Group of Christian Pediatricians Come Out Against Ntl Geo

[Carolyn Marie]

http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/pediatricians-condemn-national-geographic-posting-transgender-9-year-old

The group of pediatricians represent just 500 out of 60,000 in the U.S., and IMO should be considered a hate group.  They are far outside the mainstream of medical practice.

Carolyn Marie

[VickySGV]

The ACP is a known bogus "medical association" originally they were Anti-Vax'ers who rallied after the highly falsified report that Vaccinations for a variety of diseases were the proximate cause of Autism Spectrum conditions.  I saw one "intelligence" report on the membership, and of the 500 Carolyn mentioned very few are practicing medicine even if they have the medical degree, largely from suspensions due to continuing education requirements in their states

[Charlize]

Unfortunately their name implies a strong knowledge.  Hopefully truly educated and knowledgeable practitioners will react and not allow the legislation and hate this kind of misguided opinion can produce.  Unfortunately every bit of  positive publicity brings a negative reaction.

 

Hugs,

 

Charlize

[Briana]

First, good morning everyone.  :-)  Wowzies...The ACPed is an ugly little group.  Unfortunately, they have the power to influence many; especially those that don't take the time to do a little research or those that believe or are just 'wowed' by anything seemingly medical and doctor related.  On a higher level, the ACPed is a good example of the differences in practitioners across the healthcare spectrum and how it can influence the care you receive.

I could go on and on about some of the negative influence & impacts this group as well as some others that are similar have in both the medical field the healthcare consumer, but...  I think I would end up writing a 'book' full of frustration and irritation.   

[Tejana]

12 hours ago, Carolyn Marie said:

http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/pediatricians-condemn-national-geographic-posting-transgender-9-year-old

The group of pediatricians represent just 500 out of 60,000 in the U.S., and IMO should be considered a hate group.  They are far outside the mainstream of medical practice.

Carolyn Marie

Hhmmm....One online dictionary defines the word "condemn" as expressing an unfavorable or adverse judgment indicating strong disapproval  or censure (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/condemn?s=t),

I am inclined to think that calling this medical association a hate group, just because one disagrees with their public stance, is pretty far outside the mainstream of civil discussion, albeit the right to do so (i.e., condemning other persons'/groups' speech) is guaranteed under our U.S. Constitution's First Amendment.

Certainly, I can understand the emotional verve that motivates someone here condemning the condemners.  In a forum predominantly composed of transgendered/transsexual individuals, there is probably scarcely a one of us (including myself) who does not wish that we had transitioned at an age earlier than that at which we did so.  However, we must not lose sight of the fact that some children who state that they are of the gender opposite to that of their primary sexual characteristics...some of these children do, in fact, come to identify as cis-gendered by the time that they reach adulthood.

I firmly believe that the possibility that an apparently trans-gendered child might identify as cis-gendered upon reaching adulthood contra-indicates the use of hormonal or surgical interventions prior to the child reaching his/her legal majority.  I do not think it outside the mainstream of rational thought to assume that some medical and/or surgical treatments/procedures once done cannot be undone (i.e., at least not satisfactorily so).

W/ re: to the article itself, some statements by the ACP-member interviewed are strongly expressed, but no more so than opinions I frequently see expressed in this forum.  In terms of the few purported facts presented, I found only one with which I kinda question.  The article's statement that 75-95% of the children who appear to be trans-gendered will identify as cis-gendered by their late teens may be an exaggeration.  [I could be wrong though, it's been a while since I studied this phenomenon (i.e., transgender persister vs desister children)]  

Regardless of the accuracy of this 75-95% figure i do acknowledge that in certain extreme cases, hormonal/surgical intervention might be indicated, but only as a last resort. To do otherwise could well be detrimental to the life & well-being of both the child and others.

Interesting article though.  Certainly makes me wish I was still within reasonable driving distance to a good university library (i.e., so I could survey available scientific literature on this subject). 

 

 

[JBfox]

 Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but what I've found on the topic of children and transition is that when they are of that young of an age that theyre not even allowed to undergo HRT or surgical changes. At most common practice seems to be that right around the ages that puberty might start some are allowed blockers. To my understanding puberty blockers don't cause nonchanging effects to the body, right? If this is the case, children should be the ones that have an easy time shifting if they do eventually change their minds (referencing the 75-95%). They'd just stop taking the blockers and their body should continue as normal.

