Mother's Regret Transitioning Children

[SilverBear]

You know what I did I went back and looked. Too bad you can't find them. It's not that hard.

neither is typing "they are in post #_____"

 

[ThatRobGuy]

If the external (and informal) “triage” modalities are functioning properly, it could follow that only “appropriate candidates” were referred to the clinic? (Still, this strains credulity.)

I guess anything's possible, but as you put it "it strains credulity"...as I'm sure most people can't imagine a specialist of any kind (apart from maybe something like a dietician, since just about everyone technically has something they could improve in their diet) having a 100% treating rate on their referrals.

For the triage model, since a vast number of GPs have admitted in polling and surveys they're seriously underqualified and undereducated on this topic, I can't imagine their referrals are as astute in this realm as they would be for something like referring a child (who they suspect has hearing trouble based on observations that can be assessed in their office) to an audiologist.


But given that this is uncharted water, given what we discussed, I don't think someone merely having some questions or skepticism should immediately lump them in the "far-right transphobe" category.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I think I posted this in an another thread already, but while it does raise concerns, there are some clear follow-up questions to ask:

1. How many patients have they treated? 100% of 10 candidates is a lot different from 100% of 1000 candidates.

I can say with a high degree of confidence than the number certainly isn't a low as 10. (but perhaps you were saying that kind of low number for effect to highlight a point, which is fine)

Their Cincinnati Transgender Health Clinic actually has offices at 3 locations in the Cincinnati area, with a staff of a Medical Director, 3 Doctors, A public relations manager, and 3 nurses. You don't typically have a need for that kind of organizational structure and staff if you're only seeing 10 patients a year.

And given that UCLA estimates that 300,000 kids between the ages of 13-17 identify as transgender, and Cincinnati Childrens hospital is the 4th largest of its kind in the country, I think it's safe to assume they've seen a fair number of patients.

2. How are patients ending up at the clinic? Are they referred to the clinic after other doctors and psychiatrists have determined that they are candidates for transitioning, or are these patients who have had all of their gender identity care through Cincinnati Children's?

Regardless of which of the two scenarios is the case (it's probably a mix of both), the underlying questions one may have are still the same.

Survey and polling would indicate that the majority of practitioners are self-admittedly underqualified and not familiar enough to be confident in their assessments...I posted the link in another thread, but something like 70% of physicians freely admitted that they didn't feel like they were educated enough on it to make a recommendation one way or the other.

So the odds of GPs (and regular Cincinnati Children's hospital staff doctors) getting it right 100% of the time is a dubious proposition at best.


This next part is probably a little bit of my bias against alternative medicine showing, but the aforementioned Medical Director they have (Lee Ann Conrad), is a person who not only has a background in "complementary medicine" and osteopathy (which is basically a hybrid between real medicine and chiropractic) - which already lends itself to pattern of "everyone who walks through the door needs what I have to offer", but is also something of a self-professing activist on the topic (she mentions her affiliation with LGBT organizations on her bio page)

That combination alone makes me a tad skeptical of what kind of leadership that particular department has at that hospital.


...and I would apply that standard across the board, even in cases where I'm 100% in favor of something.

For example, I'm a fan of people being able to use marijuana. However, if a major hospital opened up a medical marijuana division, and the director of that department was a Naturopath who brags on their bio page about being honored with an award from High Times magazine, I'd be a tad skeptical when 100% of the people who showed up were deemed "a good fit" for medical marijuana.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

So the odds of GPs (and regular Cincinnati Children's hospital staff doctors) getting it right 100% of the time is a dubious proposition at best.

Getting what right though? The hospital admin just said "gender treatment," which is a very non-specific phrasing. If 100% of your patients come to you expressing distress related to gender, then it would be reasonable that all of them would need some sort of treatment related to gender, right? That could mean transition or hormone replacement, but it could also just mean counseling from a psychologist who specializes in gender care. At least that's how I read that statement.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Getting what right though? The hospital admin just said "gender treatment," which is a very non-specific phrasing. If 100% of your patients come to you expressing distress related to gender, then it would be reasonable that all of them would need some sort of treatment related to gender, right? That could mean transition or hormone replacement, but it could also just mean counseling from a psychologist who specializes in gender care. At least that's how I read that statement.

The judge's concerns were specifically rooted in the Lee Ann Conrad, herself, saying that 100% of the patients referred to her department were good candidates for continued gender treatment, not just "treatment". That could be a poor choice of words on her part. But "continued" implies that the baseline forms for treatment have already been done.

