For those who think it's okay for TG to be a mental disorder

[Fencesitter]

We don't have nearly that many right-wing Christians from funky denominations here in Germany as you have in the USA, only very few and they have not much to say in society. Here, it's more important to have something written down in the DSM-IV so that we can get the transtitian paid by health insurance.

[Rosa]

Some mental illness is treatable.  I have major depression, but there is treatment for it.  I think that transsexuals also experience a degree of mental distress until they receive treatment, but the condition is treatable.  The cause is biological but the result is gender dysphoria, which is treatable.

[Steph]

The first thing we need to do is to stop putting our selves on the same plane as Gays, Lesbians and Bi-Sexuals.  While there are members of the TG world who sexually identify as belonging to one of those groups, our issue is one of Gender Identity; not the same thing.

The second issue is for us to get over the fact that being TS is considered a mental disorder.  We are certainly not normal.  Growing up I was utterly confused about the way I felt, why I thought that I should be a woman, I have a penis, shouldn't it be a vagina? People treated me like a man, they raised me to be a man, which was really confusing as I was obviously a woman - Yep pretty disordered if you ask me.  So what the fark is wrong with that?  I sought help, and I received it, and received the recommended treatment, which just happened to be the treatment I wanted, and resulted in the outcome I wanted.

Take it off the books and what do we have?

-={LR}=-

[spacial]

I have to agree with you on both points ladyrider.

Though I wouldn't be seen dead using an iMac.

[Julie Marie]

Wait a moment, you still have homosexuality (and bisexuality and asexuality or - theoretically - even heterosexuality or God knows what) in the DSM-IV and the ICD-10.

No, homosexuality was removed from the DSM some time ago.  And that's the point I'm making here.  The fact it was removed from the DSM gave the plaintiffs the ability to say. "This is not a mental disorder and the experts have said so."  TGs cannot say that.

The first thing we need to do is to stop putting our selves on the same plane as Gays, Lesbians and Bi-Sexuals.  While there are members of the TG world who sexually identify as belonging to one of those groups, our issue is one of Gender Identity; not the same thing.

The second issue is for us to get over the fact that being TS is considered a mental disorder.  We are certainly not normal.  Growing up I was utterly confused about the way I felt, why I thought that I should be a woman, I have a penis, shouldn't it be a vagina? People treated me like a man, they raised me to be a man, which was really confusing as I was obviously a woman - Yep pretty disordered if you ask me.  So what the fark is wrong with that?  I sought help, and I received it, and received the recommended treatment, which just happened to be the treatment I wanted, and resulted in the outcome I wanted.

Take it off the books and what do we have?

-={LR}=-

To your first point, transgender is the one commonality LGBT people have.  There are effeminate gays and masculine lesbians and it is the crossing of the gender lines in presentation that causes most people to think someone is gay or lesbian.  And that often leads to discrimination and prejudice.  So we do have a link.  The reason I have cited the Prop 8 ruling here is because it covers a lot of the issues we face when fighting for our rights.

To your second issue, what is normal?  Do we define normal according to man's law or according to nature's law?  In nature, normal is unique.  No two things are identical.  So, according to nature's law, we are very normal.  Remember: it's not nice to fool with Mother Nature!  As far as your opinion that you were disordered because society refused to accept you for who you are, that doesn't wash with me. They screwed up simply by the fact that we are who we are because of what's between our ears, not what's between our legs.

If TG is removed from the DSM what do we have?  We have a medical condition that is already recognized by the American Medical Association.  And they have urged insurance companies to cover our medical costs.  The IRS now allows for unreimbursed medical expenses for GRS and HRT to be deducted on your taxes.  This is because both recognize the TS condition as a medical condition and not a mental condition.  If it were strictly mental the focus would be trying to make us believe we are happy with the gender we were born.  Frankly, I've had enough brainwashing.

Here in the US, with our arcane health care laws, it could at some point become a financial blessing to have it in the DSMV.  A girl in Boston was able to get a deduction for her surgery after a lengthy fight.  I believe that a large part of her argument was that it wasn't simply a "cosmetic" procedure which under American tax law is not deductible, but rather a cure for a medical diagnosis.

