A critical subset of medical practitioners ( child and adolescent psychiatrists, paediatricians, paediatric endocrinologists) inexplicably totally captured by the dominant subset of “ Health Professionals “, viz., social scientists./ psychologists. What better example of the woke being prepared to “fight harder, and to take no prisoners “?
These activists have been able to capture the relevant medical colleges, the regulatory body AHPRA, and the ( lay, so somewhat excused) legislators. Whenever this nightmare unravels, the social costs ( to so many young folk) and the processional medical reputational costs will be beyond estimate.
This nonsense is the antithesis of science and common sense It is a corruption of the ethics and ideals of the disciplines that should be held sacred in medicine.
As I have stated previously in this forum:
Virtually every principle enshrined in medical practice to ensure safety and efficacy has been ignored in the field of gender medicine.
Children diagnosed with GD are offered off-label hormones as a precursor to irreversible genital mutilation and sterilisation.
Normal circumstance would demand an immediate cessation of such an invasive process pending confirmation of positive outcome via an appropriate clinical trial.
Not so! The absurd notion that changing girls into boys and boys into girls is lifesaving thereby sidelining scrutiny in the rush ‘get it done and save a life’.
We have ventured into a brave new world where the rules don’t hold and its pioneers are applauded as brave and noble.
This account accurately reflects my experience attending the AusPATH Conference in 2019: a melange of pseudo-science masquerading as research, shared among an unquestioning group of ideologues. I had attended as an observer to deepen my knowledge of the trans phenomenon, as I work to support schools managing the needs of trans children, but I was refused membership of AusPATH because my unquestioning acceptance of the affirmation model could not be guaranteed. So much for an open and objective search for truth.
BTW I did learn how deeply the affirmation model leans on Critical Psychology - a clinical misuse of an otherwise important epistemic theory. When I realised that this is the intellectual foundation of the trans narrative, I came to believe that the whole trans edifice has no solid foundation.
Bernard, you did well to get hold of this article. Not many surprises to me, though maybe many for the general public. One surprise for me was the perception that governments are hostile to the transing movement, I thought Aussie federal and state governments were very much in support.
And big thanks to the author for giving up her precious time and for sharing this. I hope the emotional labour involved didn't cause her to resort to the beanbag room at any point.
I often wonder this. If your commitment is to queering and transgression and to the prioritisation of identitarian viewpoints over solid scholarship then anything really does go. Everything has validity within its own framework and is worthy of consideration. By these measures science, medicine and evidence based procedures are only as important as the "newly emerging field of trans epistemology". No wonder transactivism is a form of bullying when the only rational explanation for much of what happens at the Auspath conference and in the development of guidelines (Bernard's recent article about my analysis of the PATHA) is 'because we say so'. At the recent Genspect webinar this was described as a scientistic, rather than a scientific view by Simon Tegg in a piece of insightful analysis of the way New Zealand's 11* higher rate than the UK is portrayed not as a scandal but as responding to a need.
I would like to know more about this 48% survey. Adam Bandt (Greens leader) mentions this on his website. 48% will suicide if they don't transition etc. I found this since posting. https://www.transgendertrend.com/the-suicide-myth/
"It was recommended that health professionals tell parents that 48 per cent of trans youth have attempted suicide—a statistic from a low-quality online survey—and that the single biggest risk to their child would be a lack of parental support in transition. This approach was described as “empowering” parents to effectively stop their child committing suicide, and not acknowledged as emotional blackmail." --- note the Baker et al 2021 evidence review comissioned in part by WPATH: https://academic.oup.com/jes/article/5/4/bvab011/6126016
"We could not draw any conclusions about death by suicide." (They rated the evidence on this issue "insufficient."
And this is exactly right.
We often speak of institutional capture, but it hits differently when you see it. AusPATH did not present as a healthcare professionals’ organisation using its expertise for advocacy; it presented as an advocacy organisation using its healthcare credentials for ideology.
This is beyond institutional capture, this is a cult.
