prescribed HRT because it is cheaper. (Any decent editor should have been all over him for this, but anyway.)

The author was not against therapy per se, but appeared to be saying it would be better to use Lupron to delay the onset of puberty until the child had become older and was more able to decide its future.

I do have to say that seems, speaking as a parent, to be a reasonable approach and one I would want to explore if, as a parent I ever have to deal with this.

First of all for a Gay man or Lesbian, (who by definition are not gender disphoric) to state an opinion about TRANSGENDERED youth is as legitimate as a HETEROSEXUAL MAN STATING AN OPINION ON LESBIANISM. They have no special knowledge, expertise or EMPATHY for the TS comminity.

Second the gay community have an agenda; In many cases a young MTF who gets treatment before puberty will be able to integrate into the broad HETERO community and will NOT IDENTIFY AS GAY OR QUEER. It would therefore be a loss to their cause and community.

OK, Here is the list.

The effects of andro blockers and estrogens on a pre-pubertal male ARE REVERSIBLE.

The risk of cancer for the short amount of time using these drugs is INFINITESIMAL. The risk is no greater than the risk in adults, many of whom take these drugs for decades. I don't know where the author of that article got their medical info, but it is WRONG.

The idea that a few thousand dollars for LUPRON is a reason to deny your child a well adjusted, happy life as opposed to a life of misery IS OBSCENE. Would you chose not to treat your child for cancer if it was too expensive? AND YES, IMO THIS IS ANALOGOUS.

This article is a perfect example of the tragic disconnect between the GAY and TG agenda.

[SarahG]

I have always questioned statistics on ts prevailance because I don't think enough information exists from which to go from. Transgendered prevailance on the other hand, as in including tvs and ts people together- sure, thats going to be a significantly larger figure. Not big in the grand scheme of things, but big compared to just how many ts people there probably are.



The effects of andro blockers and estrogens on a pre-pubertal male ARE REVERSIBLE.


Yes and no. Tblockers can have some nasty side effects, although rare. Spiro can lead to irregular heart beats, even death for some patients and that isn't going to change based on age or being prepuberty. Does that mean it is a big deal? No, I don't think so- and I say that as someone who does have an irregular heart beat from spiro.

Estrogen, that one is kinda complicated, depending on the delivery method it can cause kidney problems.

I am curious if prepuberty patients would have the same sterilization concerns that postpuberty patients have...



The risk of cancer for the short amount of time using these drugs is INFINITESIMAL.

I'd say so as well.



The idea that a few thousand dollars for LUPRON is a reason to deny your child a well adjusted, happy life as opposed to a life of misery IS OBSCENE.

The issue at hand runs far deeper than that, if parents get up in arms over HPV vaccines, then there is a cultural ideology problem at hand and its far larger in scope and intensity than trans issues.

[MacShreach]

I have always questioned statistics on ts prevailance because I don't think enough information exists from which to go from. Transgendered prevailance on the other hand, as in including tvs and ts people together- sure, thats going to be a significantly larger figure. Not big in the grand scheme of things, but big compared to just how many ts people there probably are.


Lynn's method-- divide the population by the known number of post-op transsexuals--may be rough and ready but it's undeniably going to give a baseline to start from (1:2500 in the States, 1:3750 in UK.) The point being that the psychiatric community in both estimate 1:30,000, which must be out by at least an order of magnitude. That's for known SRS. Add in those who had the op overseas and pre-ops and the figure is considerably greater before you even get to considering tvs etc. (Whom I would count in a different category anyway.)


Oh, and Rod-- don't raise your voice to me. It's not polite.

[Rod la Rod]

Oh, and Rod-- don't raise your voice to me. It's not polite.

Nothing personal. No offense intended.

[MacShreach]

Nothing personal. No offense intended.

Cool. None taken.

[justatransgirl]

Well, some interesting viewpoints. I tried to find the original article on the GLT website but apparently they don't post features online.

I have to disagree with some of your point "Mac," I can see your comments are well intentioned but I have to agree with "Rod" that it's very hard for someone who isn't trans to relate fully. It can even be hard for transpeople to understand each others situations.

Yes, in a perfect world TS's in the USA should have health care options which would solve this issue. But with the current state of transphobia it's unlikely.

For that matter in the USA and many other parts of the world we are in danger of losing the gains that have been made over the past 40 years.

