A WARNING FOR THOSE CONSIDERING MtF SRS

[SandraJane]

Lynn Conway.com

Basic TG/TS/IS Information
by Lynn Conway
http://www.lynnconway.com/
Copyright @ 2000-2005, Lynn Conway.
All Rights Reserved.


A WARNING FOR THOSE CONSIDERING MtF SRS:

What if you "succeed" in completing a TS transition, but did it for the wrong reasons?

Yep, you get the idea! This is one place you do NOT want to go!

Retrieved from the Internet on September 2, 2011 by SJ


http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Warning.html

Samantha Kane

Then we have those who "change sex" on a whim and have the financial means to do so, then afterwards have regrets and sue everyone in sight who "did this to them" - while not taking any responsibility whatsoever for their own actions.

For example, consider the case of "Samantha Kane", and then think about the damage that this impulsive person has done to himself and about the harm he is now doing to trans women everywhere by his irresponsible actions - both in transitioning and then in lashing out as those who tried to help him in the first place.

[spacial]

Thanks for posting this. Like many, I've seen this and other sites, reporting the claims of Mr. Cane, and others.

There are a number of quite obvious problems jump out but one, rather obvious one is, why would he chose to change his name to Charles?

But as has been said many times, some people say they regret transision. Some regret almost anything. But SRS is unlike most medical procedures in that it has an overwealming success rate. I recently saw a claim that it was 97%, with a rider that some claimed it was only 80%. That reminded me of the radio interview a few years ago, with the head of the Zimbabwian central bank, on a report that Zimbabwian inflation was 9mill%. He retorted, (with expletives), that it was actually only 3mil%.

[justmeinoz]

Considering the requirements of the SoC, I have trouble with the concept of "SRS on a whim".  Bloody long slow whim in my opinion.   All sounds just a little bit BS to me.

Karen.

[chloe23]

 You should be responsible for your own decisions, where adults. I agree SRS is not for everybody, but for some it is a life saver. People who have SRS and then come to regret it try to blame everybody in sight for it. Transition can be very expensive and many family's are torn apart with it. It should be something that is thoroughly thought out and expect the consequences of it.

Chloe

[Ann Onymous]

Considering the requirements of the SoC, I have trouble with the concept of "SRS on a whim".  Bloody long slow whim in my opinion.   All sounds just a little bit BS to me.

Not everyone who performs SRS pays heed to the SoC...there are a handful of plastic surgeons that will take any request for the right amount of money.  Essentially informed consent on a more permanent scale than HRT...

The SoC was the bane of my existence in the mid-80's...

[melissa42013]

Not everyone who performs SRS pays heed to the SoC...there are a handful of plastic surgeons that will take any request for the right amount of money.  Essentially informed consent on a more permanent scale than HRT...

The SoC was the bane of my existence in the mid-80's...

I have come to resent to so called "Standards of Care". I feel that I am an adult and fully capable of making my own educated decisions regarding how I choose to live my life. I resent that I have to spend so much time with therapists who act as gate keepers to "officially" start me on HRT, that I have to do a year of RLT, and then get two letters from professionals that go into a lot of detail to get SRS. (assuming you follow the rules)

If I want to get just about any other type of plastic surgery I can just go talk to a doctor. I don't need to be checked out and certified by a therapist to get it. Just as there are a few people who get obsessed with plastic surgery there will be people who do SRS for the "wrong" reason. But for gods sake, we are adults and we should be held responsible for our own decisions. If I decided to have my penis medially enlarged, and it caused erectile dysfunction, that is my decision.

The SOC kept me from seeking care for many many years as it seemed like just too restrictive of a process. So for years I held off on doing anything and now at 38 am wishing I would have started earlier. (like most others). It is wise to seek therapy in this process, absolutely. Should it be required, perhaps on a certain level. But at this point in my life I am pretty certain what I need to do and the process is just going to get in the way. I started HRT on my own and THEN elected to seek therapy and medical supervision for my own reasons. That is my decision and I don't like the idea of having the fears of the actions of "the least common denominator" dictate what I have to do. If this were applied to everything we would end up having to wear helmets to drive a car!

Ok, that was my rant...... begin the abuse.... lol
-M

[Steph]

I have come to resent to so called "Standards of Care". I feel that I am an adult and fully capable of making my own educated decisions regarding how I choose to live my life. I resent that I have to spend so much time with therapists who act as gate keepers to "officially" start me on HRT, that I have to do a year of RLT, and then get two letters from professionals that go into a lot of detail to get SRS. (assuming you follow the rules)

If I want to get just about any other type of plastic surgery I can just go talk to a doctor. I don't need to be checked out and certified by a therapist to get it. Just as there are a few people who get obsessed with plastic surgery there will be people who do SRS for the "wrong" reason. But for gods sake, we are adults and we should be held responsible for our own decisions. If I decided to have my penis medially enlarged, and it caused erectile dysfunction, that is my decision.

