Also it makes no sense to me that you're saying such assessments will enable parents to keep traumatizing their children, when the entire point is to try to get everyone the appropriate treatment they need, whether for dysphoria or for actual trauma.
-
I'm just going off the text in the picture, but it seems to me like it's arguing that teens who have been abused may not be in a good place to make such decisions? I don't think it's a binary between treatment/no treatment, but adding more counselling before reevaluation?
It's a subtle obfuscation. It doesn't matter if they're not in a good place to make such decisions because when they go before a doctor it becomes the doctor's decision. That's the nature of gatekeeping. Also the only thing that matters is whether the decision is correct or not
-
-
I mean, I agree that should be up to the professionals, but we're hearing more about how it's getting harder for such doctors to *not* affirm gender self-id. Yes, it's up to the doctors, so we should allow measures that help doctors be more accurate?
-
A measure like that would indemnify doctors rather than penalizing them or curtailing them in some way. One tends to increase autonomy and thus accurate professional decision making, the other to produce a specific type of outcome.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
If the affirmation route is growing more common, then it is increasingly largely up to the patient and less the doctor, is it not?
-
If this is the case then it is probably because of broken incentive structures in the system itself rather than because doctors just "feel obligated" or something. Either way the answer should be to change incentive structures rather than force the error in one exact direction.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.