Cranius wrote:connor wrote:While I agree with the above argument and am firmly in the NOT CRAP position, my girlfriend, a Manhattan surgeon, offers this perspective (paraphrased):
"We (meaning U.S. surgeons) don't really do them anymore, since about the mid 90s. The reason is because a lot of medical literature came out that more often than not, a person's desire to change sexes was really just a mask for deeper problems. People often become convinced that all their problems lie in their gender, but this often isn't the case. People who had the operation were found to still have unresolved issues that they thought would be 'cured' by the procedure. They become so psychologically focused on this, then they get 'fixed' but still have the same depression issues.
"As a surgeon, if you're trying to fix something and make someone happier, yet the surgery doesn't do what its supposed to do, then as surgeon, I'm obligated not to do it...because it's surgery. There are risks involved in all surgeries, and this kind, it's really, really hard to reverse."
Connor, I'm curious as to why surgeons in the US are in agreement not carry out gender reassignment treatments anymore. Here in the UK there is 98% success rate for this surgery, with only 1% of patients regretting having this surgery. At current, it is the only known effective treatment for transsexualism. If you compare this to the 70's, when patients were treated with group and aversion therapies, there was a suicide rate 30%. So, I think could be safe in saying that it is life-saving surgery, as people do kill and mutilate themselves form this disorder. It is also regarded here as an inborn disability and treated equally to other correctable disabilities.
Who knows? I'm just repeating what she said. And from what I can tell, she's very good at what she does, so I trust her. Also, she's no prude about such things.
Connor