 It seems frustrating that even a group of medical personal would just start falsely throwing around scary words and statistics, but I also understand that most of the process of transitioning is run by specialists and that a regular PA might not have all the facts either.  

 I mean, if that little girl decided at the age of 3 that she was certain and persisted all the way to the age of 9. I feel like it's seriously unlikely that she'll change her mind by the time shes 16/17/18 (whenever she's able to actually undergo hrt). I think even if we assume she'd change her mind if she just went through puberty regularly, why wouldn't she change her mind while on the blockers? I don't remember a whole lot while being a kid but there doesn't seem to be much of a difference between boys and girls at that age outside of hobbies, habits, and dressings.

 I guess I just can't see the harm in it either way. Either they'll be comfortable in their mostly neutral body and just presenting as they like, or they won't and they'll proceed onto their assigned gender. The alternative seems much worse to me. Force them to go through puberty, and they may hate everything about it, and then theyre forced to live with the natural changes until they can afford to fix it with surgery.

[VickySGV]

JBfox -- you are quite right in your understanding.  A problem we have at the minute is that we are 10 years or a couple more before our current population of younger children who are treated, pre-puberty, with social transition and during the normal puberty years with hormone blockers has reached adulthood and begun adult life for us to start having the absolute best overall statistical base.  The studies from the past regarding the high rate of desistance of GD and return to Cis are being shot full of holes today due to a number of things, including simply the number of children in Transyouth medical programs and major hospital clinics .

Dr. John Money who was the leader of the Nurture, Not Nature theory of gender formation did teach us that surgery too early in a person's life is not a good idea, by the spectacular failure of work on Intersex children that he eschewed.  That result is valid and a reasonable point, but holding the no surgery POV is not a validation of "Let the brat suffer until they are mature adults".   For some though, a single case of desistance is deemed enough to scuttle the whole program, just as ACPeds first pulled with Childhood Vaccinations for Measles, Mumps, Whooping Cough and more. 

[Carolyn Marie]

In reading up about this group, I have to also note that, prior to their interest in adolescent transition, they focused their attention on gay and lesbian folks.  Their attitude towards that population is that being gay is not something one is born with, but which is transmitted socially from parents to children, and which can be unlearned through the appropriate (i.e. conversion) therapy.  They have also been the leading proponent of the notion that gay and lesbian couples should not be allowed to adopt children, as it will harm the children.

My opinion concerning the ACP is based on the totality of their views about the entire LGBT community.  I thank you, Tejana, for your support of my right to express this opinion.

Carolyn Marie

[Guest Kenna Dixon]

3 hours ago, Lisa said:

Between their attitude, the truthrevolt.org agenda and the lovely people that comment, I find myself kind of in a state of despair. So much bile and hatred. Many of these people would simply rather see us all dead.  It's so disheartening. 

 

From my anonymous comment on the site:

"Articles about the transgender condition bring the willfully ignorant and clearly biased out in droves. It's interesting to see people both decry the fact such a small part of the population receives so much attention and at the same time see them as having such a major negative impact upon all that's good and holy.

The simple fact remains that transgender people have always been with us, regardless of whether one now chooses to consider them part of some modern day "liberal" agenda. The first gender realignment surgery was performed in Germany in the 1920s. Some individuals are born transgender. Most are not. No one would or could choose to be in that particular minority. There is nothing to be gained, and the losses can be tremendous.

Those who parrot the views on the subject of the American College of Pediatricians, Dr. Paul McHugh or the myriad religiously conservative groups with "family" in their names are grasping at straws to find support for their preconceived opinion that being transgender is "wrong", "sinful", "mental illness" "perverted", etc., etc. And apparently, it's inconceivable to them that liberal or conservative political philosophy, religion, homosexuality, pedophilia, child abuse and the other issues they drag into the discussion have nothing whatsoever to do with being transgender."

[VickySGV]

Excellent shot Kenna !!!

[Carolyn Marie]

35 minutes ago, VickySGV said:

Excellent shot Kenna !!!

What she said! 

 

Carolyn Marie

[Carolyn Marie]

6 minutes ago, Lisa said:

Excellent shot at what? Me? I was simply remarking on the hatred from many if not most of the commenter's at the ens of the article. I fail to see how I'm responsible. Don't shoot the messenger. 