Sigh,
TS Jamie :-)

[peggygee]

I will be uncustomarily brief and want to apologize for having given a
cursory perusal to a very compelling and complex issue.

Jamie, at the onset I want to thank you for bringing this issue to the
atention of the forum. Additonally I would like to commend you for your
well thought out response to the editorial.

Also to the gentlemen who responded I would like to thank them for their
empathy on this matter.

Having said all that, I must concede that I must render a Solomon like
judgement and air on the side of caution.

Ideally if Lupron were more affordable that would be the optimal solution
to prevent a potential lifetme of gender dysphoria.

And while there are many people who know at a very young age that they
are transsexual, there are many for whom that isn't an accurate
assessment for a variety of reasons.

Indeed if I had to provide an analogy; It would be that I would be against
the death penalty not because of the people that would rightfully be
executed, but because of the one who should not.

I apologize for the clumsy analogy, but trust that it conveys the point.

I will also get back and read through this thread and give it the attention
it warrants.

[Hazel Tucker]

Personally, I can't decide if hormone replacement therapy is good for every kid out there with GID, but i can say from personal experience- it saves lives. At least mine anyway. I was 13 and begging my parents to let me "do what i have to do". They were not so keen on my being trans at the time and they were afraid of "making the decision" to put me through medical treatment. They told me no. At the time I was seeing the best gender therapist in the area, who agreed with my parents that i was "too young" to transition just yet, solely on the fact that "they" weren't ready.

I fought depression everyday. Thoughts of suicide. Puberty. Everyday. I started getting facial hair; my voice started to drop. And then I made a decision to transition outside of the criteria and bought hormones online. They saved my life. I was 16 almost 17 by that time. Undue suffering. Because i took the initiative and started hormones as early as i possibly could my life is easier, not in the sense that being trans is easier, just the day-to-day stuff. Because the professionals did not encourage my parents to help me the issue was neglected. I was neglected.

Sometimes cancer, liver disease, etc are risks we take to survive. Kids know themselves better than u think sometimes.

:roll:

[SarahG]

Personally, I can't decide if hormone replacement therapy is good for every kid out there with GID

It doesn't have to be.

No one is advocating every minor who is suspected of being GID be given HRT. That is not to say that it shouldn't be an option, for the clear cut cases of which no one- not the patient, parents or doctors, has any doubts.

[Rod la Rod]

Sometimes cancer, liver disease, etc are risks we take to survive. Kids know themselves better than u think sometimes.

:roll:

I am really happy to hear that you were able to help yourself. It sounds like you made it through OK. I think you did the right thing.

I sent you a PM regarding this issue. Welcome to HA!

[Christopher Plowe]

And then I made a decision to transition outside of the criteria and bought hormones online. They saved my life. I was 16 almost 17 by that time. Undue suffering. Because i took the initiative and started hormones as early as i possibly could my life is easier, not in the sense that being trans is easier, just the day-to-day stuff. Because the professionals did not encourage my parents to help me the issue was neglected. I was neglected.

Sometimes cancer, liver disease, etc are risks we take to survive. Kids know themselves better than u think sometimes.

:roll:

Well I'd say that you did the right thing by taking control of you life like that. And I must say that you've turned out VERY WELL, between your Avatar & you myspace page... I'd say you are possibly most beautiful Tgirl I've ever seen.

WOW, I think I'm in lust :jerkoff

[justatransgirl]

Hazel, your story is exactly my point. I am so glad you posted this - and for your first foray into our site. Thank you.

And thank you Peggy I was hoping you'd see this post.

Hazel if you don't mind (well actually too late...) I'm going to forward your comments (without ID of course) to the editor of the magazine for his personal reference.

Keep your thoughts coming folks.

Hugs,
TS Jamie :-)

[MacShreach]

Kids know themselves better than u think sometimes.

Well, I deeply sympathise with the position both you and your parents were put in. My own view is, and I'm not picking a fight with you, that at 13, especially in the case of a natal boy, a parent can't really be sure that what the child is saying is really the case. Personally I think that for most kids, around 16 is about the earliest we can really begin to be so sure. The trouble is the grey bit in between.

