<p>The entire 106-page task force report is at <a href=“Page Not Found”>Internal Server Error;
<p>Lo and behold, the AMA reached a similar conclusion, adopting its own resolution on transgender health care on June 16, 2008. But some people, in their supreme arrogance and presumption, consumed by their own insecurities, claim to know better. In other words, they pretend to have knowledge on a subject about which they’re entirely ignorant.</p>
<p>AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION HOUSE OF DELEGATES
Resolution: 122
(A-08) . . .</p>
<p>Whereas, The American Medical Association opposes discrimination on the basis of gender identity and </p>
<p>Whereas, Gender Identity Disorder (GID) is a serious medical condition recognized as such in both the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th Ed., Text
Revision) (DSM-IV-TR) and the International Classification of Diseases (10th Revision), and is characterized in the DSM-IV-TR as a persistent discomfort with one’s assigned sex and with one’s primary and secondary sex characteristics, which causes intense emotional pain and suffering; and </p>
<p>Whereas, GID, if left untreated, can result in clinically significant psychological distress, dysfunction, debilitating depression and, for some people without access to appropriate medical care and treatment, suicidality and death; and </p>
<p>Whereas, The World Professional Association For Transgender Health, Inc. (“WPATH”) is the leading international, interdisciplinary professional organization devoted to the understanding and treatment of gender identity disorders, and has established internationally accepted Standards of Care for providing medical treatment for people with GID, including mental health care, hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery, which are designed to promote the health and welfare of persons with GID and are recognized within the medical community to be the standard of care for treating people with GID; and </p>
<p>Whereas, **An established body of medical research demonstrates the effectiveness and medical necessity of mental health care, hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery as forms of therapeutic treatment for many people diagnosed with GID; and </p>
<p>Whereas, Health experts in GID, including WPATH, have rejected the myth that such treatments are “cosmetic” or “experimental” and have recognized that these treatments
can provide safe and effective treatment for a serious health condition**; and </p>
<p>Whereas, Physicians treating persons with GID must be able to provide the correct treatment necessary for a patient in order to achieve genuine and lasting comfort with his or her gender, based on the person’s individual needs and medical history; and </p>
<p>Whereas, The AMA opposes limitations placed on patient care by third-party payers when such care is based upon sound scientific evidence and sound medical opinion;
and </p>
<p>Whereas, Many health insurance plans categorically exclude coverage of mental health, medical, and surgical treatments for GID, even though many of these same treatments,
such as psychotherapy, hormone therapy, breast augmentation and removal, hysterectomy, oophorectomy, orchiectomy, and salpingectomy, are often covered for
other medical conditions; and </p>
<p>Whereas, The denial of these otherwise covered benefits for patients suffering from GID represents discrimination based solely on a patient’s gender identity; and </p>
<p>Whereas, Delaying treatment for GID can cause and/or aggravate additional serious and expensive health problems, such as stress-related physical illnesses, depression, and
substance abuse problems, which further endanger patients’ health and strain the health care system; therefore be it </p>
<p>RESOLVED, That the AMA support public and private health insurance coverage for treatment of gender identity disorder (Directive to Take Action); and be it further </p>
<p>RESOLVED, That the AMA oppose categorical exclusions of coverage for treatment of gender identity disorder when prescribed by a physician (Directive to Take Action).</p>
<p>“Since certain people like to quote the APA, I guess they have to agree with the following resolution the APA adopted last year”</p>
<p>Well, no, they don’t. The purpose of quoting the APA was to provide an “unbiased,” irrefutable source for those who demand substantiation of every factual statement, and who decry as “biased” any source that does not agree with their views. In this case, the APA was quoted to support the statement that the causes of homosexuality are complex, and that the existence of a so-called “gay gene” has not been established.
That’s all. :)</p>
<p>claremarie, so what?</p>
<p>A bit off to the side, but I have to say that I am so incredibly busy taking care of myself and my family with respect to spiritual matters, health, finances, education, leisure time, etc. that I just cannot imagine having any energy left over to obsess about how other people who are not hurting anyone else should or should not live their lives. I always find it fascinating when I see folks who really don’t have enough on their own plate to keep themselves occupied. </p>
<p>I understand that we are all here on CC in a political forum discussing things, but I still am amazed when people devote so much mental real estate to trying to control and judge others.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For the same reason that people with jobs and large families “find” (make) the time to “obsess” about things like the future of the planet, like the future of energy, like the opportunities for education in Third World countries. Because they give a damn about future generations and a world they will one day no longer inhabit, but whose resources and social structures will be left to posterity to inherit, manage, and maybe even be victimized by.</p>
<p>What a concept.:rolleyes:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>DonnaL- I may have misused the word biology. By biology I meant the configuration of the genitals, rather than the personal/mental/spiritual gender. I meant biology to refer to the physical. </p>
<p>Regarding the article that claremarie posted-about treatment of children with GID, the point I was trying to make was that there might be some children who appear to have GID but who really don’t- ie. they are saying they want to be the opposite gender because of other issues- ie. sibling favoritism, a family that denigrates women, etc. Therapy for these kids will uncover and perhaps “cure” what appears to be GID but really isn’t. Then there are kids who truly have the “trapped” and gender identity issues because the body parts and the gender identity in the mind and spirit are out of synch. To me, this situation has thus far not successfully been addressed by therapy that tries to get the person to accept the gender usually associated with the particular body parts. The best treatment thus far has included changing the body parts to match the mental and spiritual identity at the end of a long process of therapy to address acceptance of gender. </p>