Judge paves way for transgender teen to get hormone therapy at Cincinnati Children's Hospital

Before therapy can begin at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, the teen must be evaluated by a psychologist not affiliated with the hospital, judge says.

www.cincinnati.com

As noted before, having someone who's an open activist on the matter and affiliated with activist organizations probably wasn't the best idea on the hospital's part. Even if she can be unbiased when assessments are being done, it still opens them up for "conflict of interest" scrutiny. The same way it would if someone who was a member of a pro-fossil fuel lobbying group was appointed to be an organization's head of environmental assessments.


If anything, the Cincinnati Children's hospital would want to make sure they don't have another case of something like this on their hands.

I Thought I Was Saving Trans Kids. Now I’m Blowing the Whistle.

There are more than 100 pediatric gender clinics across the U.S. I worked at one. What’s happening to children is morally and medically appalling.

www.thefp.com

Whistleblower report on St. Louis transgender clinic triggers calls for federal, state probes

Whistleblower Jamie Reed, who worked at the transgender center between 2018 and 2022, said staff too freely prescribed medications and did not properly explain the side effects. “I was struck

www.stltoday.com

If the whistleblower's statements have any shred of truth (and that's yet to be determined, but evidently it's credible enough that it's drawn concern from both the state AG, as well as the university the hospital is affiliated with who says they intend to both launch their own internal investigation, and said they intend to fully cooperate with the state government probe), that could be indicative of a problematic trend, even if it's not an intentionally nefarious one.

...and the whistleblower doesn't appear to have any sort of political axe to grind, as they describe themselves as politically far-left, and are themselves an LGBT person who's married to a trans man.


Good intent plus passion, but without guardrails, can cause the train to go off the tracks from time to time. Combine it with an even deeper passion for "making sure the other side doesn't win because their stance it too far in the other direction", and it's all but guaranteed to go off the tracks. ...and this is an evident pattern on a variety of issues.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

The judge's concerns were specifically rooted in the Lee Ann Conrad, herself, saying that 100% of the patients referred to her department were good candidates for continued gender treatment, not just "treatment". That could be a poor choice of words on her part. But "continued" implies that the baseline forms for treatment have already been done.

Are you not reading what I write? Again, "gender treatment" is such a vague term as to be meaningless. It could mean hormones and surgery, or it could just mean counseling. Those are all forms of treatment that could be related to gender and gender identity - thus "gender treatment". And no therapist is going to kick out a patient after just one session.

If the whistleblower's statements have any shred of truth (and that's yet to be determined, but evidently it's credible enough that it's drawn concern from both the state AG, as well as the university the hospital is affiliated with who says they intend to both launch their own internal investigation, and said they intend to fully cooperate with the state government probe), that could be indicative of a problematic trend, even if it's not an intentionally nefarious one.

I agree, that does sound worthy of an investigation and could be indicative of a problematic trend if true.

 

[Mayzoo]

I cannot even imagine how tired the staff here are. You all have my prayers.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Are you not reading what I write? Again, "gender treatment" is such a vague term as to be meaningless. It could mean hormones and surgery, or it could just mean counseling. Those are all forms of treatment that could be related to gender and gender identity - thus "gender treatment". And no therapist is going to kick out a patient after just one session.

I read what you wrote, but the operative word in continued gender treatment here is "continued", and not "treatment". And given the nature of what that particular wing of the hospital specialized in, it wasn't just "more counselling". The team of physicians I mentioned earlier didn't even have a therapist or psychiatrist on staff (or at least they don't list one on their staff website).

I understand that "treatment" is vague, but "continued" isn't quite as vague in the context of the scope of this particular medical team.

They list Lee Ann Conrad as the Director, 3 other physicians who seem to have a specialized focus on endocrinology, some nurses, and a public relations person.

...which is why the judge (even though ruling in the favor of Cincy Children's and the minor who wanted to get the treatment without parental consent, given the facts of that particular case), stated that their ruling was contingent on the teen, first, getting an evaluation by a psychologist, and one not affiliated with the hospital.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

I understand that "treatment" is vague, but "continued" isn't quite as vague in the context of the scope of this particular medical team.

Actually, I'd say it was just the opposite. If they don't offer counseling through the clinic, then using the word "continued" confirms that counseling is considered "gender treatment' for their purposes (it's highly unlikely that all of their patients were already receiving hormones or had had surgery beforehand), and there's nothing that would preclude referring their patients for counseling from the psychiatric staff at the hospital - she did not say "continued gender treatment by our clinic". Again, it's something that's worth looking into and questioning, but one phrase in a statement by an administrator is hardly enough to make definitive accusations of malpractice on.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Actually, I'd say it was just the opposite. If they don't offer counseling through the clinic, then using the word "continued" confirms that counseling is considered "gender treatment' for their purposes (it's highly unlikely that all of their patients were already receiving hormones or had had surgery beforehand), and there's nothing that would preclude referring their patients for counseling from the psychiatric staff at the hospital - she did not say "continued gender treatment by our clinic". Again, it's something that's worth looking into and questioning, but one phrase in a statement by an administrator is hardly enough to make definitive accusations of malpractice on.

