Another unqualified religious crackpot attempts to discredit gender affirming care.
According to Jean C. LLoyd via Witherspoon Institute’s pseudo-intellectual blog: Pressing Pause on the Global Transgender Youth Pandemic. Right.
Jean C. Lloyd is a lesbian married to a gay man whom she met through the Catholic Church’s Courage Ministry. I’m certain that is a marriage “made in heaven.”
Lloyd claims to hold a PhD. She has not disclosed the source or discipline of her PhD. If doing so enhanced her credibility we would know that information.
Suffice it to say that Ms. Lloyd hasn’t the first clue about gender diversity. She also spouts opinions as facts:
Before Covid-19’s pernicious spread, another health phenomenon had reached epidemic proportions and is still occurring on a global level. Unlike the virus, its vulnerable population is the young—especially young girls.
Do you have any statistics to support any of the above? No stats but lots of judging others:
A pandemic exposes many truths. Performing radical surgeries on healthy bodies, with the hope of improving body dysphoria, are in fact elective and are neither essential nor life-saving. “Stress” and “disappointment” are not malignancies, and “chest dysphoria” does not metastasize.
I suppose that she is referring to gender confirmation surgery. Does anyone really believe that she gives a crap out the wellbeing of others? Or, in the alternative, is this yet another anti-LGBTQ polemic attempting to defend the teachings of the Catholic Church which, the Vatican admits, are due to a conflict that transgender people pose with Genesis 1:27?
Undeterred by common sense, Lloyd continues:
The increased incidence of mental health conditions and the elevated risk of suicide remain for transgender-identified individuals at every stage of transition; and research consistently shows that medical interventions and body modifications, no matter how deeply desired, do not widely deliver measurable results in terms of objective health and well-being.
Transgender people do have an elevated risk for self-harm. That is true. However, with gender-affirmative care, the potential for self-harm decreases significantly. “Objective health and well-being” means quality of life. There are many reports. Just a quick sample from NIH:
Study One (2019):
Current studies indicate that quality of life improves after sex reassignment surgery. The available studies are heterogeneous in design. In the future, prospective studies with standardized methods of assessing quality of life and with longer follow-up times would be desirable.
Study Two (2018):
Medical GAI [gender-affirming interventions] are associated with better mental wellbeing but even after successful medical transition, trans people remain a population at risk for low QoL and mental health, and the nonbinary group shows the greatest vulnerability.
In other words, gender-affirming care definitely helps. However, transgender people still have a lower quality of life than the general population. The reason for the lower quality of life is minority stress which is more prominent in transgender people than gay people.
Study Three (2017):
Our results show that transgender women generally have a lower QoL compared to the general population. GRS leads to an improvement in general well-being as a trend but over the long-term, QoL decreases slightly in line with that of the comparison group.
According to the methodology, the comparison group is the general population.
At the risk of repeating myself, transgender people are not as healthy as the general population but their health (QoL) improves with gender-affirming healthcare. One way to guarantee that they are less healthy is to submit transgender people to gender identity conversion “therapy.”
One of the links in Lloyd’s treatise is to another post, by Rev. Paul Dirks, to the same outlet promoting conversion therapy. Very authoritative I assure you.
Before COVID-19’s pernicious spread, another health phenomenon had reached epidemic proportions and is still occurring on a global level: gender dysphoria. Unlike the virus, its vulnerable population is the young, especially adolescent females. Charts of exponential increases in referrals to gender clinics abound, showing increases of over 4,000 percent in the United Kingdom and 1,500 percent in Sweden over a ten-year period. The same pattern is playing out across many nations, with no sign of slowing down.
Oh please. If Ryan T. Anderson is still the editor of this blog, he is doing a shitty job. The link to the rise in the UK is a Christian Post article about the rise in Sweden. The second link to the rise in Sweden at least is in regard to Sweden but it comes to The Guardian from a television show.
For the record, in 2009/10 in the UK a total of 40 girls were referred by doctors to gender specialists. By 2017/18 that number had increased to 1,806. Referrals for boys rose from 57 to 713 in the same period.
The reason is simple. In 2009/2010 clinicians were still trying to prevent children from transitioning on the premise that doing so would somehow prevent them from ever becoming transgender. Obviously the percentages are misleading due to the small beginning numbers.
That has changed due to the fact that it did not work. There were just as many transgender people in the end except for the fact that so many, as teems either attempted or committed suicide. A referral, by the way is just an evaluation. Kids in severe distress are transitioning earlier and the research supports this approach:
Socially transitioned transgender children who are supported in their gender identity have developmentally normative levels of depression and only minimal elevations in anxiety, suggesting that psychopathology is not inevitable within this group. Especially striking is the comparison with reports of children with GID; socially transitioned transgender children have notably lower rates of internalizing psychopathology than previously reported among children with GID living as their natal sex.
Unfortunately, trans-identifying youth are not given the same consideration that other minors are given, nor are they treated with the same standard. They are treated not only as adults, but as exceptionally prescient and self-sacrificial ones. As a result, today many of them are being given automatic life sentences.
