Susan's Place Logo

News:

Based on internal web log processing I show 3,417,511 Users made 5,324,115 Visits Accounting for 199,729,420 pageviews and 8.954.49 TB of data transfer for 2017, all on a little over $2,000 per month.

Help support this website by Donating or Subscribing! (Updated)

Main Menu

WPATH Standards of Care v7

Started by Gina_Z, August 18, 2013, 11:14:22 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Gina_Z

Hi. I'm reading the SOC v7. (I'm basically androgyne/fem) I was happy to read this:

'...Often with the help of psychotherapy, some individuals integrate their trans- or cross-gender feelings into the gender role they were assigned at birth and do not feel the need to feminize or masculinize their body. For others, changes in gender role and expression are sufficient to alleviate gender dysphoria. Some patients may need hormones, a possible change in gender role, but not surgery; others may need a change in gender role along with surgery, but not hormones. In other words, treatment for gender dysphoria has become more individualized...'

The idea that treatment has become more individualized is encouraging. :)
Gina
  •  

Kim 526

Yes, and it seems to give therapists a bit more leeway than 15 years ago.
"Peace came upon me and it leaves me weak,
So sleep, silent angel, go to sleep."
  •  

Gina_Z

Ha. Yeah- they would ask you Would you like to be like Stallone or Monroe? Oh...those are the ONLY choices!? 
  •  

Kim 526

I used to get all dolled up for therapist appointments, like I was trying to prove I was uber-femme.
"Peace came upon me and it leaves me weak,
So sleep, silent angel, go to sleep."
  •  

ativan

http://www.wpath.org/documents/SOC%20V7%2003-17-12.pdf

Here's that link for those of you who missed it on another topic.

This is pretty much essential reading that will answer many questions that a lot of you have.
Be sure to read through to the end, the glossary and stuff where a lot of confusion and questions will be answered.
I know a couple of the contributors to this, and it's already a little dated, even at just over a year old.
It is light years beyond the old standards. I know these people are very dedicated to updates and ongoing research.
It's been brought up a couple times here since this edition has come out.
For *Trans people of all kinds, this is a very important document.
Ativan

This link should be a stickie.
*Ativan makes a subtle hint....  :D
  •  

Gina_Z

Thanks A.P. I should've re-posted that link. The last time I read the S.O.C., it was over ten years ago so I was surprised by the sensible updates. It answered a lot of my questions about therapy and how treatments are very individualized.  I like your stickie hint.
  •  

LordKAT

While I can see the changes as an improvement for some, I can  see them being a disaster for others.

It could be interpreted that surgery isn't needed by anyone. Insurance companies may be told to include trans care but limit what is covered and since surgery is the expensive part, they could use this as a way to say it isn't covered even if it should be mandatory to cover it.


Perhaps my fears are baseless, but I don't trust insurance companies to honor a law's intent as much as it's letter.
  •  

ativan

Yah, I see that.
It is much closer to professionals desire to recommend surgery when needed and gives them a reference to base it on.
While the standards are not law themselves, they can be the basis for making those laws.
The insurance industry will not pay out anything if they think they can get away with it.
The people I know and those who work with them are tirelessly working on just those problems.
When it was written, and in the course of making decisions, I gathered that too radical of a change or in statements might have been too much.
In other words, it is conservative in the way it is written.
There is still a lot of work to be done.
It has made some significant changes in policies and the ability to get surgery where none existed before.
There are insurance companies that are looking at revising their policies to reflect the thinking that it is far less expensive to them to allow surgery vs the need for long term therapy, which is costing them more in the long run.
This alone is such a big boost for those who have benefited from that.
I look at it as much the same way I see the changes made in the DSM 5.
Not the best, but still better. It's interesting that many professionals have denounced the DSM 5, while looking closer at the WPATH Standards.
I know of several people who found by simply changing their insurance companies or their employers had changed it, who now are covered for surgery.
This wasn't possible a couple years ago. It's going to take time.
If they don't want to pay for surgery, then the recommended course is much more long term and expensive therapy.
Damn sneaky, but that's how they felt it best to deal with it at the time.
It has given many professionals the means to get surgery and better therapy and just general care for their patients.
It isn't the end all paper of standards. The next revision should reflect this.
Hopefully it won't be as long in coming as this one was.
Just how it is being interpreted isn't up to the insurance companies as much as it is by the medical professionals who use it.
It is forcing the insurance companies to take notice, which was a big part of the revision, not all, but a part of it.
It has also opened the doors for better research. I know this because the people I know are leading some of it.
It's a major part of why I still go where I do for care.
It's also helped quite a bit with Non-binaries and opens doors for those who thought they couldn't have this alternative.
I do share your concerns as well, just the same. I don't trust insurance companies or the government to do what is right.
But it has made a significant difference, in my opinion.
Ativan
  •  

Taka

maybe i should read it despite this thing not applying to me. living in the wrong country...
  •  

LordKAT

WPATH belongs to more than one country. World Professional Association for Transgender Health
  •  

Gina_Z

We'll have to see how things play out. I sure don't like the idea of people being refused coverage by insurance companies for surgery. Has that been happening?
Gina
  •  

LordKAT

  •  

LordKAT

The ANZPATH homepage states it was formed by Australians at the 2009 WPATH conference and when you click on their soc, it goes to the WPATH SOC.
  •  

ativan

 I suggest then that they try and find a different therapist/psychologist who knows what they are doing.

