Pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence can be terrible problem for women, mostly a consequence of childbirth. Prolapse can cause, among other conditions, pain, dyspareunia and urinary incontinence.
A device developed in Australia in the 1980’s and 90’s, referred to as 'pelvic mesh' or 'sling' was inserted surgically in the pelvic floor to address the problem.
Although no clinical trials were undertaken the device was approved by the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and subsequently was used globally, including extensively in the United States.
It took some time but problems began to appear among women thus treated. This included: migration of the mesh with invasion of the vaginal wall and other organ structures, severe dyspareunia, incontinence and intractable pain. The problem was enhanced by the fact that the mesh migration and scarred with pelvic tissue making it very difficult to remove.
The (TGA) banned pelvic mesh implants in November 2017.
More that 8 Billions of dollars in lawsuits followed and many women remain permanently damaged.
It is not at al unrealistic to predict the future of those promoting and implementing the ‘Affirmative Model’ of gender care, although they cannot claim that the 'model' had received TGA approval.
Thanks so much for your excellent analogy, Vincent. Alas, there are so many examples of the hasty and ill considered application of medical "innovations" that harm people irreparably.
Thanks Dianna. I suspect that those involved in this dreadful process, where young people, heavily burdened with mental health conditions undergo irreversible sterilising and mutilating procedures that have not undergone any study to confirm safety and efficacy will result in a lawyers picnic, where the massive lawsuits involved in the ‘Pelvic Mesh’ debacle will be peanuts in comparison.
And yet, the Family and Federal Circuit Court of Australia is still over-riding parental objection to the commencement of cross sex hormones and deciding that children of 15-16 years of age are competent to make their own decisions on the matter. The institutional capture of medicine, the law and education is appalling. Perhaps the law suits can extend to the legal profession and the courts, and to schools who tell 5-6 year olds that boys can be girls and girls can be boys.
Dianna Kenny participated in the NAPP hosted webinar with Hillary Cass last year. Of all the Australian members of the panel in the later discussion, she ,as a psychologist, gave the most direct and clear tactics to confront G.A.C. , the other , medical practitioner on the discussion panel participated relatively timidity, by comparison, I thought.
Thanks Dianna, you're insights and courage are exemplary. Who would have thought that so many scientists, psychologists and physicians would abandon the epistimological positions of their own field and fall into contagion and gender woo. I suppose you of all people would understand that this is the nature of things but why are so few, particularly older people who were privileged to live in a sane world their whole lives, able to speak reason and help young people in a time of need?
It is certainly refreshing to read that some sanity is returning to discussion of this issue... and more people being prepared to confirm epistemological and biological truth about the nature of human sexuality.
Say what you will about the man but this seems like a wise move:
Donald Trump has signed an executive order stripping federal funding from schools that allow transgender girls and women, whose sex at birth was male, to participate in female sports events in schools and colleges.
I fully support the executive order's objectives. I just hope that no court ever declares trans people to be a constitutionally protected class like blacks or gay people, because that could make it impossible to roll back this abusive aspect of the trans agenda and others.
Rather than pass laws prohibiting "affirming" care treatments for gender dysphoria, legislation should clearly spell out what constitutes "informed consent," including the lack of data to determine treatment efficacy and data which challenges the efficacy of these treatments. The protocol for follow-up should also be specified, and the statute of limitations for malpractice suits brought on the basis of lack of informed consent should be extended to 20 years past the age of majority.
Informed consent is a flawed idea when it comes to mutilating children. No child or even adolescent can give consent to treatments with the lifelong consequences of GAC because they have neither the cognitive maturity nor life experience to be fully informed. Young people should not have to be their own gatekeepers or safe guarders.
Wouldn’t it be interesting to hear the euphemistic term “ mature minor” to be challenged in court , were “ informed consent “ to be required to be defended. Surly it would be left stranded as the oxymoron it is.
The point of the informed consent legislation would be to ensure prospective "affirming care" patients are given the most current information available on possible outcomes and results of research on effectiveness. There is no downside to these requirements and little chance they could be successfully challenged in court. One consequence would be that companies issuing malpractice insurance would be more likely to decline to cover medical practitioners offering affirming treatment.
..the brain isn’t fully developed until at least 25 or 26. How many truly mature young adults do you know that can honestly process the ‘information’ given on ‘informed’ consent. And by that stage, any ‘treatment’ becomes an elective & cosmetic procedure imo. I don’t think it should ever be an option, doesn’t cure a thing.
I agree. Anyone under 18 can never ‘consent ‘to this damaging ‘treatment’. In the same way that anyone under 16 can never ‘consent’ to sexual activity.
When evolution is mentioned as the causal affect of the sex differences between men and women it becomes easier to then move to saying as the proponents of gender affirming care, using ‘gender’ instead of sex and then telling theses children that somehow evolution made mistakes.
As a Christian I believe God created us male and female and in His image. Much more comforting than using evolution as a causal factor for social convention.
I’m very impressed, flawlessly constructed argument and irrefutable conclusion.
The extra examples beyond lobotomy of iatrogenic harm are quickly deployed and good shocks. The “pause” on puberty is impossible, puberty lasts from onset in males around 10-12 years and halts around 18-20, possibly longer neurologically. I’ve been scratching my head to give a good analogy - usually “the train has left the station”… if you halt puberty at 15 it stops at 20, it doesn’t extend another 5 years, you’ve lost 5. I wish someone with your explanatory skills can correct the word - pause - it is a deletion, a sterilizing, a stunting.
If you block vision in one eye during a critical period, the eye will never have vision.
If you block puberty during a critical period, the child will never develop sexually, ever.
Pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence can be terrible problem for women, mostly a consequence of childbirth. Prolapse can cause, among other conditions, pain, dyspareunia and urinary incontinence.