It's possible, but if a 25 year veteran judge (who's been pretty moderate over their career) portrayed it that way based on the testimony heard, and demanded that the teen be seen by a psychologist that's not affiliated with the hospital (as a stipulation of their ruling), that leads me to believe that "continued treatment" in that context, didn't involve "referrals to psychiatric staff elsewhere", because if they were already doing that, that likely would've been clarified (unless all attorneys involved in that case - on both sides - were seriously inept at their chosen profession).

I think that's where political tribalism muddies the waters... people are willing to go to great lengths to conjure up contrived "what if?" scenarios in order to keep their ideological viewpoint "intact" against criticism...when maybe there's room for criticism. And that goes both ways on the political spectrum.

Much like the far-right will come up with contrived narratives to defend their position on guns, I think some on the left have a habit of doing that on these kinds of issues.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

It's possible, but if a 25 year veteran judge (who's been pretty moderate over their career) portrayed it that way based on the testimony heard, and demanded that the teen be seen by a psychologist that's not affiliated with the hospital (as a stipulation of their ruling), that leads me to believe that "continued treatment" in that context, didn't involve "referrals to psychiatric staff elsewhere", because if they were already doing that, that likely would've been clarified (unless all attorneys involved in that case - on both sides - were seriously inept at their chosen profession).

I think the judge's requirement of a second opinion was reasonable. It was based on the parents' concerns that their child wasn't being treated correctly - that's a valid concern, even if it was rooted in transphobia/intolerance. Broadly speaking, a second opinion is always a good idea when making a significant medical decision, and it's something that any parent should do in this situaiton. If the initial assessment was correct, the second opinion would confirm it. And if it was incorrect, then hopefully the child will get the treatment that he/she actually needs.

The statement from the hospital admin wasn't testimony to the court, as far as I can tell - it was just a public statement that the judge had seen that gave her cause for concern. For example, here the same doctor states that 85% of children who have gender issues do not turn out to be trans:

Conard estimates that approximately 2 percent to 3 percent of the population is transgender.

“Gender can be fluid when you’re growing up,” she explains. “Eighty-five percent of kids with gender issues won’t end up being transgender, but they do have a high chance of being gay or lesbian.”

For Healthcare Professionals | Transgender Health Clinic

Our experts help community physicians understand and approach gender issues in childhood and adolescence. Learn about gender identity from top doctors.

www.cincinnatichildrens.org

I think that's where political tribalism muddies the waters... people are willing to go to great lengths to conjure up contrived "what if?" scenarios in order to keep their ideological viewpoint "intact" against criticism...when maybe there's room for criticism. And that goes both ways on the political spectrum.

Much like the far-right will come up with contrived narratives to defend their position on guns, I think some on the left have a habit of doing that on these kinds of issues.

I'm going to point that one right back at you on this. I'm not trying to deflect criticism, just pointing out that you seem to have settled on a singular conclusion based on ambiguous information.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I'm going to point that one right back at you on this. I'm not trying to deflect criticism, just pointing out that you seem to have settled on a singular conclusion based on ambiguous information.

Far from it... I'm not set on a singular conclusion, I believe that certain people are transgender, and may identify with the gender that's societally linked with their opposite sex.

I think I've been pretty balanced on this one.

I've called out conservatives who assume that every practitioner who engages in affirmation "must be groomers", but I've also recognized that people who see themselves as "activists against the conservatives" can have some serious blind spots.

And it would seem that you have tried to deflect some criticism (despite the fact that the criticism wasn't directed at you, personally)

When I highlighted a story about a balanced judge that had some concerns about how a particular medical institution (that has a transgender medicine department that's led by someone who's a member of multiple trans activist groups), your proposed hypothetical defense was rooted in the semantic vagaries of the word "treatment" when that wasn't the core of the inquiry.

A good litmus test on the sincerity of "benefit of the doubt" would be if one is willing to grant "the other side" the same latitude.

For instance, if democrats in your state proposed a measure that said "people under 18 shouldn't be carrying guns unsupervised" (a common sense provision) -- I use that one, because it's an actual thing that's happening in Missouri right now --, would you invoke a "well, there are some 17 year olds in very rural parts of the state who hunt for their food, so that's why some people are opposed to it" defense?