The SOC kept me from seeking care for many many years as it seemed like just too restrictive of a process. So for years I held off on doing anything and now at 38 am wishing I would have started earlier. (like most others). It is wise to seek therapy in this process, absolutely. Should it be required, perhaps on a certain level. But at this point in my life I am pretty certain what I need to do and the process is just going to get in the way. I started HRT on my own and THEN elected to seek therapy and medical supervision for my own reasons. That is my decision and I don't like the idea of having the fears of the actions of "the least common denominator" dictate what I have to do. If this were applied to everything we would end up having to wear helmets to drive a car!

Ok, that was my rant...... begin the abuse.... lol
-M

No abuse but the arguments you've presented are old news many have had the same feelings, "It's my body, I'll do what I want with it".  The folks mentioned in the article were adults too and obviously thought they knew best.  They are just safe guards to protect the patient.  Comparing plastic surgery to SRS is not quite fair.  Given the advances made, a person who goes in for a face lift/brow lift etc. and isn't happy with the results can usually have it repaired, SRS is forever, there ain't no going back.  SOC protects those wannabes who think it would be neat to have a vagina and be a woman.  People who think they know best can really mess it up for every one else.  SOC protects the patient and the surgeons from idiotic clients.  Surgeons getting sued will certainly think twice about continuing to provide SRS.

Ya it's a pain in the ass, but damn this is forever.

[SandraJane]

And Kane still denies responsibility for it.  Lynn Conway lists 4 of the most well known SRS "regrets", there's probably a few more. The SOC isn't foolproof, but like Steph sez, this is forever, few are rich like Kane and can afford a "redo".

[Izumi]

I dont know about you, but i had to jump a lot of hoops and take a test to make sure i wasn't crazy before i was approved for SRS by my therapist and later confirmed that by another therapist before surgery. 

After SRS i knew i made the right decision, it was a relief to have it out of the way so i could go on with my life.  For me SRS was a step not the goal of my existence.  I lived as a woman for 2 years pre SRS and never wanted to go back, having SRS hasn't changed that but it has made my life a lot easier and a lot more comfortable although it doesnt seem that way sitting a donut heh. 

Anyone who bypasses the safeguards in place to make sure your doing the right thing, runs the risk of regretting it later.   The best thing to do is be honest with yourself and your therapist and go from there.  I do hate it though when people have SRS for the wrong reasons and make me look like I am crazy when in fact that person was the one that was crazy not me.

[spacial]

I also deeply resent the methods and procedures curently being applied for people seeking SRS. The cases of Mr Kane and a few others demonstrate that these are ineffective. I find them offensive.

Granted, it is permanent. But this is my body. I accept that any competant surgeon will want to be sure that it is in my best interests. That, however, is not quite the same as expecting people to preform like trained seals.

As I understand it, the defination of real life experience is that I must live, for a period of time as a woman. I have lived all my life as a woman, A woman affected by the presence of an ugly bit.

[melissa42013]

Most of the "regret" stories I have heard had less to do with the SRS and their WANTING to live as a woman but rather the resulting prejudices, loss of employment, broken family and personal relationships, etc. 

In many of these cases it appears to me that their regret comes from the impact it had on their lives because of social reaction not a feelings of inconsistency with their birth gender.

I accept reluctantly* the reasons for caution before performing surgery HOWEVER, what other medical condition is there, which when treated has as high of a success rate as this one, where you have to beg, fight, and pay your way through the process (in the USA) to receive treatment?

It would also be extremely prudent for doctors to require you to seek therapy before prescribing an antidepressant. And it would be even safer for them to have two therapists confirm the diagnosis. But in reality how many people would suffer because of this or avoid getting the treatment they needed because of these steps.

Perhaps at 16 caution is prudent but at 38 years old I am pretty darn certain that SRS is the best option I have for easing my mental anguish. I am sane, well balanced, successful, happy, and other than being TG quite pleased with my life. I know that SRS is not going to make things any easier for me in any of those areas and in fact I understand fully that the transition process is more likely to disassemble everything I have built over my life than maintaining the status quo.

Now I am not advocating we set up "mobile SRS trucks" that park on the corner like the taco trucks....... but really? I have to go to a therapist and beg to be put on HRT per the standards of care? I have to spend how much time in therapy before I can move onto the next step? IMO the system needs to be relaxed and adjusted to the modern reality and is based on inaccurate information and a generally uneducated professional base. I would even be as bold as to say that some of the "gatekeepers" of the process are transphobic at worst, ignorant at best. (research Kenneth Zucker and Ray Blancard revised the DSM-V (the therapists diagnosis guide) and they are advocates of repairative therapy.)