Had you been one of my own children and I had known Lupron was available, I would have fought tooth and nail for you to have it so that we could have the time we needed to cover all the bases in order to protect and do the best for you. I do fully appreciate the problems that the marching time-line of puberty presents; this is a very difficult situation for everyone concerned.

Children are hugely important to their parents and the very last thing I would want is for one of mine to be hurt or damaged in any way by errors of omission or commission on my part. I think that's probably true for most parents, I don't believe I'm that unusual.

[BrendaQG]

Early hormones make a huge huge difference in the quality of a transsexuals life.

I had hormones early and totally outside of the system. I was fortunate. My parents were both in the medical profession and that gave me access that other people did not have.

I did stop taking them for a long while and have paid a small price for it. But overall it is nothing compared to how I would be if I had not had any at all.

Surgery can only do so much. I mean..right now people who have known both of us since we were kids mistake me for my little sister. I cannot see how surgeries could ever have done that for me.

[SarahG]

at 13, especially in the case of a natal boy, a parent can't really be sure that what the child is saying is really the case. Personally I think that for most kids, around 16 is about the earliest we can really begin to be so sure. The trouble is the grey bit in between.

Which is why I wasn't advocating for it to be uniform across the board. The option has to exist for those within that gray area where it makes sense as a viable option. Doing things on a case by case basis requires having as many options to chose from as possible.

That first sentence (in the clip I quoted) I find kinda disturbing. Something is wrong when parents can't believe their kids and it really gets tiring to see parents time and time again pull the "oh its just a phase" line when their kid tells them something like this.

I am so NOT saying that homosexuality and being trans is one in the same, but that "its just a phase" or "the kid doesn't know what they're talking about" line is used in many situations such as these, and on that note I think this picture is appropriate.

[MacShreach]

That first sentence (in the clip I quoted) I find kinda disturbing. Something is wrong when parents can't believe their kids and it really gets tiring to see parents time and time again pull the "oh its just a phase" line when their kid tells them something like this.

I'm not suggesting that parents shouldn't believe their kids; however the duty of a parent is to weigh up what might or might not be a passing issue and what might or might not be in the long-term best interest of the child. What a child believes to be true today may change radically in 2 years and the parent is charged with the responsibility of making the decision.

I have already stated more than once that I think Lupron or a similar drug, should be prescribed in cases where the child is pre-teen or early teens. The use of these drugs, as I understand it, will delay the onset of irreversible masculine changes in the body so that the child's ultimate transition, if proceeded with, will be as successful as had they begun HRT earlier. I fail to see what possible argument there can be with this. Transition will be for life, after all. What does a couple of years' delay, when the potential effects of puberty are being held off, matter?

Every parent knows about passing phases and to deny that this is a very real possibility or they don't exist is just unrealistic.

[SarahG]

I have already stated more than once that I think Lupron or a similar drug, should be prescribed in cases where the child is pre-teen or early teens. The use of these drugs, as I understand it, will delay the onset of irreversible masculine changes in the body so that the child's ultimate transition, if proceeded with, will be as successful as had they begun HRT earlier.

I am not debating that point, what I am saying (not sure if I am being unclear, I might be...) is that having hrt as an option for some cases can work in addition to having stuff like Lupron as an option.

[Hazel Tucker]

"What a child believes to be true today may change radically in 2 years and the parent is charged with the responsibility of making the decision. "


Yes, I agree. But when a child has been consistently expressing being uncomfortable in their physical sex since they were 3 years old-it's crushing to them that no one understands their needs. My parents couldn't afford Lupron...they put me in therapy(which they couldn't afford either). To be completely honest therapy can only do so much. Catching the teen growth spurt with cross hormone therapy ensures that the child will look like the sex that they really are. They will be more comfortable in their body. And won't need to seek out surgicl proceedures to make them feel like they look like a woman or a man. Just because not all cases of GID in early adolescence are solid cases doesn't mean we should punish the ones that are. Every child is different; u can't treat them all the same. This is something that the HBSOC and I disagree on.

[tgirlzoe]

I keep seeing kids on Oprah, Barbara Walters, etc. Part of me is terribly envious of them having parents who will listen. I have a couple internet friends who are still in high school and well into transition. One is getting her SRS as soon as she graduates in June!

