Shifts in Gender Ideology and Medical Practice

The narratives surrounding gender ideology often clash with basic common sense and ethical standards. In recent times, they’ve gained traction among certain politicians, educators, healthcare professionals, and even religious leaders, often at the expense of vulnerable minors and adults.

Interestingly, it seems that at least one major medical association, which previously advocated for “gender-affirming care,” is reevaluating its stance. This change appears to be influenced by significant public pressure, a shift in societal views, and the potential risks of legal repercussions.

“Plastic surgeons must be more vigilant, recognizing that their role is not just technical but ethical.”

The American Society of Plastic Surgeons, established in 1931 and representing over 11,000 physicians, had previously asserted that plastic surgery could aid individuals with gender dysphoria in aligning their physical bodies with their identities. They had also criticized Republican-backed limitations on “gender-affirming care.”

However, a recent statement from ASPS has indicated a major change regarding surgical procedures for those under 19, specifically concerning breast, genital, and facial surgeries.

In light of recent developments, ASPS acknowledged that numerous health systems globally are currently reviewing their practices due to mounting uncertainties about both the symptoms reported by patients and the overall benefits of these medical interventions.

Furthermore, they pointed out that systematic reviews have brought to light new information regarding potential complications arising from treatment, raising concerns about the quality of existing studies and the follow-up care they provide.

ASPS referenced critical reviews, specifically the substantial 388-page Cass Review from the UK, highlighting significant flaws in the evidence supporting gender transition practices, and another detailed 410-page report by the Department of Health and Social Care that explored the treatment of childhood gender dysphoria.

The society noted that the relationship between supposed “gender-affirming care” and adverse outcomes is becoming more apparent, leading to questioning the reliability of the available evidence.

In addition, ASPS pointed out that many children experiencing early-onset gender dysphoria tend to find relief from their distress by the time they reach adulthood, usually without any medical or surgical intervention.

They concluded that there’s insufficient evidence to support a favorable balance between the risks and benefits of gender-related endocrine and surgical interventions for younger patients. ASPS now recommends postponing such surgeries until patients turn 19.

They urged plastic surgeons to recognize their ethical responsibilities beyond technical skills, advocating for enhanced documentation practices and transparency about uncertainties in treatment.

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. praised ASPS for their reevaluation, stating, “I commend the American Society of Plastic Surgeons for standing up to the overmedicalization lobby and defending sound science.”

Kennedy emphasized that efforts like these are crucial for protecting future generations of children from potential lifelong harm.

Dr. Stanley Goldfarb, president of the medical advocacy group Do No Harm, echoed this sentiment, highlighting ASPS’s newfound commitment to evidence-based practices.

ASPS released this policy statement just days following the awarding of $2 million in damages to a woman who underwent gender reassignment surgery as a minor—marking a significant moment in medical malpractice litigation related to such practices.

Fox Varian, now 22, expressed regret over her surgery in 2019, which resulted in the loss of healthy breast tissue, and she is currently pursuing legal action against the medical professionals involved in her care.

Dr. Miriam Grossman, a child psychiatrist and author, commented on the potential shift in medical practices, suggesting that such lawsuits might prompt healthcare providers to reconsider surgical interventions for minors.