Summary

In this short debate piece, Kirsty Entwistle, a clinical psychologist who had worked at England's NHS youth gender service in Leeds, backs Butler and Hutchinson's call for detransition research. She argues that stories detransitioners have shared online show decisions about puberty blockers (drugs that pause puberty), hormones and surgery being made on misleading information about how well they work and whether they are needed. She calls for long-term tracking of everyone treated by NHS and private clinics, for non-medical treatments for gender distress, and for a close look at the systems that shaped current practice. The piece raised concerns that were later examined by England's official evidence reviews and the Cass Review, an independent review of youth gender services. But it is opinion based on personal stories and gives no figures on how common these problems are.

Key findings

• Artikel ini adalah tanggapan dua halaman terhadap seruan Butler dan Hutchinson tahun 2020 untuk penelitian dan layanan bagi orang yang menghentikan atau membalikkan transisi.
• Artikel ini mencatat kelompok orang yang berhenti transisi yang makin banyak, banyak di antaranya berusia belasan dan awal dua puluhan, yang membagikan pengalaman mereka di ruang daring publik karena tidak ada layanan spesialis untuk mereka.
• Penulis berargumen bahwa tindak lanjut jangka panjang yang terorganisasi atas semua orang yang diberi perawatan medis oleh klinik NHS dan swasta sangat penting.
• Ia berargumen bahwa keputusan tentang perawatan medis untuk tekanan gender didasarkan pada informasi yang menyesatkan tentang seberapa baik perawatan itu bekerja dan apakah perawatan itu diperlukan.
• Ia mengatakan kisah-kisah orang yang berhenti transisi menunjukkan bahwa perawatan non-medis untuk tekanan gender sangat dibutuhkan.
• Ia menyerukan pemeriksaan cermat terhadap sistem politik dan organisasi yang mengarah pada praktik saat ini, untuk mencegah anak muda mendapat perawatan medis yang tidak mereka butuhkan.

Abstract

Butler and Hutchinson's clarion call (Butler and Hutchinson, 2020) for empirical research on desistance and detransition deserves careful consideration. It formally documents the needs of the emerging cohort of detransitioners, many of whom are in their teens and early twenties. In the absence of specialist services, some detransitioners have been sharing their experiences in public forums. The anecdotal reports by detransitioners indicate that systematic long-term follow-up of those who have been prescribed medical interventions by NHS and private clinics is essential to understanding the gestalt. Decision-making on the basis of misinformation on the effectiveness and necessity of medical interventions for gender dysphoria is a problem, and detransitioners indicate that nonmedical interventions for gender dysphoria are sorely needed. Analysis of the political and organisational systems that have brought us to the current situation is required in order to prevent more young people from being prescribed unnecessary medical interventions for gender dysphoria.

Conclusion

Detransitioners' testimonies reveal that decision-making about medical interventions for gender dysphoria has been based on misinformation regarding effectiveness and necessity. Systematic long-term follow-up of individuals prescribed medical interventions is essential, nonmedical interventions for gender dysphoria are sorely needed, and analysis of the political and organisational systems that led to the current situation is required to prevent more young people from being prescribed unnecessary medical interventions.