A device developed in Australia in the 1980’s and 90’s, referred to as 'pelvic mesh' or 'sling' was inserted surgically in the pelvic floor to address the problem.
Although no clinical trials were undertaken the device was approved by the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and subsequently was used globally, including extensively in the United States.
It took some time but problems began to appear among women thus treated. This included: migration of the mesh with invasion of the vaginal wall and other organ structures, severe dyspareunia, incontinence and intractable pain. The problem was enhanced by the fact that the mesh migration and scarred with pelvic tissue making it very difficult to remove.
The (TGA) banned pelvic mesh implants in November 2017.
More that 8 Billions of dollars in lawsuits followed and many women remain permanently damaged.
It is not at al unrealistic to predict the future of those promoting and implementing the ‘Affirmative Model’ of gender care, although they cannot claim that the 'model' had received TGA approval.
Thanks so much for your excellent analogy, Vincent. Alas, there are so many examples of the hasty and ill considered application of medical "innovations" that harm people irreparably.
Thanks Dianna. I suspect that those involved in this dreadful process, where young people, heavily burdened with mental health conditions undergo irreversible sterilising and mutilating procedures that have not undergone any study to confirm safety and efficacy will result in a lawyers picnic, where the massive lawsuits involved in the ‘Pelvic Mesh’ debacle will be peanuts in comparison.
And yet, the Family and Federal Circuit Court of Australia is still over-riding parental objection to the commencement of cross sex hormones and deciding that children of 15-16 years of age are competent to make their own decisions on the matter. The institutional capture of medicine, the law and education is appalling. Perhaps the law suits can extend to the legal profession and the courts, and to schools who tell 5-6 year olds that boys can be girls and girls can be boys.
Dianna Kenny participated in the NAPP hosted webinar with Hillary Cass last year. Of all the Australian members of the panel in the later discussion, she ,as a psychologist, gave the most direct and clear tactics to confront G.A.C. , the other , medical practitioner on the discussion panel participated relatively timidity, by comparison, I thought.
Thank you, Andrew!
Thanks Dianna, you're insights and courage are exemplary. Who would have thought that so many scientists, psychologists and physicians would abandon the epistimological positions of their own field and fall into contagion and gender woo. I suppose you of all people would understand that this is the nature of things but why are so few, particularly older people who were privileged to live in a sane world their whole lives, able to speak reason and help young people in a time of need?
Eloquently stated, Heterodork!
It is certainly refreshing to read that some sanity is returning to discussion of this issue... and more people being prepared to confirm epistemological and biological truth about the nature of human sexuality.
Say what you will about the man but this seems like a wise move:
Donald Trump has signed an executive order stripping federal funding from schools that allow transgender girls and women, whose sex at birth was male, to participate in female sports events in schools and colleges.
I fully support the executive order's objectives. I just hope that no court ever declares trans people to be a constitutionally protected class like blacks or gay people, because that could make it impossible to roll back this abusive aspect of the trans agenda and others.
Rather than pass laws prohibiting "affirming" care treatments for gender dysphoria, legislation should clearly spell out what constitutes "informed consent," including the lack of data to determine treatment efficacy and data which challenges the efficacy of these treatments. The protocol for follow-up should also be specified, and the statute of limitations for malpractice suits brought on the basis of lack of informed consent should be extended to 20 years past the age of majority.
Informed consent is a flawed idea when it comes to mutilating children. No child or even adolescent can give consent to treatments with the lifelong consequences of GAC because they have neither the cognitive maturity nor life experience to be fully informed. Young people should not have to be their own gatekeepers or safe guarders.
Wouldn’t it be interesting to hear the euphemistic term “ mature minor” to be challenged in court , were “ informed consent “ to be required to be defended. Surly it would be left stranded as the oxymoron it is.
The point of the informed consent legislation would be to ensure prospective "affirming care" patients are given the most current information available on possible outcomes and results of research on effectiveness. There is no downside to these requirements and little chance they could be successfully challenged in court. One consequence would be that companies issuing malpractice insurance would be more likely to decline to cover medical practitioners offering affirming treatment.
Informed consent is the issue of the moment. Considering the events of the last four years.
..the brain isn’t fully developed until at least 25 or 26. How many truly mature young adults do you know that can honestly process the ‘information’ given on ‘informed’ consent. And by that stage, any ‘treatment’ becomes an elective & cosmetic procedure imo. I don’t think it should ever be an option, doesn’t cure a thing.
I agree. Anyone under 18 can never ‘consent ‘to this damaging ‘treatment’. In the same way that anyone under 16 can never ‘consent’ to sexual activity.
When evolution is mentioned as the causal affect of the sex differences between men and women it becomes easier to then move to saying as the proponents of gender affirming care, using ‘gender’ instead of sex and then telling theses children that somehow evolution made mistakes.
As a Christian I believe God created us male and female and in His image. Much more comforting than using evolution as a causal factor for social convention.
medical practitioners
I’m very impressed, flawlessly constructed argument and irrefutable conclusion.
The extra examples beyond lobotomy of iatrogenic harm are quickly deployed and good shocks. The “pause” on puberty is impossible, puberty lasts from onset in males around 10-12 years and halts around 18-20, possibly longer neurologically. I’ve been scratching my head to give a good analogy - usually “the train has left the station”… if you halt puberty at 15 it stops at 20, it doesn’t extend another 5 years, you’ve lost 5. I wish someone with your explanatory skills can correct the word - pause - it is a deletion, a sterilizing, a stunting.
If you block vision in one eye during a critical period, the eye will never have vision.
If you block puberty during a critical period, the child will never develop sexually, ever.
Anyway, great piece.