Australian T.V. Documentary On De-Transition Stirs Heated Debate

[AllieJ]

18 minutes ago, Betty K said:

 

Yes, that is the complication I'm referring to. I'm curious as to what the answer is. Also curious as to what "start looking for the real reason" means.

 

 

Are you aware of this situation happening often? And whether it often leads to suicide? I would guess that the suicide risk would be higher in kids who were denied treatment because they failed the test. What about them?

That complication would be determined by the funding agency, but I would hope there would be some regulations to guide this, obviously lots of things still to be developed. 

 

Unfortunately teen suicide involving transgender is too common, I have spoken to parents who have children who had already attempted suicide, and the parents were terrified the kid might succeed before they were approved for treatment. If a kid didn't scan a incongruent bed nucleus, they could concentrate on finding other reasons for their distress, This could include conditions like Dissociative Identity Disorder, or even someone desperately unhappy with their life (often due to family related abuse). This would mean that the person would more likely get the appropriate treatment for what exactly is affecting them, so better outcomes.

 

Hugs,

 

Allie

[Betty K]

4 minutes ago, AllieJ said:

Unfortunately teen suicide involving transgender is too common, I have spoken to parents who have children who had already attempted suicide, and the parents were terrified the kid might succeed before they were approved for treatment.

 

I know trans teen suicide is common -- I said so above. My question was whether indecisive trans kids are at especially high risk of suicide, since that is not something I have heard before. Generally it is the kids who know they are trans and either (a) can't receive treatment, or (b) are not accepted by their parents who, in my reading, are at highest risk of suicide. I guess you will say that a positive result on the test would make parents more accepting, but what about the kids with the negative results?

 

But I can see there is no point in asking that question, since you are 100% certain that the Bed Nucleus is the one and only legitimate cause of gender incongruence. So I return to my first question:

 

What about the two adult trans people, both of whom seem equally well-adjusted, one of whom has passed the test and one of whom hasn't? If this scenario is possible (and you seemed to accept that it was) then doesn't it disprove the validity of the test? If transition has improved someone's life then who is to say that it wasn't a good treatment for their distress, no matter what their Bed Nucleus says?

 

And, gosh, I just can't help myself: what about gender fluidity?

[AllieJ]

Teens are at the time of life when they are finding themselves, and questioning is very common, but those with distress with their gender are often not taken at their word, and made to wait through seemingly endless assessments because the specialists are especially scared of making a mistake with children. These kids are in distress and need answers, but currently there is no definitive diagnostic, and kids do die waiting for appropriate treatment. So yes, questioning kids in distress are at significant danger, especially if they are denied treatment for long periods. And this is very distressing for parents.

 

Parents often don't accept gender incongruence in their kids, and would benefit from a definitive diagnosis, and again, those who didn't show incongruent structure would be further tested for other conditions as mentioned before.

 

I am not 100% convinced that Bed Nucleus is the one and only legitimate cause, but it is far more indicative than the current method of asking a patient if they have had persistent distress! I expect that scans will form an important part of diagnosis in the future, but not for many years and likely combined with other factors, but we will have to wait and see.

 

As I said, there are other causes of gender distress, and trans is one of them. That someone is coping doesn't disprove the test. 

 

Think of this, the people who realise they are trans late in life usually felt they were cis for much of their lives, then maybe a crossdresser for some time. They can spend most of a lifetime figuring it out, and 'try' different identities along the way. Most late bloomers when they work it out, think back over their lives and realise there were hints all along. So, they can experience some fluidity as they figure things out. The consensus is that we are born trans and it is hard wired into our brains, and with these recent developments, they look to have identified where this 'hard wiring' is. Those uncomfortable feelings generated are rarely clear that they mean gender incongruence, and everybody affected take some time to work out what those feelings mean. 

 

The Bed Nucleus findings fit so well the fixed gender descriptions introduced decades ago I think by Dr Anne Vitale, and still held as true. There are other brain indicators, but none which are as definitive as the Bed Nucleus structure, and this is why I have confidence in this development being accepted at some time in the future. I have been searching for answers for 65 years, and this is by far the best In have seen, and tick pretty much all the boxes.

 

Looking forward to your next Last question!

 

Hugs,

 

Allie

[Betty K]

My last question is the same question again: What about the people that fail the test? If you accept that there are other potential causes of gender distress then how can it be okay to disqualify some people from treatment, funding and societal acceptance simply because they don’t pass the Bed Nucleus test? I still don’t feel that you’ve adequately addressed that question at all.

[AllieJ]

8 hours ago, Betty K said:

My last question is the same question again: What about the people that fail the test? If you accept that there are other potential causes of gender distress then how can it be okay to disqualify some people from treatment, funding and societal acceptance simply because they don’t pass the Bed Nucleus test? I still don’t feel that you’ve adequately addressed that question at all.

I guess your term "fail the test" shows that you think that being found to be trans is desirable. This would be an indicative procedure to arrive at a more accurate diagnosis so that appropriate treatments can start as soon as possible, and with greater confidence. Surely this is the best outcome? 

 

The Bed Nucleus outcome has been around all of this century, and it is still being debated and scrutinised by the medical community, and I doubt we would see it as a definitive diagnostic for at least another decade, if ever! So if it gets adopted, it will be by far the most robust diagnostic tool we have ever seen. It could enable more rapid access to treatment for vulnerable people, but more importantly, a more definitive diagnosis can justify more funding for trans treatments, as well as improving the societal acceptance.

 

Not only do we lose young people waiting for diagnosis, but we lose people to lack of funding for essential treatments, and lack of family and community support. The reported suicide attempt rate of 40% for our community has been the same for 50 years, and this shows we aren't improving our lot! I believe we need to embrace things which might bring that figure down, as this has the potential to do. 

 

Hugs

 

Allie

[Betty K]

23 minutes ago, AllieJ said:

I guess your term "fail the test" shows that you think that being found to be trans is desirable.

Allie that is just so disingenuous. I’ve already stated several times why I believe failing the test could be harmful, and it’s not because I believe being trans is “desirable”. You must know what my concern is by now — that people who would benefit from gender-affirming care, indeed who would suffer without it, would miss out on it. If you prefer to twist my words than answer my question then I can only assume you are arguing in bad faith. 

 

[AllieJ]

15 minutes ago, Betty K said:

Allie that is just so disingenuous. I’ve already stated several times why I believe failing the test could be harmful, and it’s not because I believe being trans is “desirable”. You must know what my concern is by now — that people who would benefit from gender-affirming care, indeed who would suffer without it, would miss out on it. If you prefer to twist my words than answer my question then I can only assume you are arguing in bad faith. 

 

Again, we will need to agree to disagree as I believe that getting appropriate and timely treatment is desirable rather than harmful, so it isn't a test you pass or fail. 

 

Hugs,

 

Allie

[Betty K]

Again with the word twisting! Whoever said getting appropriate treatment could be harmful? Taking away appropriate treatment is what’s harmful. And if a treatment is working, isn’t it appropriate?

 

Rhetorical question. I agree: this discussion is going nowhere. Good luck with your crusade Allie. Who knows, maybe, if applied with a little less religious zeal, this theory will benefit us all. 
 

 

 

[Carolyn Marie]

This topic has run its course, IMO, and it's time to lock it to further comment.  Thanks for a robust discussion, everyone.