While I appreciate the need for caution I also dismiss the level of the standards that are required to "legitimately" complete the process. If you want to short circuit the whole process it can be done really easily  including SRS if you know how. It will not stop a person who wants to try SRS for other reasons. It is the feeling of helplessness that causes trans people to resort to scary and dangerous transition methods (silicone plumping), destructive behaviors (drugs and alcohol), or choosing to make a final exit from life rather than face the many many challenges fo transition. The goal of the medical community should be to help you achieve the body you know is right and not to assume you need to be protected from yourself.

[Lisbeth]

"Then we have those who 'change sex' on a whim and have the financial means to do so, then afterwards have regrets"

Do we have any idea at all of the number of people who fall into this category?

[Shana A]

"Then we have those who 'change sex' on a whim and have the financial means to do so, then afterwards have regrets"

Do we have any idea at all of the number of people who fall into this category?

One! Charles Kane. Maybe I can think of a second, Wayne something... the ex-trans person who wrote a book that the ex-gay therapy crew promote...

[Steph]

I also deeply resent the methods and procedures curently being applied for people seeking SRS. The cases of Mr Kane and a few others demonstrate that these are ineffective. I find them offensive.

I imagine that any patients that requires surgery is pretty PO'd about the procedures that are applied before being approved for surgery.  Heart patients for example, I can't understand why a heart surgeon wouldn't perform a triple by-pass on me, after all if I think that I need one I should be able to have it performed, it's my body and I know whats best for me.  Why do I need to go through all those stupid tests and see hospital councillors who would advise me on possible out comes.

Yep it makes no sense.  Surgeons should only be governed by their conscience and how much I'm willing to pay.  Sheesh...

[cynthialee]

When I started transition I resented the SOC very bitterly.
But as time has progressed I have become pro SOC.

I was anti SOC mainly because I waited too long. I held off until it was transition or die.

There needs to be some way to deal with the late in lifer who waited to the point of suicide. If we go by SOC in these cases it can get deadly for the transitioner.
Personaly I circumnavigated the SOC for the first few months of my transition. Mianly due to the dificulty finding a proper GT in my area and a support mechanism.

anyways...I ramble

[Hermione01]

I know of two who have regretted their surgery. One wants to sue because she says she was under the influence of anti-depressants when going through the process, she lost wife and family and believes she was not in her right mind when she had SRS. The other accepts she will live the rest of her life as female but isn't as happy as she thought she would be and given another chance, would not have had the surgery.

[grrl1nside]

In general, I agree with most of the posts that have some misgivings about the Standards of Care. I think that there are many interests at stake that have helped to prop this up where it could probably be at least a little looser and still protect individuals.

Just a quick note, every country/authority will be different. But, I do think that a great deal of this is not just about the S.O.C. and the professional body associated with it.  Having written health related policy, I can see why many governments would find the fairly rigorous following of the standards of care in their interest as means of not only protecting individuals, but also to control the purse strings  (if part of the public system),  and as a means of insulating itself from too much opposition from certain vocal sections of the public that would oppose spending in this area. Based on the success rates of SRS, I wonder whether the tight controls is rather short-sighted if you discount the surgery costs plus suing costs versus what are long term costs of not resolving the issues earlier (mental health, hospitalizations, lost work productivity, etc.) for this population of people (namely us  ).

Yes, people at times need to be protected from themselves and the cost of getting it wrong may be high. That being said, the main concern is whether a person can give informed consent. I don't believe for one second that 1 or 2 yrs RLE is needed to do this. In this respect, I think there are at least 2 questions: (1) what are reasonable steps that any therapist and any client must follow to ensure that the diagnosis and actions to resolve the problem are correct and (2) what are the reasonable steps/hoops/requirements that are needed in order to ensure that a person is capable of giving and showing they have given informed consent. The S.O.C. seems rather rigid in my opinion. A reasonable length of time where a person must show that they are capable of informed consent is what is important to me providing they are willing to foot the bill, plus a clear diagnosis and that reasonable less invasive measures have proven ineffective. Basically, I can appreciate what is happening from a public expenditure point of view even though I hate it on a personal level and why the S.O.C. become such a lightning rod for those going through the process. In the case where a person is not footing the bill then it raises the next question (3) At what point is the medical condition severe enough that the public should pay for the costs and what reasonable restrictions should be put in place to restrict it? I certainly don't have an answer to this but the S.O.C. has been relied on here to a great degree because it is restrictive (again in my opinion).

In my opinion, this is not just about the S.O.C. per se and the body associated with it, but about the political economy of health.