A critical subset of medical practitioners ( child and adolescent psychiatrists, paediatricians, paediatric endocrinologists) inexplicably totally captured by the dominant subset of “ Health Professionals “, viz., social scientists./ psychologists. What better example of the woke being prepared to “fight harder, and to take no prisoners “?
These activists have been able to capture the relevant medical colleges, the regulatory body AHPRA, and the ( lay, so somewhat excused) legislators. Whenever this nightmare unravels, the social costs ( to so many young folk) and the processional medical reputational costs will be beyond estimate.
This nonsense is the antithesis of science and common sense It is a corruption of the ethics and ideals of the disciplines that should be held sacred in medicine.
As I have stated previously in this forum:
Virtually every principle enshrined in medical practice to ensure safety and efficacy has been ignored in the field of gender medicine.
Children diagnosed with GD are offered off-label hormones as a precursor to irreversible genital mutilation and sterilisation.
Normal circumstance would demand an immediate cessation of such an invasive process pending confirmation of positive outcome via an appropriate clinical trial.
Not so! The absurd notion that changing girls into boys and boys into girls is lifesaving thereby sidelining scrutiny in the rush ‘get it done and save a life’.
We have ventured into a brave new world where the rules don’t hold and its pioneers are applauded as brave and noble.
This account accurately reflects my experience attending the AusPATH Conference in 2019: a melange of pseudo-science masquerading as research, shared among an unquestioning group of ideologues. I had attended as an observer to deepen my knowledge of the trans phenomenon, as I work to support schools managing the needs of trans children, but I was refused membership of AusPATH because my unquestioning acceptance of the affirmation model could not be guaranteed. So much for an open and objective search for truth.
BTW I did learn how deeply the affirmation model leans on Critical Psychology - a clinical misuse of an otherwise important epistemic theory. When I realised that this is the intellectual foundation of the trans narrative, I came to believe that the whole trans edifice has no solid foundation.
Bernard, you did well to get hold of this article. Not many surprises to me, though maybe many for the general public. One surprise for me was the perception that governments are hostile to the transing movement, I thought Aussie federal and state governments were very much in support.
And big thanks to the author for giving up her precious time and for sharing this. I hope the emotional labour involved didn't cause her to resort to the beanbag room at any point.
I often wonder this. If your commitment is to queering and transgression and to the prioritisation of identitarian viewpoints over solid scholarship then anything really does go. Everything has validity within its own framework and is worthy of consideration. By these measures science, medicine and evidence based procedures are only as important as the "newly emerging field of trans epistemology". No wonder transactivism is a form of bullying when the only rational explanation for much of what happens at the Auspath conference and in the development of guidelines (Bernard's recent article about my analysis of the PATHA) is 'because we say so'. At the recent Genspect webinar this was described as a scientistic, rather than a scientific view by Simon Tegg in a piece of insightful analysis of the way New Zealand's 11* higher rate than the UK is portrayed not as a scandal but as responding to a need.
I would like to know more about this 48% survey. Adam Bandt (Greens leader) mentions this on his website. 48% will suicide if they don't transition etc. I found this since posting. https://www.transgendertrend.com/the-suicide-myth/
This is criminal:
"It was recommended that health professionals tell parents that 48 per cent of trans youth have attempted suicide—a statistic from a low-quality online survey—and that the single biggest risk to their child would be a lack of parental support in transition. This approach was described as “empowering” parents to effectively stop their child committing suicide, and not acknowledged as emotional blackmail." --- note the Baker et al 2021 evidence review comissioned in part by WPATH: https://academic.oup.com/jes/article/5/4/bvab011/6126016
"We could not draw any conclusions about death by suicide." (They rated the evidence on this issue "insufficient."
And this is exactly right.
We often speak of institutional capture, but it hits differently when you see it. AusPATH did not present as a healthcare professionals’ organisation using its expertise for advocacy; it presented as an advocacy organisation using its healthcare credentials for ideology.
Thank you!
“ professional reputational”costs