Lisa, I'm certain that Vicky,, and then I, were referring to Kenna's comment that she posted on the comments section of the article in question.  In quoting you, Kenna was using it as a point of reference. 

HUGS

Carolyn Marie

[Charlize]

Lisa as i read the comments above they are certainly not directed at you but are simply echoing your statement.

Kenna had made a comment on that site which was giving a reasonable not hateful response to the article.

 

Hugs,

 

Charlize

[VickySGV]

I am sorry, I did indeed mean that Kenna had made a very good reply to the ACPeds supporter's site, and it was none of it aimed at you Lisa. Friends again???

 

[Guest]

I'm so sick of religion and the hate it breeds. Yes I know that some people don't use it as a weapon, but in my personal experience, most people do.

[Guest]

On 12/28/2016 at 2:42 PM, Lisa said:

Hi Carolyn, I failed to see that was Kenna's comment. I apologize...thought I was being attacked.  I need to read closer...sorry you guys!

Don't worry Lisa, you have to get to at least four thousand posts before we snark! Giggle, just kidding!

As for Kenna?  She can look them in the eye with a smile, throw a well deserved punch and not skip a beat! That lady has the gift of words.

My verbose way of saying "Good job Kenna! " Hug. JodyAnn

[VickySGV]

46 minutes ago, Fiona said:

I'm so sick of religion and the hate it breeds. Yes I know that some people don't use it as a weapon, but in my personal experience, most people do.

Those of us who have deep ties in our religious spirituality feel the same way all too many times. We are as angry and hurt as anyone can be that religion has been stolen for the purpose of justifying hate and lack of acceptanc.  In my case, my church loved me and accepted me for exactly who and what I am, and that love made it possible for me to do what I needed in my Gender Journey.

[Guest]

37 minutes ago, VickySGV said:

Those of us who have deep ties in our religious spirituality feel the same way all too many times. We are as angry and hurt as anyone can be that religion has been stolen for the purpose of justifying hate and lack of acceptanc.  In my case, my church loved me and accepted me for exactly who and what I am, and that love made it possible for me to do what I needed in my Gender Journey.

And I'm very happy that you were able to remain with a parish that accepted you. I have a lot of friends that were run off and that half killed them.

[Guest]

Hatred and division are nothing about God, they are blinded in denial that they are playing for the other team. I suspect the ones that blow the loudest have the dustiest cobwebbed Bibles.

I like the phase "Religion is for people who don't want to go to hell, spirituality is for those that have been there. " Yet the self proclaimed judges, create there own hell, the trick is not to let it spread like an infection. One day hopefully the scales will fall from their eyes and God can heal them. My place is to be a good example.

[Guest LesleyAnne]

The 'Southern Poverty Law Center' lists the 'American College of Pediatricians' as a hate group. 

Wilkipedia quote: "The organization's view on parenting is at odds with the position of the American Academy of Pediatrics, which holds that sexual orientation has no correlation with the ability to be a good parent and to raise healthy and well-adjusted children.^[5][9][10] The American College of Pediatricians has been described by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a "hate group", with "a history of propagating damaging falsehoods about LGBT people".^[11][12]"

As stated in posts above they are a small group of approx. 500, but they are not  all physicians. Membership encompasses ancillary healthcare givers as well as  physicians. They have very strong religious beliefs about marriage being only between a man and a woman, and that life begins at conception. Their core values are considered harmful by the American Academy of Pediatrics. They are radically religiously motivated much like the 'Family Research Council' who is also considered a hate group by the SPLC. 

[Guest]

On 12/30/2016 at 11:23 AM, JodyAnn said:

Hatred and division are nothing about God, they are blinded in denial that they are playing for the other team. I suspect the ones that blow the loudest have the dustiest cobwebbed Bibles.

I like the phase "Religion is for people who don't want to go to hell, spirituality is for those that have been there. " Yet the self proclaimed judges, create there own hell, the trick is not to let it spread like an infection. One day hopefully the scales will fall from their eyes and God can heal them. My place is to be a good example.

While I think it's pretty well known here that I don't believe in god or religion or anything like that, I have long stated that I respect spirituality far more than religion because I think that religion is the big business of pedaling god for a profit. The vast majority don't read the bible at all let alone trying to understand the original intent.

