Detransition is often called rare. In this short opinion piece, Sarah Jorgensen argues that the rising number of young people who regret transition should be seen as harm caused by medical care, like past cases where drugs later proved harmful. She says the gender-affirming approach skips proper assessment, plays down risks, blames mental health problems mostly on stigma, and rests on weak evidence, as official reviews in Sweden, Finland and England found. She notes the main guidelines give little advice on detransition. She calls for open debate, more research, and recognition and support for detransitioners. It is a clear statement of concerns, but it is opinion, not new research. Its 10 to 30% figures come from a few studies that counted people stopping treatment, which is not the same as regret.
Although transition regret and detransition are often dismissed as rare, the increasing number of young detransitioners who have come forward in recent years to publicly share their experiences suggests that there are cracks in the gender-affirmation model of care that can no longer be ignored. In this commentary, I argue that the medical community must find ways to have more open discussions and commit to research and clinical collaboration so that regret and detransition really are vanishingly rare outcomes. Moving forward, we must recognize detransitioners as survivors of iatrogenic harm and provide them with the personalized medicine and supports they require.
Conclusion
The medical community must find ways to have more open discussions and commit to research and clinical collaboration so that regret and detransition really are vanishingly rare outcomes. Last, we must recognize detransitioners as survivors of iatrogenic harm and provide them with the personalized medicine and supportive care that they need.