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Far from it... I'm not set on a singular conclusion, I believe that certain people are transgender, and may identify with the gender that's societally linked with their opposite sex.

...I was referring to your opinions on the particular case we've been discussing for the past few days, not your thoughts on transgenderism in general. You've apparently decided that Cincinatti Children's is "transing the kids" whether they need it or not, based on a single quote that may or may not be taken out of context (and either way, does not clearly state what you claim it does).

When I highlighted a story about a balanced judge that had some concerns about how a particular medical institution (that has a transgender medicine department that's led by someone who's a member of multiple trans activist groups), your proposed hypothetical defense was rooted in the semantic vagaries of the word "treatment" when that wasn't the core of the inquiry.

No, I pointed out your flawed interpretation of the ruling (you specifically changed "gender treatment" to "transitioning") and proposed some follow-up lines of inquiry to clarify the issues (to which I could add a third: "What constitutes 'gender treatment'?"). I didn't get into the semantic vagaries of the word "treatment" until you implied that it must mean hormone therapy or transition, which is not at all clear, as you have asserted. While that was not at the core of the inquiry, it would change the meaning of the quote that was provided as part of the judge's reasoning for questioning the diagnosis.

For instance, if democrats in your state proposed a measure that said "people under 18 shouldn't be carrying guns unsupervised" (a common sense provision) -- I use that one, because it's an actual thing that's happening in Missouri right now --, would you invoke a "well, there are some 17 year olds in very rural parts of the state who hunt for their food, so that's why some people are opposed to it" defense?

I dunno, that seems like a reasonable argument against such a law. Not sure how it relates to what I've said though - I'm not defending anything, but rather attacking your flawed reasoning.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

Lesbian couple adopts

Unfit parents do all kinds of crazy things to their kids. And the current trans craze isn't founded in reason or logic, it's founded on the desire to bring forth as many trans people as possible as young as possible.

Or the lady in the article is lying, I read the story. There's no way. The therapist would agree with the kids being transgender with her story. And no there's no craze , to as many trans people as possible.

 

[Servus]

Or the lady in the article is lying, I read the story. There's no way. The therapist would agree with the kids being transgender with her story. And no there's no craze , to as many trans people as possible.

Not everyone in the medical field is beyond reproach.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

...I was referring to your opinions on the particular case we've been discussing for the past few days, not your thoughts on transgenderism in general. You've apparently decided that Cincinatti Children's is "transing the kids" whether they need it or not, based on a single quote that may or may not be taken out of context (and either way, does not clearly state what you claim it does).

But my statements weren't just based on a single quote...it was based on the quote, plus these other things I mentioned earlier in the thread
- The judge's assessments and concerns
- The staff that comprises the department being almost exclusively endocrinologists
- The Department Director's self-professing activist status combined with their professional history
- The example from another major children's hospital that's currently under a probe for questionable ethics and conduct (to show that that sort of thing isn't just confined to small "under the radar" clinics)

 

[rjs330]

Not everyone in the medical field is beyond reproach.

Especially those that are involved in castrating and mutilating children for money.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

But my statements weren't just based on a single quote...it was based on the quote, plus these other things I mentioned earlier in the thread
- The judge's assessments and concerns

Which were also based on that quote.

- The staff that comprises the department being almost exclusively endocrinologists
- The Department Director's self-professing activist status combined with their professional history

Perhaps cause for concern, but not evidence of anything.

- The example from another major children's hospital that's currently under a probe for questionable ethics and conduct (to show that that sort of thing isn't just confined to small "under the radar" clinics)

Irrelevant, as it does not pertain to the actions of Cincinatti Children's.

Look, I can completely understand wanting to proceed with an abundance of caution, and there are definitely things worth questioning and/or investigating when it comes to gender treatment, but you're going to great lengths to contrive "what if" scenarios at Cincinatti Children's to support that narrative.

 

[rjs330]

Which were also based on that quote.


Perhaps cause for concern, but not evidence of anything.


Irrelevant, as it does not pertain to the actions of Cincinatti Children's.

Look, I can completely understand wanting to proceed with an abundance of caution, and there are definitely things worth questioning and/or investigating when it comes to gender treatment, but you're going to great lengths to contrive "what if" scenarios at Cincinatti Children's to support that narrative.

The fact that 100% get treatment there and and that kids are transitioned there is enough to condemn the hospital. Any hospital that provides for transitioning of children deserves condemnation period. It's not ever right to castrate or mutilate kids.

 

[FreeinChrist]

Or, more likely, it is a fake story created to push the manufactured outrage of certain groups

It is an odd story in that the mother(s) let a 4 year old decide what to be - which is ridiculously young.
IF the story is real, which is questionable.