Indeed in some parts of the world, this document means nothing to them, but then they have severe problems with anyone who is different in orientation and gender roles and identities.
This document isn't a request for these countries to abide by a set of rules.
That is up to their governments and possibly insurance carriers to do.
In other words, if it is looked down on by their medical industry, especially those who are still backwards in their insurance ideas of right and wrong, this document isn't the answer for them.
It is up to the people to form a better government or demand that the practises of their Health Professionals and insurance industries follow simple guidelines for *Trans Healthcare.
That is all that this document is designed to do.
Establish a set of criteria and level of standards that are simple enough to understand.
It isn't the end all of proof that surgery is necessary or even required.
It does establish that there is documented evidence that there is sufficient evidence that it does indeed stand to reason that *Trans Healthcare and any related surgeries are useful in allowing surgeries and related healthcare in after treatment, increases their quality of life to a level that approaches that of the rest of the people.

If in their area of society, they find it unacceptable that *Trans People should have that same quality of life, it is up to the people to change that.
The document can be used as evidence that this is acceptable and should be followed at a minimum.
Which is what the document is.
It sets a minimum of standards.
In some places, it is the minimum and standards are actually set higher.

While there is currently a backlash in sentiment from political and religious groups hoping to gain control over this and much more that affects peoples quality of life, it is the people's will that changes this and keeps these kinds of radical groups from changing and lowering peoples qualities of life, based on their idiotic values based on fear on anything that goes against their limited abilities to think clearly.

To simply state that it makes it harder and imply that it possibly makes it impossible for people to get the Healthcare they deserve is nitpicking at the least.
Without this set of standards, things would be still as they were twenty years ago.
Indeed, it has changed the way the Healthcare industries in many places approach the needs of *Trans People.
In a very positive way.
Yes there are still some places that their backwards thinking is still just that.
While the document attempts to change that, it cannot change that kind of thinking if it is not accepted.
It is up to the will of the people to do that.
If people are unwilling to fight for those changes, they won't happen because of this simple standards of care document.
Indeed, to nitpick at the wording and to find possible reasons to object to it, is going to happen just as ill informed and prejudiced thinking does with most everything.
It is much like those same kind of limited thinkers that in this country are trying to reinterpret our constitution into some religious backwater set of rules to live by.
And that is the law here. They are trying to make a case out of their way of life as being the only way to exist.
It has become an uphill battle to keep this kind of thinking that makes the idiotic changes in law at bay.

This set of standards is a constantly changing set of ideas that are designed to increase the quality of life for many people who otherwise wouldn't receive it.
If anyone has suggestions that are a positive influence on ongoing research and documentation that helps with this, it is by all means welcomed by the committees that have designed and put together this set of standards.
I have had my own input into it by way of making suggestions to those I know involved.
I don't know if my influence has made any kind of difference, but it was well received and not pooh-pawed as some uninformed opinion.

Most of it is based on interviews with people that it concerns.
If you have concerns about any changes that should or could be made, you should address the people who have researched and compiled this information into a document that is a standard of care, not the end all law dictating that it must be complied with.
You can find these people and ways of contacting them in the document itself.
If you have reservations about aspects of it, spell them out.
Making blanket statements without addressing the problem itself does nothing to change things.
Informed response to any changes you see that should be made, can be made, will be received along with the many suggestions that are made everyday to the people who put this together.

Again, the people who are doing the research and compiling evidence that supports better standards of care are still researching and compiling.
It is ongoing and will, as long as there is sufficient reason to do so.
It is through suggestions from the general population of *Trans People that gives it sufficient reason to go on.
If you can find a better standard to go by that they seem to have missed, then by all means suggest it to them.
They look at as much information as their limited abilities allows.
There is always the search for more money that expands this ability.
Much of it is done from donations and grants that come from concerned organizations.
That is another way of affecting changes that can and should be made, as more and more evidence is compiled.
It's up to the community to see that as much can be done as possible.
This document is a reflection of what the community has been able to do so far.

Like I said, it is not the law or the end all of an ongoing discussion of *Trans related healthcare.
It is what it is, flawed as it may seem, and picked apart by those who wish to see these changes undone.
If you see changes that can be made, suggest them.
It is in everyone's interests to support it, not to complain that enough hasn't been done.
Enough will never be done by not effecting the changes that can be made, by tearing down an attempt to make life better.
*Rant done....
Ativan
  •  

Taka

Quote from: LordKAT on August 20, 2013, 05:51:39 AM
The ANZPATH homepage states it was formed by Australians at the 2009 WPATH conference and when you click on their soc, it goes to the WPATH SOC.
it's pretty hilarious to read that their meeting was held in oslo. the very city where my government manages to decide over and over again that only true transsexuals should be treated by national health care "professionals". they could at any time decide to forbid the few private practitioners we have from treating anyone who's judged "not trans enough". too strict on the rules, making no changes. there are too many stories about people who've had to lie themselves to the help they needed. i automatically fall outside their system because i have a child. private practitioners are hard to find, there are none that i know of within a five hour drive. and that's where i start to give up.

well, at least they've started some project dealing with children and adolescents. individuals under 18 didn't get any help either earlier.
  •  

Natkat

Quote from: Taka on August 21, 2013, 08:38:39 AM
well, at least they've started some project dealing with children and adolescents. individuals under 18 didn't get any help either earlier.

I heard it pretty huge, one I know been to one of those trans-kid camps or what to call it, and she said there where 20-30 trans kids and parrents and the parrents very rebellious.
  •  

Taka

Quote from: Natkat on August 21, 2013, 09:28:11 AM
I heard it pretty huge, one I know been to one of those trans-kid camps or what to call it, and she said there where 20-30 trans kids and parrents and the parrents very rebellious.
i wish i knew more about it, but i don't exactly live near enough. hopefully they do it responsibly.
  •