<p>I agree that at this point in time the cause of transexuality isn’t anywhere near as important to determine as the treatment and societal acceptance of the people. However, as a Catholic, I do hope that causes can be identified at some point, for both homosexuality and transsexuality, so that the Church can articulate its theology of sexuality with firm science in mind. Having the firm science is about the only way I see the Church possibly changing its positions on these two areas of sexuality and gender.</p>
<p>I agree that not all children with gender dysphoria or GID turn out to be transsexual. The majority of adult trans people were gender dysphoric as children, but I certainly can’t say that it works the other way round. (Although I’m not sure people realize just how extreme the dysphoria of a severely gender dysphoric child can be. This has very little to do with girls who are tomboys or boys who happen to like to play with dolls. Nobody’s advocating early transition for that.) Still, though, I don’t believe anything irreversible should be done in terms of medical transition until the child is really old enough to make a decision. Sometimes, after all, children don’t strongly identify with one gender or another – because they don’t see gender as making much difference to their lives – until they reach puberty. My own son was mildly gender-variant as a child (not like I was; more in the way a lot of boys are who end up being gay), but, as it turned out, he decided once he reached puberty that he really, really liked being a boy! (I, on the other hand, hated it. The fact that it was, in essence, artificially induced was especially unpleasant for me. I felt like I was being poisoned. But I didn’t like what it did to me regardless of how it happened.)</p>
<p>All eye-rolling sarcasm aside, epiphany, please explain what this:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Has to do with LGBT people. Nothing that I can see. Unless you’re like that Congressperson from Oklahoma who announced a few months ago that LGBT people in general, and same sex marriage in particular, were a greater threat to this country than terrorism. </p>
<p>There are some people for whom “delusional” and “out of touch with reality” are extremely accurate terms.</p>
<p>Clearly, it is important for all of us to be concerned about </p>
<p>epiphany
whether or not we agree on the way to take care of those things.</p>
<p>Trying to control “social structures” is a VERY slippery slope. Today YOU may be the one deciding what others can and cannot do (with respect to things which are by their very nature personal). Tomorrow it may be ME telling YOU what you can or cannot do (and I have a very strange sense of humor, so trust me - you would not like it). Either way, not good at all.</p>
<p>“However, as a Catholic, I do hope that causes can be identified at some point, for both homosexuality and transsexuality, so that the Church can articulate its theology of sexuality with firm science in mind. Having the firm science is about the only way I see the Church possibly changing its positions on these two areas of sexuality and gender.”</p>
<p>The Catholic Church’s position on homosexuality is NOT based on the cause, so it matters little whether a “gay gene” is ever identified, or if research eventually concludes that sexual orientation can be affected or even changed by early childhood experiences.</p>
<p>The above statement is correct. The moral position on homosexuality activity is different than that of homosexual orientation, or what is referred to as SSA (same-sex attraction). The position is that even IF it were to be determined that it’s “only genetics” that is at the root of SSA, homosexual activity is still condemned.</p>
<p>DonnaL- I, too, would be concerned with irreversible childhood transition. But, if the child is suffering horribly, would you think about non-hormonal or non- surgical transition options, under the care of a therapist? IE- dressing and outward behavior. As well as working with the school to ensure bathroom privacy and gym class issues and whatever else arises. Or are there other ways to help ease the pain the child must be experiencing?</p>
<p>claremarie and epiphany- You are correct that the Church’s current position is not dependent on cause, but that does not mean that if a cause were determined in the future that the Church would not rearticulate its position in light of the unitive as well as procreative aspects of human sexuality. In addition, if a cause for transexuality were determined, the Church could more directly teach about the morality of surgery and hormonal treatment. </p>
<p>I’m not saying that the Church will immediately react or even ever change because of new scientific discoveries; I am saying that new scientific discoveries are the only possible reasons for a change in Church teaching on these issues. I don’t think it’s real likely, but I wouldn’t say never.</p>
<p>Given my study of theology, both current and past, I strongly doubt that the position on homosexual activity will ever change in the RCC in our lifetimes, minimum. I think it’s conceivable that the position on transgendering may change, to some degree. The position on transsexualism is barely even formed/articulated, and is in process. </p>
<p>The two realities are different. They are not driven by the same principles/ideology on the part of the RCC, nor are the life realities the same for the two different groups.</p>
<p>I’m not Catholic, so speaking as an observer, but the Catholic Church does have a history of changing teachings because of scientific advance, the subject of evolution coming immediately to mind.</p>
<p>Or heliocentricism. But how long did that take?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Many families make decisions that others might consider “unjust.” Some might say, for example, that an impoverished and unemployed Catholic couple who deliberately decide to become pregnant with their 14th child are not acting in the best interests of their children. But at the same time, most people would acknowledge that it was a choice made with love, and with the intent to work hard to ensure a successful future for their offspring. Why can’t a same-sex couple who adopts a child–with that same love and hope for the future–be afforded the same respect? Neither family situation may be ideal, but both have a right to exist, and both would benefit from the support of the community.</p>
<p>But garland, they do not have a long history of changing moral positions on sexuality. That is a different category entirely.</p>
<p>Again, the RCC does not base its moral decisions solely on scientific advancements. Obviously, many regret that, but the basis of moral decisions (as opposed to academics, i.e., systematic theology) is a combination of philosophy, biblical teachings, and what is called “tradition,” which includes the history of Catholic thought: ancient to present.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why is that?</p>