So, … the physicians who treat trans youth are quacks and their parents are incompetent. The psychiatrists who diagnose trans youth are part of some conspiracy to frustrate the teachings of the Catholic Church. They are all part of the conspiracy.
There are numerous times when Ms. Lloyd undermines her own argument in order to support a conspiracy theory that the doctors are all in on some sort of mass delusion:
Stop Giving Children Experimental Treatments with Irreversible Side Effects
Trans-identifying youth are also assumed to have extraordinary maturity concerning medical decisions and even participation in research. In a qualitative study  that explored the attitudes of trans youth on the subject of puberty suppression, the authors state:
The adolescents also showed that they seriously weighed the short- and long-term consequences, and consciously chose for the treatment. Furthermore, they showed a remarkable insight and altruism in their willingness to participate in research, which also meant they were able to look beyond their own short-term interests.
Never mind that puberty blockers are not experimental and do not have irreversible side effects. Furthermore she is confusing children with adolescents and not considering that parental consent is required. Lloyd is also assuming that clinicians are not adequately explaining potential consequences.
Would she be happier if the children were ignorant?
All of Lloyd’s assumptions, misstatements of fact, selective observation and conspiracy theorizing are intended to support the teachings of the Catholic Church which are pronouncements from the Vatican without considerations for medical science. Lloyd’s task was impossible at the outset.
She is doing a pretty shitty job of defending those teachings:
Additionally stunning was the fact that, “compared to clinicians, adolescents were often more cautious in their treatment views.” When minor children are more cautious about their treatment than their doctors in experimental medicine, and are serving as their own gatekeepers, something has gone dreadfully wrong.
Clinicians are not forcing treatment on adolescents. To be fair the study did raise the issue. They ask many good questions rather than arriving at conclusions. Over the last four years since the study there has been a considerable amount of research regarding puberty blockers.
Indeed, the lead investigator published new research in 2020. Lieke Josephina Jeanne Johanna Vrouenraets is responsible for Trajectories of Adolescents Treated with Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Analogues for Gender Dysphoria.
That same scientist who questioned methodologies four years earlier has concluded:
Gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRHa) are recommended as initial treatment for adolescents diagnosed with gender dysphoria, providing time to follow gender identity development and consider further treatment wishes without distress caused by unwanted pubertal changes. This has been described as an extended diagnostic phase. … the vast majority who started GnRHa proceeded to GAH [gender affirming hormones], possibly due to eligibility criteria that select those highly likely to pursue further gender-affirming treatment. Due to the observational character of the study, it is not possible to say if GnRHa treatment itself influenced the outcome. Few individuals discontinued GnRHa, and only 3.5% no longer wished gender-affirming treatment.
Off the rails:
Gender clinics are normalizing infertility-inducing and permanently disfiguring surgeries, in children, on the advice of medical research conducted without control groups, without concern for effect sizes, and without sensible understandings of risks versus benefits. The American Academy of Pediatrics, and other professional organizations, have been quick to throw their weight behind actions that should not pass a Human Subjects Review committee, due to the lopsided risk, the modest benefits, and the violations of the principle of (truly) informed consent for minors.
Children are not candidates for surgery. WPATH is quite specific in that regard. In other words, in the vernacular: What the fuck is this deranged woman talking about? Speaking of WPATH:
The Standards of Care espoused by the same organizations, claim consensus on early medical interventions where there is none; they contradict the scientific literature; and they emerge from contexts riddled with conflicts of interest and profit motives. This is not how medical research and clinical operations are supposed to work.
The first link, above, is to a 2015 article. Lloyd has accurately depicted the conclusion:
As long as debate remains on these seven themes and only limited long-term data are available, there will be no consensus on treatment. Therefore, more systematic interdisciplinary and (worldwide) multicenter research is required.
The science has improved considerably over the past five years due to the fact that there is far more long-term data available. There was not a consensus then but there is a consensus now.
The second link in the above is to an article by James Cantor who is a psychologist, not a physician. Cantor does not like the AAP clinical guidelines which are for medical care. The article is published to Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy.
There are two more links about conflicts and profit motives. The first is to an anonymous trans-denial website in Canada. The second is to an article by an artist and environmentalist in The Federalist. Both are baseless conspiracy theories by people without any real knowledge.
Lloyd references an anti-trans “organization” called the Society for Evidenced Based Gender Medicine. It seems to be headed by Dr. William Malone, a trans-denying Defender of the Faith:
“No child is born in the wrong body, but for a variety of reasons some children and adolescents become convinced that they were,” Malone said in a Wednesday interview with CP [Christian Post].
Lloyd’s closing sentence is predictable:
With respect to the global transgender epidemic, pressing pause is long overdue.
There is no epidemic. Gender dysphoria is not contagious. Missing from this very lengthy diatribe is any alternative to gender-affirming care and evidence to support it. Dr. Jack Drescher, a prominent psychiatrist and expert on gender identity recently said:
I don’t know of anybody who’s discovered a way to actually talk a transgender person out of their gender dysphoria.