Beware of short cuts. (36)

If full information is available, I think it should be fine to trade these kind of hormone treatments.

The most sensible reason for limiting access to naturally occuring or medical grade hormones is that when people take life and body altering medications without the involvement of a doctor there is nobody to monitor any health related things which need monitoring and prevent (or treat/adjust meds for) people becoming ill. Even having access to that should be a choice. (Given that people can poison themselves daily with alcohol and nicotine without being vetted by doctors, psychiatrists, then a clinic before being possibly permitted to smoke or drink).

The problem of people putting themselves at risk via self treatments (by which I mean medical problems arising from medicine use) would be better fixed in my opinion by opening access to treatments in localised medical communities, instead of trying to stop treatments becoming available elsewhere. The gatekeeping of it is part of what causes people to deal with their own problems and go elsewhere because the process is too long and humiliating for many. We also need to recognise not everyone needs mental or emotional support necessarily, if nobody is making things difficult for them, so we can make active choices to use the meds.

I think the (expensive and ridiculously stereotyped and conditional) medical gatekeeping of transition drugs is detrimental to many people and unnecessary - adults should be allowed to make their own mistakes. Let's face it, most people tend not to change their gender on a whim, the instability of a minority of others is not those majority people's problem. People who need help can still have it without conditions being imposed on everyone.

For example, I think if a person has a chronic need or desire to transition (chronic, I understand in medical terms as meaning consistently for six months or more) then they should get the hormone treatments via their doc - eg in UK their GP in Germany their Hausarzt and so on, once they have access to full information about the risks and benefits. Without need for someone else to permit it other than their own GP to confirm that the information has been seen and understood and there are no obvious health reasons not to have them.

GPs should (and probably do) have enough information to do the relevant blood checks etc needed for health reasons when using these kind of treatments (for various kinds of people) and a referral can be made to endocrinology when treatment is started if something is amiss or more detailed medical checks are necessary.

It would save a lot of money wasted in the gender system they could spend on other things such as giving out gender clinic appointments to people who are having gender problems (rather than having a problem getting drugs they know they need, whilst being held up in the vetting system).

Gender clinics - I'd prefer they were an option for support than a vetting process. people who need them should be able to get to them and those who don't should be allowed to do what they wish with their own bodies.

De

Vote to repeal the kinky porn ban! http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/posts/282427/
Sign up to CAAN's statement www.caan.org.uk

Edited 5 Dec 11, 10:02 AM by Degenerate

http://empressm7.uboot.com/ http://www.socialkink.com/empressmartine Vampire, pro/lifestyle ts dom/switch.Ageplay mummy/aunty/AB,medical play,domestic,energy, outdoor specialist."Who you calling"@?!;:$£<&#931;#"!" "Did you just call me a "@€$££!?"!

I am certainly no expert in the history of the medicalisation of trans people, but as far as I can tell, in the UK t least, the system is very much a gatekeeping one for at least two reasons.

The first is simply about seeking accuracy and not wanting to be liable for mistakes. Most of us probably know that LGBT issues can be complex and overlaps can confuse people. For example, people have mistaken homosexuality for being trans and vice versa (whereas sexuality and gender are quite separate). Also, people occasionally make mistakes and regret transitioning. I think the procedure of being vetted & counselled by two psychiatrists before being referred to gender experts is designed to weed out those mistakes, to prevent regrets later - to sepearate those having other mental health issues from 'genuine' transpeople in order to give them the right support.

The main problems I see with this is that the process is humiliating and relies on a stereotyped model of 'genuine' man and womanhood, which if people do not meet, they are also thrown out with the weeds. The criteria people are expected to meet are not criteria non-trans men and women would necessarily meet either, nor are they expected to. It also takes no account of people who are neither male or female.

Secondly, there are restrictions on what the NHS can pay for, as with anything, and although hormone treatments are cheap, the surgeries people may wish to have as well are not. The weeding system is designed to ensure that those in most need receive the treatments. I think initially the only reason transsexualism (lets face it, they aren't interested in other transgender matters usually) is treated on the NHS is that it is a life threatening condition, in that it's been found that where people are prevented from living the lives and being the person they truly are, the suicide rates amongst trans people are depressingly high. Those treatments save lives.

I think these notions are valid but I think the one size fits all approach is not needed and would save more money for those who need it if people who are stable and know their mind could be enabled to just get on with it via GPs (as per my previous message) instead of clogging up the gender clinics and lead up doctors (psychiatrists) with people who don't need them. De

Vote to repeal the kinky porn ban! http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/posts/282427/
Sign up to CAAN's statement www.caan.org.uk

http://empressm7.uboot.com/ http://www.socialkink.com/empressmartine Vampire, pro/lifestyle ts dom/switch.Ageplay mummy/aunty/AB,medical play,domestic,energy, outdoor specialist."Who you calling"@?!;:$£<&#931;#"!" "Did you just call me a "@€$££!?"!

Edited 29 Nov 11, 5:35 PM by Empress_Martine

Yes I suppose that's one mistake people could make. Another is the medical people are trying to weed out those (men) with a fetish for cross dressing from those who are transsexual (ie those who are women).. though the tests on this don't always make sense when compared with non trans women.

For example - people may be asked if they wear ladies underwear when masturbating. But the test does not stand up when compared with non trans women - ie, most women when masturbating, if they are not naked, are wearing women's underwear.

So here, we see something which is normal amongst women, being regarded differently where it relates to trans women. Non trans women also regularly find dressing up sexy makes them feel sexy, I see no logical reason for it to be any different for trans women. Let's face it, most of us feel sexier when dressed certain ways - and feel less sexy when dressed others. Non trans women also have fetishes - eg for hosiery, lingerie or heels - that's without getting into the less common fetishes we see with BDSM/Fet people. Trans women have to be allowed the same normal turn ons, surely.

Of course it's always easy to criticise current sifting processes.. I have only partial ideas about how to do it 'right' would work and I think it's ok to at least initially check those trans people presenting aren't terribly mixed up, for their own welfare, but after that we need to be allowed to make our own mistakes. This doesn't stop me feeling there has to be a more respectful and less humiliating way to work that out.

I do think trans people themselves working alongside medical proffessionals could come up with a better system though, if the expert view of trans people was accepted for what it is. The complete medicalisation of transsexuality, which is also partly to do with social roles, is a mistake in my view.

De

Vote to repeal the kinky porn ban! http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/posts/282427/
Sign up to CAAN's statement www.caan.org.uk

Edited 5 Dec 11, 10:03 AM by Degenerate

My personal belief is that the psychiatric supervision is required, if only to check the conclusions of the patient. Though the application of the rules should be more uniform, or better understood by both sides.

Hugs,

Irebne.

Yet Dom as I am _ Still I crave the wind from your sub wings
fleeting softly with gentleness so pure

http://empressm7.uboot.com/ http://www.socialkink.com/empressmartine Vampire, pro/lifestyle ts dom/switch.Ageplay mummy/aunty/AB,medical play,domestic,energy, outdoor specialist."Who you calling"@?!;:$£<&#931;#"!" "Did you just call me a "@€$££!?"!