Story: "Trans teen regrets his ‘Frankenstein’ transition."

  • Thread starter Thread starter mdgspencer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
They are mutilating a healthy body to make it conform to a belief of an individual that may not conform to reality.
Last I checked, the brain is part of the body. If there’s a disconnect between it, and the body, we do not have a healthy individual. You can’t take the body sans brain and just consider its apparent health in isolation. Medicine treats, or at least is supposed to treat, persons.

So yes if you amputate a healthy body part from a healthy individual, that would be a sin.

However, we are not dealing with healthy individuals.
 
Last edited:
However, we are not dealing with healthy individuals.
As you pointed out, the body is healthy.
The brain is not.

Yet the treatment is to mutilate the body instead of figure out and treat where the problem actually lies.
This is an error.
 
They are mutilating a healthy body to make it conform to a belief of an individual that may not conform to reality.
…”a belief of an individual“… I’m not sure there is any “belief” involved. There is a self-awareness that does not match their physical reality. The surgery (which must be very scary to contemplate) seems preferable to going on as they are. Think about that !
 
A parallel would be a doctor who recommends a lobotomy for severe mental disorders where their causes are not known. Seems just a tad irresponsible.
I’m not sure the recipients of lobotomies found them helpful, whereas a good proportion (but not all) have found the surgeries we’re talking about helpful.
 
TG activists try to get us to concede that TGism is a normal thing like blue eyes or black hair,
The German bishops recently stated (as per a translation) that homosexuality is “normal”. On closer examination, I think they mean that in the sense of “naturally occurring”. That much may be true for transgender cases.
However, we are also supposed to treat this as a medical problem, allowing TG people who desire surgery to get it under health insurance or government health services.

And we are also supposed to treat it as a psychological issue and not disturb TG people.

And all at the same time, we are also precluded from considering it a problem, because it is “normal,” and not look for sources of the problem,
Valid points. But let’s be careful to not brand all those who experience these problems as “activists”. And let’s also remember that the “desire” for surgery in severe cases is not merely on the level of a woman seeking breast enhancement.
 
Last edited:
I’m not sure there is any “belief” involved. There is a self-awareness that does not match their physical reality.
I am kind of curious how you could identify self awareness without a belief somewhere.
 
Yet the treatment is to mutilate the body instead of figure out and treat where the problem actually lies.
This is an error.
To not do what (at this time) cannot be done is not an error. It is a necessity! The treatment is the taking of what is judged by patient and medical advisors to be the best available option. Whether, for a given person, that is a good judgement, or a moral judgement, is open to debate.

If anybody suggests the causes of transgender issues/ dysphoria should not be researched - I’ll be the first to condemn them.
 
Last edited:
Yet the treatment is to mutilate the body instead of figure out and treat where the problem actually lies.
This is an error.
Scientists are trying to figure it out! What makes you think otherwise? The brain truly is the last frontier of medicine.

Until they do however, to just say to sufferers “too bad, so sad, here’s a length of rope” is simply unethical in its own right.

So, WPATH proposes a spectrum of treatments ranging from, basically, cross dressing and living in the opposite role part or full time, to hormone treatments, to surgery.

What would be unethical would be forcing surgery on those finding comfort and balance with a lesser intervention. It is not unethical to propose surgery for the more difficult cases.

And no, not all cases go to surgery. I know of trans people from the lowest level of intervention to the most extensive level.

I agree that not following WPATH standards (i.e. the “informed consent model) is inadequate and unethical.

I also believe not offering any treatment is unethical, as the treatments have proven effective in the majority of cases.

In case folks have forgotten, the teen in the OP’s article used the informed consent model. IMHO that is where the issue lies in that case. The patient was inadequately assessed. That is the ethical failing, not the notion of surgery to alleviate suffering.
 
Last edited:
And let’s also remember that the “desire” for surgery in severe cases
It is becoming more clear that this is not for “severe cases” anymore.
This mutilation is becoming more and more common.
Every month we can read in the news of another child being put through this.
 
Until they do however, to just say to sufferers “too bad, so sad, here’s a length of rope” is simply unethical in its own right.
Please identify within this thread where this has been said by anyone but yourself.
And then take your straw man and burn it down.

There is no place for logical errors within proper discourse.
 
It is becoming more clear that this is not for “severe cases” anymore.
This mutilation is becoming more and more common.
Every month we can read in the news of another child being put through this.
Yes, which is a great concern. I suspect we only get a small insight into each case.
 