Gay people often view trans people as confused or self-hating gay people ~ they project what they can't understand. However, in the case of children, this is often true. According to the famed "sissy boy" study, nearly all children treated turned out gay, some bi and only one transsexual. My mom says that even though she saw I was quite different and feminine in elementary school, she had no idea if I would be gay, transgendered or just a sensitive straight man. She said she realized I liked boys when I was 11, when she said she saw me flirting with a boy (I don't remember this but I did have crushes and had started masturbating by then so it's quite possible).

Even though I was having serious depression and conflict over the gender issue in the second half of elementary school, nobody would listen to me. I kept trying to prove that I was a girl, adults kept judging me by my genitals. But what did I learn by age 11? My parents had a lot of early-90s Focus on the Family/Concerned Women for America/Moral Majority-type anti-gay propaganda around that I wasn't allowed to look at, but did eventually. I learned that boys who want to be girls are called "gay".

I had no idea that there were people out there who felt like me. "Gay" was the only word I had for what I was. I eventually "came out" in 10th grade, I took so long because my mom kept trying to keep me in the closet but many people just assumed I was gay anyway.

Coming out as gay didn't fix my problems, I still loathed my body and was in serious emotional and physical pain. I still cut or burned myself (which started in 9th grade). I was reckless with drugs, popping pain killers, smoking pot, even tried to overdose on a bunch of crank and caffeine pills (which just led to collapsing in class and throwing up a lot of blood). That was the first of two suicide attempts that year.

I discovered transsexuality that summer via Christine Jorgensen. Still, nobody would listen. But at least now I had a name for it and a new name for myself that my friends knew. I was desperate to find hormones, even though my parents forbid it, threatening to kick me out.

I sat in that miserable limbo of androgyny for another three years before I gave up and started hormones come what may. Still, my parents wouldn't listen. My dad said I was too young to make that sort of decision so I asked him how old I would need to be. He just said, "never." He begged me to go into an ex-gay program, saying they'd cure me within five years. I was kicked out, forbidden contact with my baby sister for the next decade until she turned 18 (she was 6) and things stayed that way for the next two years with no contact.

Finally, this past summer, we started emailing. On the Thursday before Christmas, I heard my mom's voice for the first time since April 2005. The next day, I caught the bus to see them. It was emotional and, for the first time, they listened. Even my dad made an effort to call me by my new name and female pronouns.

The most important thing that parents can do for their children, no matter their issue, is to listen to them. Whether they choose Lupron or Spiro isn't as important as doing something if the child desperately wants something to be done. I had some therapy ("a lot" to my parents, not nearly enough to me) throughout adolescence to deal with my depression but there was always the pressure to not talk about gender. We had a couple sessions with a Christian family counselor and the best I could bring myself to put down on the intake sheet was that my parents were upset that I was gay but I chicked out talking about it when she brought it up as a group.

Spiro can have bad health risks but every drug is a calculated risk. Many parents give their kids vaccines, even knowing that some kids will die from it. Well-monitored, it shouldn't be a problem. Like vaccines, you can judge whether the risk from not taking it (eg. depression, suicide, loss of quality-of-life due to permanent testosterone or estrogen effects) is greater than the risk of taking it.

The SOC says that there is no minimum age for anti-androgens or anti-estrogens but that cross-sex hormone therapy should wait until the child is 16. I think that's reasonable but the standards are just guidelines, not laws, and treatment should be tailored to the individual case. I've seen detransition cases with late transitioners but not teen transitioners. However, someone on here said they knew a couple who transitioned early but detransitioned to live as gay men.

Just because you think a child is too young to understand the risks and implications from changing genders doesn't mean they understand the risks and implications of not. I was forced to go through male puberty and it nearly killed me. How would choosing a female puberty and reclaiming my life be bad? Many fewer children transition back than transition. So shouldn't the child's wishes be listened to? I think it's pretty solidified by the time the kid is in high school and if it's destroying their life, err on the side of too much treatment.

What needs to be avoided is this re-establishment of gender stereotypes by trans people and their allies. Just because a 6yo boy likes to play dolls and a girl likes to play with trucks doesn't mean they're transgendered. There are plenty of non-gender-conformant kids who are not gender dysphoric, every person is different. But the kids who are dysphoric need to be addressed and listened to.

[the_corner]

My two cents....

If I had a children that I suspects in under a transgendered condition... honestly... I would not know what to do for the best of the kid....

