One quibble. "Gender dysphoria" is the older term, current since the early 1970s, a euphemism for transsexualism. "Gender identity disorder" is the newer, now discarded, term, and moreover it described a different set of indications from gender dysphoria.
It's irrelevant whether one term was or was not used in a DSM edition. The DSM is hardly an authority on such things, and did not even address such syndromes until the 1980s. The DSM is merely a guide for the layman or nonspecialist GP.
Hi Meg, my understanding is that Gender Identity Disorder predated Gender Dysphoria, with the shift happening in 2013. It’s true that activists seek to further “depathologise” trans by arguing no diagnosis should be necessary for treatment, but there are contexts in which diagnosis is not an academic question.
In Australia, public children’s hospitals & government ministers defend hormonal interventions with children on the basis that these children have a recognised medical diagnosis, gender dysphoria.
These authorities are sensitive to the question: what exactly is it that you are treating? Is this medicine or something else?
Bernard, reflecting on your concluding two questions, given the powerful position attained by those advocating unchallenging GAC , as demonstrated in the real risk of career retribution ( Jillian Spencer... and who knows how many others?) or punitive legislation for active non compliance by miscreants , we can only remain totally gob smacked to see how this social science led ideology has so captured so many key positioned medical professionals , and to have bluffed relevant medical colleges and even the statutory regulatory body of AHPRA. This road to hell has certainly been paved with good intentions... to my profession’s shame. It will take future legislators to become aware that , intuitively, an overwhelming majority of Child and Adolescent psychiatrists, paediatric endocrinologists and general paediatricians are appalled by their “ leaders”. How do future legislators become aware of how captured their predecessors remain?
I believe the fancy term is "preference falsification". As under authoritarian regimes, those opposed to it feel isolated & are careful not to express their prohibited opinions. It's difficult to predict what will release these opinions. During the unravelling of the Soviet bloc, it was sometimes the death of a peaceful protestor leading to many more people turning out for protests. At some point, those who felt isolated realise they are actually the majority. The Keira Bell case, I think, was one such trigger. There will be more ahead.
Bernard in regards to “ those who felt ( currently, feel) isolated realise they are actually the majority “ are in need of a voice. U.Q. Medical school once hosted a focus on EBM ( evidence based medicine), lead by the late Chris Del Mar. Chris’ group moved from UQ medical faculty, to Bond University, some years ago. From my past personal contact , via collaborations between Chris’ group and Brisbane North Division of General Practice, with which I was then active, with Chris,
I once fantasized that an approach to that group might stimulate some challenge to the “ issue”, perhaps enough to provide the evidence to see encouragement of political championing for protection of future vulnerable children. Unfortunately with Chris’
I guess what I am trying to say is that it will take some medical profession’s championship to convince future ( lay) politicians to act. An academic EBM unit might have been a powerful such champion? Where else to turn?
One quibble. "Gender dysphoria" is the older term, current since the early 1970s, a euphemism for transsexualism. "Gender identity disorder" is the newer, now discarded, term, and moreover it described a different set of indications from gender dysphoria.
It's irrelevant whether one term was or was not used in a DSM edition. The DSM is hardly an authority on such things, and did not even address such syndromes until the 1980s. The DSM is merely a guide for the layman or nonspecialist GP.
This paper touches on the debate about the significance of shifts in DSM diagnosis ---
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8039393/
Hi Meg, my understanding is that Gender Identity Disorder predated Gender Dysphoria, with the shift happening in 2013. It’s true that activists seek to further “depathologise” trans by arguing no diagnosis should be necessary for treatment, but there are contexts in which diagnosis is not an academic question.
In Australia, public children’s hospitals & government ministers defend hormonal interventions with children on the basis that these children have a recognised medical diagnosis, gender dysphoria.
These authorities are sensitive to the question: what exactly is it that you are treating? Is this medicine or something else?
Bernard, reflecting on your concluding two questions, given the powerful position attained by those advocating unchallenging GAC , as demonstrated in the real risk of career retribution ( Jillian Spencer... and who knows how many others?) or punitive legislation for active non compliance by miscreants , we can only remain totally gob smacked to see how this social science led ideology has so captured so many key positioned medical professionals , and to have bluffed relevant medical colleges and even the statutory regulatory body of AHPRA. This road to hell has certainly been paved with good intentions... to my profession’s shame. It will take future legislators to become aware that , intuitively, an overwhelming majority of Child and Adolescent psychiatrists, paediatric endocrinologists and general paediatricians are appalled by their “ leaders”. How do future legislators become aware of how captured their predecessors remain?
I believe the fancy term is "preference falsification". As under authoritarian regimes, those opposed to it feel isolated & are careful not to express their prohibited opinions. It's difficult to predict what will release these opinions. During the unravelling of the Soviet bloc, it was sometimes the death of a peaceful protestor leading to many more people turning out for protests. At some point, those who felt isolated realise they are actually the majority. The Keira Bell case, I think, was one such trigger. There will be more ahead.
Bernard in regards to “ those who felt ( currently, feel) isolated realise they are actually the majority “ are in need of a voice. U.Q. Medical school once hosted a focus on EBM ( evidence based medicine), lead by the late Chris Del Mar. Chris’ group moved from UQ medical faculty, to Bond University, some years ago. From my past personal contact , via collaborations between Chris’ group and Brisbane North Division of General Practice, with which I was then active, with Chris,
I once fantasized that an approach to that group might stimulate some challenge to the “ issue”, perhaps enough to provide the evidence to see encouragement of political championing for protection of future vulnerable children. Unfortunately with Chris’
The loss of Chris’ leadership, that became a lost cause. Perhaps such a group would have been, even then, captured by the appropriate colleges?
Water under the bridge, but I feel sure Chris would have relished the challenge!
I guess what I am trying to say is that it will take some medical profession’s championship to convince future ( lay) politicians to act. An academic EBM unit might have been a powerful such champion? Where else to turn?