How “Breaking the Silence” Silenced All the Children Who’ve Done Well
This episode of SPOTLIGHT was posted on YouTube on September 10, 2023
In a sensationalized television special on Australia’s 7NEWS Spotlight, titled “Breaking the Silence: The Reality of De-Transitioning,” which they heralded as the most contentious story of the year, the gender-affirming care debate took center stage. Spotlight’s investigative report delved into the highly charged discussions surrounding gender identity, medical interventions, and the ramifications of detransitioning. This program shone a light on two opposing factions in the ongoing dialogue: fervent supporters of the affirmation model, led by advocates like Professor Ian Hickey, and vocal critics, including parents and medical professionals like Dr. Jillian Spencer and Dr. Dylan Wilson.
Supporters of the Affirmation Model:
Proponents of the affirmation model, such as Professor Ian Hickey, firmly assert that gender clinics in Australia provide indispensable mental and physical health benefits to transgender individuals. They contend that:- Gender-affirming care is a lifeline for children and adolescents grappling with gender dysphoria, offering a chance at improved mental well-being and overall health.
- The affirmation model upholds the belief that children should be permitted to explore their gender identity, with medical interventions available to assist them in aligning with their identified gender.
- Advocates emphasize that medical decisions are not made hastily; they involve thorough evaluations, assessments, and input from a range of healthcare professionals, including psychologists and pediatricians.
- Children receiving gender-affirming care often experience enhanced mental health and a better quality of life.
- While critics highlight the rarity of detransition cases, supporters argue that such cases are infrequent compared to the broader population of transgender individuals who benefit significantly from these treatments.
Critics of the Affirmation Model:
In contrast, critics, including parents and medical professionals like Dr. Jillian Spencer and Dr. Dylan Wilson, express reservations regarding the affirmation model's speed and approach, raising several key concerns:- They question the practice of allowing very young children, aged 5–10, to make life-altering decisions regarding their gender identity, suggesting that such decisions may not be fully informed or stable at such a tender age.
- Critics harbor particular concerns regarding the use of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries in children and adolescents, citing potential irreversible physical and psychological consequences. (But they fail to mention that gender-affirming surgeries are not performed on minors.)
- Claiming a lack of comprehensive long-term data, especially for younger age groups, they advocate for more research to fully comprehend the potential risks associated with these treatments.
- Detransition cases, although relatively rare, remain a significant concern for critics, underscoring the need for extensive research to understand the contributing factors and long-term repercussions.
The answer is NO:
In the heart of the contentious debate surrounding gender-affirming care, the welfare of the majority should not be sacrificed due to the experiences of a few who have chosen to detransition. Dr. Jo Olson, from UCLA, underscores that the overwhelming evidence points to the immense benefits of gender-affirming care for transgender youth. While detransition cases are a serious concern, they represent a small fraction of those who find solace, improved mental well-being, and a brighter future through these treatments. To withhold or deny these essential interventions from the broader population would be a disservice to countless individuals in need. Striking a balance between caution and compassion is the path forward in ensuring the well-being of transgender youth in an ever-evolving landscape of gender identity and healthcare.Conclusion: The young persons who were featured in this program have undeniably gone through a lot. I do not want to minimize their experience and their regrets for transitioning in the first place. I only wish the report had attempted to contextualize their experiences. Why didn’t we hear from the overwhelming numbers of those for whom gender-affirming care has been life-saving?