There seems to be something incongruous in the gender dysphoria suicide risk as it relates to the realities of childhood suicides in Australia:
Australia’s ‘Children’s Research Institute’ website estimates that approximately 1.2% of Australian school children (approx. 45,000) identify as trans. I have searched extensively for statistics on the number of Australian childhood suicides associated with gender dysphoria but cannot find a single reference.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics quotes the age-specific death rate for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander child suicide is 8.3 deaths per 100,000, translating as approximately 4 per 45,000.
It is interesting to note there is a highly publicised group said to be at great risk of suicide (with either few or no documented cases) undergoing an experimental, irreversible, sterilising and mutilating procedures to address mental health challenges. Meanwhile, it seems there is little public awareness being raised of another group of children with well documented horrific rates of suicide..
If childhood suicide prevention is the primary concern then they’ve picked the wrong cohort!
Another question is whether the ideologues that pushed this harm will be allowed to move on to their next project of denying science in the name of social revolution. Given that the harms done are so egregious, I wonder if there could be some form of truth and reconciliation that might take place to identify the causes of this fiasco and how to prevent it in the future.
Here's one idea. I'm not an MD and have no knowledge of the training aspiring clinicians go through, but a full semester course on the egregious errors of medicine in the past, along with training not just in the tools of science but in the character of science itself as distinguished from the multitudinous forms of pseudo-science, would be a great addition. One idea might be to craft a semester long course for beginning MD students in lessons learned from past horrific departures from the standards of evidence-based medicine. Given the responsibility to "first do no harm", and the false but understandable assumption that because one has taken a course in statistics and research design they therefore must know all about science, this could be a big help. On the other hand, how to test the long term efficacy of such a course in preventing such terrible and avoidable treatment of the most vulnerable of citizens as is currently taking place, would be an important question. We can't wait for the next generation of gender ideologues to chop up more children.
At least I suppose the billion-dollar lawsuits coming down the pike might have a salutory effect.
Lee, a response might be to require all technical students, such as scientists and engineers to undertake courses in humanities and social science. The principle could be applied to students of gender studies and other social sciences, requiring them to interact with behavioral biologists. How else can gender studies and social science in general become engaged in the larger world of science? Without such interaction between the two, the reputation of truth and reason will remain to be claimed as an equally legitimate position i.e., the definition of Cultural/ Moral Relativism, that being the embrace of all “ truths” as having equal and unassailable legitimacy. When taken further to Absolute Relativism, this is where only one “ truth”pertains, the other, not only wrong, but regarded as “ evil”. This is core Marxist theory
Unfortunately the bioethics I see touching on gender medicine, where you might hope to see the helpful influence of the humanities, almost always manages to conclude that medical intervention with minors is ethical.
Bernard, you have put your finger on the core conundrum, that being the inexplicable capture of so many key clinicians by a social science ideology. These folk have , western world wide , managed to have bluffed their academic institutions, government regulatory bodies and legislators into quiet collusion. They doubtless exhibit genuinely felt compassion for their patients but those of us , unable to find the same capacity to embrace such repudiation of Truth and Reason, inherit to their position, who remain left feeling somewhat stranded in to be able to be supportive of medical intervention , importantly and specifically in minors , are left , incredulous and continue to find it difficult to obtain a safe space to be able express caution and concern without risking career retribution or personal vilification. Having retired from practice I have no such personal fears but have a sense of gratitude for the privilege afforded me over the years to have gained the trust of my patients and that sense of gratitude, one would hope to be the factor which will ultimately see an articulation of a challenge and confrontation of what can only be described as what has been a stain on my profession, inflicted by a relatively small but powerful and vocal subset of clinicians who have been better organized and prepared to fight harder. We are in trouble and the beast just gets stronger, left unchallenged
Another great article that is well researched but watch the smoke and mirrors as the mainstream media jumps up and down and points at Westmead following the 4 corners segment containing zero coherent evidence and ignores the actual story with actual evidence. Well done Bernard - great article!
• Another long term study from Sweden also found that gender-dysphoric individuals who received hormones and/or surgery did not have lower rates of serious suicide attempts compared to gender-dysphoric individuals who received no medical transition services. In fact, the data for the post-surgical gender-dysphoric individuals suggest a doubling of serious suicide attempts when compared to the gender-dysphoric individuals who did not obtain surgery.
• These observations suggest that not only is the suicide narrative, frequent to justify medically transitioning minors, is greatly exaggerated, but that medical gender transition is not an effective suicide-prevention measure. The results also suggest that treatment should focus on better control of co-occurring psychiatric illness and on evidence-based suicide-prevention measures in particular for individuals deemed at high risk for suicide.
• Nearly half (43%) of trans-identified individuals had at least one psychiatric illness in addition to gender dysphoria, compared with 7% of the general population. This finding deserves careful consideration as psychiatric illness is a key contributor to suicide
There seems to be something incongruous in the gender dysphoria suicide risk as it relates to the realities of childhood suicides in Australia:
Australia’s ‘Children’s Research Institute’ website estimates that approximately 1.2% of Australian school children (approx. 45,000) identify as trans. I have searched extensively for statistics on the number of Australian childhood suicides associated with gender dysphoria but cannot find a single reference.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics quotes the age-specific death rate for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander child suicide is 8.3 deaths per 100,000, translating as approximately 4 per 45,000.
