Penna Dexter

A landmark study released last month reveals that, when a child presents with “sudden onset gender dysphoria,” rushing to provide so-called “gender affirming care,” is not medical progress or a natural “next step.”

The standard warning has been that if the child exhibiting gender incongruence does not receive gender affirming care, he or she is a likely suicide risk. But the United Kingdom’s National Health Service recently released a nearly 400-page report that counters this narrative. Researcher and pediatrician Hillary Cass chaired this independent review, the most comprehensive evaluation of the evidence to date. Her data confirms that children who suddenly exhibit gender dysphoria are often suffering from other mental health challenges and would benefit from holistic evaluation and treatment.

The report noted the lack of quality in published studies which form the basis upon which clinical decisions are made. Researchers observed that gender affirming care is based upon “shaky foundations,” and evidence for the use of puberty blockers, cross sex hormones and medical transition surgeries as treatment for gender dysphoria is “remarkably weak.”

On puberty blockers, the report concludes: “The rationale for early puberty suppression remains unclear.”

On cross sex hormones: “The use of masculinizing/feminizing hormones in those under the age of 18 also presents many unknowns, despite their longstanding use in the adult transgender population.”

Currently, these — followed by surgery — are the go-to strategies even when gender dysphoria is accompanied by other mental health problems and conditions like autism spectrum disorder and neurodiversity issues.

Gender activists and practitioners recommend treatments as if the science were settled. It’s not. There are long term negative medical and psychological consequences to these treatments.

One of those consequences is that in pursuing this path the young person has not sufficiently dealt with the underlying mental issues.

The report concludes: “For most young people, a medical pathway will not be the best way to manage their gender-related distress.”

‘Perhaps the Cass Report will usher in some needed caution.