Spokane NAACP prez who claims black heritage outed by white parents

[Viligant_Warrior]

I appreciate the study, but all this shows is that they're still more likely to attempt or commit suicide than those with same birth sex, which should entirely be expected as they're still mentally ill regardless of whatever treatments they undertake. If you're going to argue transitioning does not alter outcomes for the better, then that would require a study among suffers of GID (transitioned vs. non-transitioned), not a study comparing outcomes of transitioned individuals vs. same birth sex individuals.

Not so. We already know that GIDs who are not "transitioned" suffer high rates of attempts and actual suicides. This proves that going through the surgery and being "given the proper body," just as the study plainly states in its conclusive remarks, " ... may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism, and should inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for this patient group."

Perhaps a better to demonstrate my point would be this: Suffers of schizophrenia that are undergoing pharmacological treatments (namely in the form of antipsychotics) are still at increased risks of suicide, impatient hospitalization, and unemployment when compared to the non-schizophrenic population at large, but that doesn't mean pharmacological treatments do not alter the outcomes of schizophrenics for the better.

But in comparing the rate of attempts or actual suicides to the general population, you understand not just how they compare to the norm, but also understand, by looking at pre-treatment rates, whether you've impacted for the better, the treated population of schizophrenics as a whole.

In contrast to your example, the numbers show an actual increase among the "transitioned" treatment group, not just against the general population, but against the "non-transitioned" control group. This is how we do psychological research, using methodology and accumulated statistics that measure the treatment group not only against the norm, but against the non-treated control group.

I'm beginning to sense that you want to argue the point to suggest that GID is a legitimate biosocial/psychological disorder, rather than a contrived diagnosis that was formulated and approved for the DSM-5 for political, rather than health, reasons. GID is truly a disorder, but it is a spiritual/psychological error rather than being what it purports to be, a case of "wrong gender in the wrong body."

 

[TecumsehGR]

Not so. We already know that GIDs who are not "transitioned" suffer high rates of attempts and actual suicides. This proves that going through the surgery and being "given the proper body," just as the study plainly states in its conclusive remarks, " ... may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism, and should inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for this patient group."

I'm not sure what you're trying to prove here. My contention is not that this is the end all, be all for people experiencing GID, just that it may be useful if it can lead to better outcomes. Your own study says it does appear to lead to better outcomes (although it does also state there's insufficient information at hand and methodological problems are found within all of these studies, including their own): "For the purpose of evaluating whether sex reassignment is an effective treatment for gender dysphoria, it is reasonable to compare reported gender dysphoria pre and post treatment. Such studies have been conducted either prospectively[7], [12] or retrospectively,[5], [6], [9], [22], [25], [26], [29], [38] and suggest that sex reassignment of transsexual persons improves quality of life and gender dysphoria."

I would never and have never argued that SRS is all that is needed for these people, so I have no qualms with the assertion that it may not suffice, which only means may not be enough. As I said in my previous post, these people are still mentally ill after SRS; it's quite clear that one mode of treatment is not all that will be needed for them.

In contrast to your example, the numbers show an actual increase among the "transitioned" treatment group, not just against the general population, but against the "non-transitioned" control group. This is how we do psychological research, using methodology and accumulated statistics that measure the treatment group not only against the norm, but against the non-treated control group.

I believe this is where your confusion is arising from. The control group(s) used did not suffer from GID. The control group(s) were used to control for factors like age and sex (e.g., 35 y/o male diagnosed with GID vs. a 35 y/o male without GID, 35 y/o female diagnosed with GID that underwent SRS and is now taken as a male vs. 35 y/o male without GID). They were population based controls, not sufferers of GID that had yet to transition. It says so right here: "For each exposed person (N = 324), we randomly selected 10 unexposed controls. A person was defined as unexposed if there were no discrepancies in sex designation across the Censuses, Medical Birth, and Total Population registers and no gender identity disorder diagnosis according to the Hospital Discharge Register. To study possible gender-specific effects on outcomes of interest, we used two different control groups: one with the same sex as the case individual at birth (birth sex matching) and the other with the sex that the case individual had been reassigned to (final sex matching)."

Again, all this study shows is that sufferers of GID that have underwent SRS experience higher rates of suicide than the general population, no more and no less.