I guess I would try to get the best professional help to achieve the best possible outcome... but I see that opinions on the topic are diverse (and some are very valid)... and therefore difficult... it has to be a tough job to be a dad in a situation like that....

[tgirlzoe]

Oh I'm sure it'd be miserable, confusing, chaotic, and would involve lack of sleep.

My parents said that child-oriented rearing just spoils kids. I think kids can very definitely be easily spoiled (and we can spoil ourselves). But ignoring the problem, trying to hide the kid from critical friends does not work, especially with a medical condition.

Many kids have gotten kicked out for being trans, gay or even dating someone of a different race. Addressing the issue is not spoiling the kid. I know a lot of parents don't realize this but there's more to raising a kid than just keeping a roof over their heads, food on the table and clothes on their backs. Sometimes you have to also play confidant and psychologist.

When I was 16, my mom told me to make sure no one at church found out I was trans or gay. She said she and my dad would lose all status and people would think they were horrible parents. What makes you a "horrible parent" is not caring about your kid's needs or standing up for them no matter what. Oh, and parenthood doesn't end when your kid turns 18, it's a life-long commitment.

I think my parents are slowly realizing all the things that went wrong. Sadly, they didn't do this ten years ago. I love my mom though and I feel there are ways she can work to be proud of her transsexual daughter and change peoples attitudes and stereotypes and possibly even help other mothers with trans children somehow.

As long as we learn from our parents, what was good, what was bad, then our children will be healthier and better off than we were.

[tgirlzoe]

I was talking to Saige (aka Alexis) last night. We were talking about going out and partying when I go there to get my orchi with Kimmel next year. She turns 21 in 2009 and I turn... 25! eeek! Another internet friend I've known for a couple years is getting her SRS in June, along with graduating from high school.

That's when I turn into one of those 45yo married CD/TS types at the support group I went to when I was 19, all gushing and moaning about how "I wish I was your age..." (not out loud, of course).

When I was 16, my plan was to start therapy ASAP and get my HRT letter. I would spend my upcoming Junior year in a bit of a messy, chaotic transtion with starting hormones, name change, etc. Then I would get to spend my Senior year more fully as a girl. Then I could go off to college where nobody knew. Hopefully, my parents would be able to help me pay for SRS before I turned 21, the sooner, the better.

I was far too optimistic about my ability to convince my parents this was good. They just saw me as some sort of extreme homosexual, perverted and going to Hell. I didn't start hormones until after I graduated, at 19. What a waste.

I remain fully convinced that high school is the proper age for treatment, if not sometimes before. Not transtioning in high school didn't save me from ridicule and violence, as my mother now says she was worried about, it probably made it worse. It clearly made my self-directed violence worse.

So 15, 16, 17 should be standard ages to begin hormone treatment. If the individual case is such that it warrants starting at 12, 13, 14, then so be it. Then 18, 19, 20 can be worst-case scenario. Even transtioning at 20, like me, is highly preferable for everyone involved than transtioning at 40, which seems to be pretty standard in the US.

Schools and parents need to be aware of this sort of thing. If we want to have healthy, well-adjusted transsexual kids, embracing it rather than suppressing it is important. There were no resources for me apart from the internet, with AntiJen and such. In a class of 500, maybe only one will be transsexual if that, but we owe it to the one.

[BrendaQG]

Zoe I know how that feels and can relate. I had parents who all they were willing to do was look the other way while I went through changes. I did not get any help dealing with the schools discomfort with my presentation and at the first excuse they put me in a mental hospital. The docs had the presence of mind to give me my own room while all the other adolescents had to double bunk. Until I was 19 that was about the extent of the gender sensitive care I got. After even those docs told them that there was nothing that could be done to change me they decided that all psychologist are really deep seated perverts. My father even said "They want black men to cut off their dicks to keep them from screwing a white woman someday." For the longest time he thought that was all I needed.

Leaving a decision like this up to the parents of a TS child will in the long haul end up hurting the child. The alternative is to make it possible for courts to put TS kids in foster care and allow them to take hormones. That can also end up messing up the kid. :-/

If I had the power to I would make it possible for the school nurse to administer hormones to such children for free w/o parental consent. By the time many parents notice the changes in the kids body it would be a done deal. At that point if the kid is thrown out of the house then the social services should kick in.

Why can't something like that be done?