For lack of a better term, I resent religious people that don't practice what they preach. And they pick and choose what parts of the bible to believe and live by. Picking and choosing what to believe in is highly problematic in this case.

[Briana]

 

24 minutes ago, Fiona said:

For lack of a better term, I resent religious people that don't practice what they preach. And they pick and choose what parts of the bible to believe and live by. Picking and choosing what to believe in is highly problematic in this case.

Sister ain't that the truth.  I've always found the "cafeteria" approach many take to religion - picking and choosing what they want to believe in and/or use, both irritating and problematic. 

[Drea]

On ‎12‎/‎26‎/‎2016 at 1:43 PM, Tejana said:

Certainly, I can understand the emotional verve that motivates someone here condemning the condemners.  In a forum predominantly composed of transgendered/transsexual individuals, there is probably scarcely a one of us (including myself) who does not wish that we had transitioned at an age earlier than that at which we did so.  However, we must not lose sight of the fact that some children who state that they are of the gender opposite to that of their primary sexual characteristics...some of these children do, in fact, come to identify as cis-gendered by the time that they reach adulthood.

I firmly believe that the possibility that an apparently trans-gendered child might identify as cis-gendered upon reaching adulthood contra-indicates the use of hormonal or surgical interventions prior to the child reaching his/her legal majority.  I do not think it outside the mainstream of rational thought to assume that some medical and/or surgical treatments/procedures once done cannot be undone (i.e., at least not satisfactorily so).

W/ re: to the article itself, some statements by the ACP-member interviewed are strongly expressed, but no more so than opinions I frequently see expressed in this forum.  In terms of the few purported facts presented, I found only one with which I kinda question.  The article's statement that 75-95% of the children who appear to be trans-gendered will identify as cis-gendered by their late teens may be an exaggeration.  [I could be wrong though, it's been a while since I studied this phenomenon (i.e., transgender persister vs desister children)]  

Regardless of the accuracy of this 75-95% figure i do acknowledge that in certain extreme cases, hormonal/surgical intervention might be indicated, but only as a last resort. To do otherwise could well be detrimental to the life & well-being of both the child and others.

I agree with much of what you say here.

There is a tendency in the community to use the logic that "because I knew at such a young age all young kids must be trans".  That is very flawed logic.

There is also a great deal of conflation of gender identity with gender non-conformance even among adults.  What in the world does liking girl things have to do with one being a girl?  If gender stereotypes with regards to behavior and interests are a bad thing, why do we go putting people in gender categories based on those stereotypes? 

I agree with the 75% to 95% figure being off but even the most modest figures fall into the 40% to 60% range.

It was not that long ago that it was common practice to surgically and chemically assign genders when a child was born with genitalia that was ambiguous.  That has since been recognized as barbaric.  But now we have this advocacy whereby many in the trans community promote acting to intervene with children's development prior to the point where data shows gender identity is usually cemented.  With kids whereby a significant percentage do in fact "grow out of it".  I find the blind advocacy a matter of projecting one's issues onto others that may not in fact have the same issue going on.  This is troubling and bound to result in negative consequences.

I also find what Nat Geo did here troubling because this particular kid now has tremendous pressures to conform to this transgender symbol that she has become.  I consider this just as bad as forcing a kid to conform to their birth gender.  This is pure exploitation of a minor by Nat Geo (and possibly advocates who pushed for this) for political purposes.  Possibly economic exploitation as well although it seems Nat Geo's motive was political rather than sticking to science.

[TexasLibraryLady]

I agree that not all gender nonconforming kids will seek or desire medical transition, but the answer can not be to deny it for all, or to say that it's a dangerous practice. The key is to provide children with the information and support to help them choose what is right for them. Let them know it's ok to be genderfluid, to be nonbinary, to be a boy that likes girl's things. But if they are a girl, that's fine too. Just like we as adults can't wake up tomorrow, say "I think I want a vagina", call the doctor and have surgery on Friday, transgender kids should be under the care of several people, all monitoring their feelings and progress.

Blockers weren't around when I was that age, so it wasn't an option. I did know that the testosterone being produced by my testies was responsible for the changes I hated in my body. As a result, I started trying to stab and cut them out. Fortunately, I did not do any serious harm to myself. I've heard similar stories from other trans women and of trans men doing similar to their breasts. If having access to blockers can prevent someone from doing actual physical harm to their bodies, or worse, it should be allowed.