Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz reviews _The Cass Report_
Epidemiologist and writer (TIME, STAT News, Slate, Guardian, etc) looks into _The Cass Review Into Gender Identity Services For Children_, the recent review of gender identity services in the UK (which has also been referred to in Ireland), and isn’t impressed:
In some cases […] the review contains statements that are false regardless of what your position on healthcare for transgender children is. Take the “exponential” rise in transgender children that the review spends so much time on. It’s true that there has been a dramatic rise in the number of children with gender dysphoria. The rise mostly occurred between 2011-2015, and has plateaued since. These are facts. One theory that may explain the facts is that this is caused by changing diagnostic criteria – when we changed the diagnosis from gender identity disorder to the much broader gender dysphoria, this included many more children. We’ve seen this exact trend happen with everything from autism to diabetes, and we know that broadening diagnostic criteria almost always results in more people with a condition. Another theory is that these changes were caused by the internet. […] The Cass review treated these two theories unequally. The first possible explanation, which I would argue is by far the most likely, was ignored completely. The second possible explanation was given a lengthy and in-depth discussion. […] The point is that the scientific findings of the Cass review are mostly about uncertainty. We are uncertain about the causes of a rise in trans kids, and uncertain about the best treatment modalities. But everything after that is opinion. The review did not even consider the question of whether normal puberty is a problem for transgender children, or whether psychotherapy can be harmful. That’s why these are now the only options in the UK – medical treatments were assumed to be harmful, while non-medical interventions (or even no treatment at all) were assumed harmless. […] What we can say with some certainty is that the most impactful review of gender services for children was seriously, perhaps irredeemably, flawed. The document made numerous basic errors, cited conversion therapy in a positive way, and somehow concluded that the only intervention with no evidence whatsoever behind it was the best option for transgender children.
(tags: transgender trans uk politics cass-report cass-review gideon-m-k healthcare children teenagers gender)