It is interesting to note there is a highly publicised group said to be at great risk of suicide (with either few or no documented cases) undergoing an experimental, irreversible, sterilising and mutilating procedures to address mental health challenges. Meanwhile, it seems there is little public awareness being raised of another group of children with well documented horrific rates of suicide..
If childhood suicide prevention is the primary concern then they’ve picked the wrong cohort!
But still we persist in following the flawed RCH guidelines in Australia.
Multiple reviews have debunked the main evidence base( the Dutch studies)
When is the RACP going to admit its mistake in endorsing the RCH guidelines?
How many more children are going to be harmed in this country before we come to our senses?
Without the fig leaf of the RCH guidelines, gender clinics will be exposed, I guess.
Another question is whether the ideologues that pushed this harm will be allowed to move on to their next project of denying science in the name of social revolution. Given that the harms done are so egregious, I wonder if there could be some form of truth and reconciliation that might take place to identify the causes of this fiasco and how to prevent it in the future.
Here's one idea. I'm not an MD and have no knowledge of the training aspiring clinicians go through, but a full semester course on the egregious errors of medicine in the past, along with training not just in the tools of science but in the character of science itself as distinguished from the multitudinous forms of pseudo-science, would be a great addition. One idea might be to craft a semester long course for beginning MD students in lessons learned from past horrific departures from the standards of evidence-based medicine. Given the responsibility to "first do no harm", and the false but understandable assumption that because one has taken a course in statistics and research design they therefore must know all about science, this could be a big help. On the other hand, how to test the long term efficacy of such a course in preventing such terrible and avoidable treatment of the most vulnerable of citizens as is currently taking place, would be an important question. We can't wait for the next generation of gender ideologues to chop up more children.
At least I suppose the billion-dollar lawsuits coming down the pike might have a salutory effect.
BTW, sorry to respond to my own post!
Lee, a response might be to require all technical students, such as scientists and engineers to undertake courses in humanities and social science. The principle could be applied to students of gender studies and other social sciences, requiring them to interact with behavioral biologists. How else can gender studies and social science in general become engaged in the larger world of science? Without such interaction between the two, the reputation of truth and reason will remain to be claimed as an equally legitimate position i.e., the definition of Cultural/ Moral Relativism, that being the embrace of all “ truths” as having equal and unassailable legitimacy. When taken further to Absolute Relativism, this is where only one “ truth”pertains, the other, not only wrong, but regarded as “ evil”. This is core Marxist theory
Unfortunately the bioethics I see touching on gender medicine, where you might hope to see the helpful influence of the humanities, almost always manages to conclude that medical intervention with minors is ethical.
Bernard, you have put your finger on the core conundrum, that being the inexplicable capture of so many key clinicians by a social science ideology. These folk have , western world wide , managed to have bluffed their academic institutions, government regulatory bodies and legislators into quiet collusion. They doubtless exhibit genuinely felt compassion for their patients but those of us , unable to find the same capacity to embrace such repudiation of Truth and Reason, inherit to their position, who remain left feeling somewhat stranded in to be able to be supportive of medical intervention , importantly and specifically in minors , are left , incredulous and continue to find it difficult to obtain a safe space to be able express caution and concern without risking career retribution or personal vilification. Having retired from practice I have no such personal fears but have a sense of gratitude for the privilege afforded me over the years to have gained the trust of my patients and that sense of gratitude, one would hope to be the factor which will ultimately see an articulation of a challenge and confrontation of what can only be described as what has been a stain on my profession, inflicted by a relatively small but powerful and vocal subset of clinicians who have been better organized and prepared to fight harder. We are in trouble and the beast just gets stronger, left unchallenged
Another great article that is well researched but watch the smoke and mirrors as the mainstream media jumps up and down and points at Westmead following the 4 corners segment containing zero coherent evidence and ignores the actual story with actual evidence. Well done Bernard - great article!
Thanks!
Pleading tolerance, I submit another comment: An interesting article in JAMA titled:
Transgender Identity and Suicide Attempts and Mortality in Denmark
JAMA. 2023;329(24):2145-2153. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.8627
A few of the salient points contained therein:
• Another long term study from Sweden also found that gender-dysphoric individuals who received hormones and/or surgery did not have lower rates of serious suicide attempts compared to gender-dysphoric individuals who received no medical transition services. In fact, the data for the post-surgical gender-dysphoric individuals suggest a doubling of serious suicide attempts when compared to the gender-dysphoric individuals who did not obtain surgery.
• These observations suggest that not only is the suicide narrative, frequent to justify medically transitioning minors, is greatly exaggerated, but that medical gender transition is not an effective suicide-prevention measure. The results also suggest that treatment should focus on better control of co-occurring psychiatric illness and on evidence-based suicide-prevention measures in particular for individuals deemed at high risk for suicide.
• Nearly half (43%) of trans-identified individuals had at least one psychiatric illness in addition to gender dysphoria, compared with 7% of the general population. This finding deserves careful consideration as psychiatric illness is a key contributor to suicide
thanks for the reminder, Vincent.
I saw reference to this study & meant to read it.
B