[spacial]

I imagine that any patients that requires surgery is pretty PO'd about the procedures that are applied before being approved for surgery.  Heart patients for example, I can't understand why a heart surgeon wouldn't perform a triple by-pass on me, after all if I think that I need one I should be able to have it performed, it's my body and I know whats best for me.  Why do I need to go through all those stupid tests and see hospital councillors who would advise me on possible out comes.

Yep it makes no sense.  Surgeons should only be governed by their conscience and how much I'm willing to pay.  Sheesh...

Steph.

The comparison is obtuese.

Heart surgery is very risky and done only when it is actually needed. It is all but impossible for the lay person to diagnose themselves. Angina, in itself, is not necessarily an indication for bypass surgery. Heart disease, generally is not either. What is, is the clinical need and the potential for recovery, verses the very real risks.

SRS, on the other hand, is an essentially cosmetic procedure. (Face it). The condition is largely self diagnoised.  The principal physical effect is from the repeated and unpredictable surges of male hormone, which will disappear.

For my part, I'm not questioning the need for a surgeon to ensure that their patient actually wants the surgery and fully understands the risks. What I do question is the standards applied by non-surgical therapists and such, for me to demonstrate that I do.

A therapist will almost certainly expect me to spend a period to time, attempting to give the world the impression that I am indeed a woman, or at the very least, a male, living as female. It is this fakery and how it is defined. I fail to see why, for example, I should be expected to wear a dress, a padded out bra, makup and such.

I didn't choose to be born with the ugly bit. I've only asked that it be removed.

As for my lifestyle, I expect to live as I have done, by my own choosing.

After removal of the ugly bit I won't be surprised if new opportunities and new ambitions come into play. I expect to and will, explore these as I choose and my finances allow.

The effect of the male hormone, for me and I suspect, most transgender people, is rather like an unpredictable dog, that starts jumping around, pulling me, biting people and generally being really annoying.

I will never be a georgous woman. I don't expect to be. I only want my freedom. Because what I have now is just waiting.

[AbraCadabra]

Her goes,
* And Kane still denies responsibility for it. *

We used to call this type of person an *arsehole* at EST, and it fits a person that steadfastly refuses to take responsibility for their actions.
I still think just that... you may call me opinionated?

As for SoC...... the paper is fine I think, yet most arguments forget the person that interprets, and 'implements' also is in danger of being called an arsehole, at least by myself.

I went to one such a 'gatekeeper' for 1 year (had no option in my case) so I do know what can be.
They often acquire a 'godlike' complex. Very hard to suffer that is, unless you just look for that sort of thing. Shut up your face, daddy knows best...

As the bible may be just fine too, it is the person getting 'godlike' about it can be a real ..., well you know then.

My 2 cents,
Axelle
PS: do I still sound pissed about this? Yeah well...

[spacial]

I tend to agreee Axelle. But would add again, my further contention, that he has mental health problems.

He has changed his first name. In itself, significant in that Mr Kane has a narcissistic personality and changing the first name is quite unusual for people so obscessed with their identites.

After his divorce, he was prevented from seeing his children. In the UK, this is highly unusual and would only be ordered under the most extreme circumstances. There have been cases of father who have abused their young daughters, still having, albeit, supervised access to their children.

His changes of accounts suggest he is l;ooking for means to cover his own feelings of guilt. He originally claimed it all started with what would have been, by his own description, an identity crisis. By his own account,

"When I was in the psychiatric hospital there was a man on one side of me who thought he was King George and another guy on the other side who thought he was Jesus Christ. I decided I was Sam."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6923912.stm

Now he claims he was pressured:

"I met people at these transsexual clubs who'd kept saying how fantastic it was to be a woman, how great the sex was, how happy they were, and I started to wonder if I should become a transsexual, too.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1026392/A-British-tycoon-father-man-woman---man---knows-hed-be.html#ixzz1WsdwH6Qv

These are very different accounts, but both, as you point out, are seeking to blame others.

His repeated attempts to make himself noticed are equally notable, from setting up as a a design consultant:

Samantha Kane became a huge success in her own right, mixing with the jet set, with whom she sipped champagne in the best hotels and bars in Cannes and Monte Carlo

.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1026392/A-British-tycoon-father-man-woman---man---knows-hed-be.html#ixzz1WserzjkE

To a personality, talking authoritively about SRS.

I don't believe any of this man's claims. I don't doubt some of the details, other than those which have come from him. I especially find it preposterus that he could maintain relationships with successful business types if he were all the things he claims he is. People don't become successful in business by associating with fools. Here in the UK, we have a super rich man, heir to the throne, who has less credability that this man apparently has.

He is a disturbed man who needs help.

It is sad that he is continually wheeled out by the nay-sayers and the Julie Bindles of this world. But not surprising given that their case is little more than intolerant and biggoted.