Please identify within this thread where this has been said by anyone but yourself.
And then take your straw man and burn it down.
No straw man. By refusing to treat, you are de facto saying “it’s better to let them commit suicide than treating them”. Because so far no other treatment has proven effective. If anti-depressants, supportive psychological treatments etc. were effective, I’d say by all means use those instead. Problem is, they aren’t.
Every month we can read in the news of another child being put through this.
Speaking of straw men: I call nonsense. Show me one documented example where a child has had genital surgery by a board-certified (US) or fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons (Canada) other than to correct a birth defect.

The case in the OP’s article is not a child. He had is surgery after turning 18; the age of majority in my province. The age at which one could be drafted into the army in the US.

So again, I challenge you, give me an example of a child, receiving genital surgery for transgenderism. And not a child operated on by some hack in a foreign backwater: one operated on by a genuine board-certified or FRCS surgeon in Canada or the US.

For what it’s worth, the Standards of care say this:
Genital surgery should not be carried out until (i) patients reach the legal age of majority to give consent for medical procedures in a given country, and (ii) patients have lived continuously for at least 12 months in the gender role that is congruent with their gender identity. The age threshold should be seen as a minimum criterion and not an indication in and of itself for active intervention.
I also have to ask: are you in favour, or not, of parents electing to have their male children circumcised? Because that is the removal of a healthy part of the genitalia for absolutely no medical indication.
 
Last edited:
No straw man. By refusing to treat, you are de facto saying “it’s better to let them commit suicide than treating them”.
Produce it.
No one in this thread has ever advocated handing someone a rope.
This is a fantasy of your own creation, and is seriously eroding your credibility.
 
Produce it.
Google “transgender suicide rate”. However, here is an anecdotal case:
To our dismay, our daughter descended into a deep depression during high school and attempted suicide.
(see Transgender and Catholic: A parent’s perspective | U.S. Catholic)
No one in this thread has ever advocated handing someone a rope.
This is a fantasy of your own creation, and is seriously eroding your credibility.
Ok point taken. Let me rephrase it to de-dramatize it: “if you deny treatment to the transgendered, you might as well be saying ‘too bad, so sad, here’s a length of rope’ because suicide would be the result in many cases”.
It seems really odd that what you would describe as life saving must wait for a legal age of consent.
Makes some wonder if this treatment is really the necessity you claim.
Straw man: where have I said it was necessary in every case? In any event with a child/teen, at least giving a correct diagnosis and providing supportive treatment and allowing them to live in their gender role gives them hope that there’s a pathway forward. Your suggestion would cut off all hope of treatment.
 
Ok point taken. Let me rephrase it to de-dramatize it: “if you deny treatment to the transgendered, you might as well be saying ‘too bad, so sad, here’s a length of rope’ because suicide would be the result in many cases”.
And now you have to find in this thread people advocating doing nothing.
It may take some time for you to review all 300 plus responses, but go ahead. Find it.

It is time to dispose of these straw men you keep trying to fight with.
 
where have I said it was necessary in every case ?
You are the one here that has continually pushed this “treatment” as necessary. Going so far as to actually call it a “gender confirmation” instead of what it actually is.

If you want to scale back now, go ahead.
But he advised, scaled back or not, the argument crumbles in the face of actual logic and morality.
 
And now you have to find in this thread people advocating doing nothing.
What effective treatment to you advocate?

When you come up with something effective, please let us know. I’ll be all for it.
 
40.png
OraLabora:
Ok point taken. Let me rephrase it to de-dramatize it: “if you deny treatment to the transgendered, you might as well be saying ‘too bad, so sad, here’s a length of rope’ because suicide would be the result in many cases”.
And now you have to find in this thread people advocating doing nothing.
It may take some time for you to review all 300 plus responses, but go ahead. Find it.

It is time to dispose of these straw men you keep trying to fight with.
You and others, however, while not saying that nothing should be done, also don’t offer any specific alternative treatment that should be used. Instead, vague statements are said such as that doctors should “figure out and treat where the problem actually lies.” That, of course, has been attempted in the past without success and efforts in that direction are still being done. But since there isn’t any effective brain/psychological treatment available now, nothing has been said about what should be done for patients in the meantime.
 
Last edited:
Ok point taken. Let me rephrase it to de-dramatize it: “if you deny treatment to the transgendered, you might as well be saying ‘too bad, so sad, here’s a length of rope’ because suicide would be the result in many cases”.
I’ll see if I can find it, but a study I read no too long ago keeps sticking out in my mind. The gist was that there really isn’t a large drop in the suicide rate pre- and post- transition. It was conducted in Sweden, iirc, which I found interesting as it’s known to be a rather liberal and “open/tolerant” country. If this is the case, then it seems there may be underlying issues beyond simply wanting to change sex/gender, in which case, pushing someone toward surgery may not be helping them at all either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top