By Alliance Defending Freedom
The American Society of Plastic Surgeons argued that ‘genital surgical interventions’ have not been proven an effective solution to adolescent gender dysphoria, adding that current ‘research’ backing medical intervention is of ‘low quality/low certainty.’
One of the most effective weapons that proponents of radical gender ideology have wielded in support of their cause has been “consensus.”
When pressed to explain how blocking a young boy’s puberty or removing a teenage girl’s healthy breasts provide any medical or mental benefit, they often cite “experts” or refer to a “consensus” of medical organizations and government agencies.
But there’s a problem with that strategy.
Recent research has shown the glaring flaws in the argument that transition drugs and procedures are appropriate or helpful for minors. European countries that had once embraced “gender affirming care” for minors, including the U.K., have begun to reverse these policies.
While American medical organizations and governments have been slow to respond, recent developments indicate that may be changing.
Earlier this year, City Journal reported that the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) had not signed on to “any organization’s practice recommendations for the treatment of adolescents with gender dysphoria.”
ASPS added that there is “considerable uncertainty as to the long-term efficacy for the use of chest and genital surgical interventions” and that “the existing evidence base is viewed as low quality/low certainty.”
More recently, the president of that organization, Dr. Steven Williams, told a local media outlet, “I don’t perform gender-affirming care in adolescents, and the reason why is because I don’t think the data supports it.”
“So at my practice, we don’t even entertain that.”
Prominent plastic surgeon Dr. Sheila Nazarian echoed that sentiment. “I think some physicians and some medical associations have been overtaken by a vocal minority and they are politicized,” she said. “This is 100 percent an American political issue. If we look at Europe, very progressive governments have backed off of these procedures in minors because they’re just analyzing the data – as we should with every procedure. Why is it that for this procedure, in this patient population, we just have to shut up?”
In addition, whistleblowers have come forward to reveal the damage being done to children. Evidence now shows that the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) has exerted pressure on researchers. In fact, leaked files from WPATH show that some doctors understood many of the concerns about pushing such drugs and procedures on minors – but did so anyway.
A landmark review of the available research on the effect of these drugs and procedures by Dr. Hilary Cass “demonstrated the poor quality of the published studies, meaning there is not a reliable evidence base upon which to make clinical decisions, or for children and their families to make informed choices.”
The Cass review, commissioned by the U.K. National Health Service, noted that “[t]he strengths and weaknesses of the evidence base on the care of children and young people are often misrepresented and overstated, both in scientific publications and social debate.”
In short, the “consensus” that our media, doctors, activists, and politicians rely upon is no consensus at all. It’s based not on proven science but on a commitment to ideology.
These cracks in the façade that advocates of gender ideology use as a shield provide hope to those who have long been advocating for the truth – in the courtroom and in the culture:
- The truth that no amount of cross-sex hormones or permanently damaging surgery can change a person’s sex.
- The truth that doctors have a duty to “do no harm,” and that includes being honest with patients about the facts regarding procedures that are mischaracterized as “gender affirming.”
It’s heartening to see prominent doctors from at least one major medical association speak the truth about the harm being done to so many children.
In the wake of Donald Trump’s election, we are hopeful that the new administration will follow through on promises to protect boys and girls from gender ideology.
And the issue of gender transition efforts for children has reached the U.S. Supreme Court too. On December 4, the court heard arguments in United States of America v. Skrmetti, in which the state of Tennessee is defending its law protecting children from these harmful and unnecessary procedures.
But we know that regardless of what happens in Washington, D.C., we will continue to face challenges in statehouses, government agencies, and school districts across the country.
The fight for truth isn’t over yet – but this is a big step toward achieving a lasting victory.
Reprinted with permission from the Alliance Defending Freedom.
