As the title says, and another significant milestone for the medical community.
For the record, New England Journal of Medicine also ignited the future on this topic, in 2013:Â Now Reading: Care of Transsexual Persons â€” NEJM, in the era of inclusion
The reasoning used by all groups (in deciding to have surgery) reflected a desire not just to live, but also to live authentically.
â€œ[T]his is not rocket science; these are human beings,â€ said (Jamison) Green (PhD, President of WPATH). â€œ[T]he endo- crine differences that they might have, [or] if theyâ€™ve had genital reconstruction, are not insurmountable challenges. [Itâ€™s] a varia- tion: you just deal with it in a logical way.â€
My one critique, if I can give it (I can, it’s my blog) is the alternating use of appropriate and inappropriate terminology. The author refers to genital surgery as “gender reassignment” which is INcorrect, alternating with “gender affifmration” which is correct. No one has their gender reassigned by surgery. Their gender is their gender.
Part of being a journalist in this space is to double check style rules, so as not to perpetuate the bias you are trying to eliminate. There’s a handy style guide available, that’s quick and easy to read:GLAAD Media Reference Guide – Transgender Issues | GLAAD
And, my role here is to thank JAMA and author Laura Buchholz for creating something that the medical profession can look at and realize that it really is the 21st Century for the rest of the world, including in health care. Much appreciated.