Yes, it was allowed because it was medical, not mental.  The DSM had nothing to do with it.  Maybe it was WPATH she used to make her case.

This really doesn't affect me much any more.  But I am concerned with those who are taking or going to take the path to transition and especially those who have, are or will experience discrimination because they are TG.  Once mental health professionals declare this condition is not mental but instead medical (and the flow is going in that direction) we can face our opponents who feel it's right to discriminate against us because we're mentally disordered and say, "Prove it!" and they won't be able to.

We need to distance ourselves from the antiquated belief we are messed up because society has punished us, repressed us, discriminated against us and shunned us.  If they did to people with red hair what they've done to us, the people with red hair would be pretty unhappy too.  It's not us, it's society.  History tells of many similar situations.  This is no different.

Gays and lesbians have seen a marked improvement in social acceptance since the removal of homosexuality from the DSM.  I think we will see the same.

[spacial]

Transgender doesn't need to be in any manual. If transgender, a treatable congental limp or a birth mark are causing severe anxiety then the treatment should be a matter of medical necessity.

It is the consequences that need to be treated.

As long as, for example, transgender, is taken as the problem, it will be transgender that is treated, not the consequences. That leaves up open to some quack coming up with an alternative treatment. ECT for example.

[pebbles]

I don't think you've thought this through. I'm afraid I disagree with everyone in this thread.

If it's not confirmed to be a physical birth defect identifiable at birth and it's not a mental illness the NHS has no obligation to treat it as begin a transsexual is then apparently nothing more than a lifestyle choice.

Gender Identity Disorder is a mental disorder with biological roots as much as any other disorder of the brain untreated this condition spawned alot of co-morbid factors in me and others why else do you think depression and attempted suicide is so common within those who are untreated?

It's a mental illness and I disapprove of your stigma against mental illness in general Yeah it's a mental illness and it deserves to be treated as much as any other. I don't give a >-bleeped-< what trans-phobic conservatives say or what there gross misconceptions about it begin. Bucking to those ideas really just propagates there lies "Just begin in your head and you can be talked out of it."

My transsexuallity is in my head. It's in my brain current study seems to show the gross anatomy of it is incongruent with the gross anatomy of my body but I can't fix my brain otherwise I would have.

A congenital limp or birthmark wouldn't be funded under most insurance plans or the NHS because that's cosmetic regardless of the anxiety (Well a limp might be depending on it's cause.), Of course what we need to do is much deeper than just cosmetics.

[spacial]

With great respect Pebbles, I'm not really sure that is correct. Birthmarks and others are treated on the NHS. The priority being given to those whose lives are most disrupted by them.

(Quick edit to remove the link. It is to a medical site giving information about treating birthmarks in the UK. I apologise for putting this in. It is against the posting rules).

But in any case, the point I'm attempting to make is that we, as a community, really need to be thinking very carefully about how we allow ourselves to be pigeon holed.

Many of us remember when problems such as ours would have been regarded as a source of shame. Now, we are to be classed as mentally ill.

I accept that, since I have managed to come to terms with myself so well that my priority is and should be lower than for someone who has not, especially a younger person.

The problem will always be getting our gps to refer us for the treatment we need. But that will exist in any case.

[Cindy Stephens]

To: Julie Marie,

I do taxes so I went back and looked at the GLAD page describing the tax deduct-ability of of GRS surgery.  They actually pled the case and supplied the lawyers.  In their extended description they CLEARLY indicated that the fundamental argument made was based on a diagnosis of GID, a psychiatric evaluation.  Perhaps you were confused because shrinks, being medical doctors, give "medical opinions".  They are all part and parcel of the American Medical Association. This association, in turn, gives "authority" to psychiatrists in this area.  Non-psychiatrists step in for surgery, hormones etc.  It may not "effect you much anymore" but it does me.  I could use extra cash in my pocket, rather than give it to Mr. IRS.   
     I would also like to point out that airline pilots being treated for clinical depression can still fly if using the new Non-drowsy Psychiatric drugs.  They don't let "crazy" people (knowingly) fly 757's.  Clinical depression is a Psychiatric disorder exactly like GID.  People with it are not crazy, they just have a mild (psychiatric), treatable medical problem.  They allow the fates of hundreds of people to fly off in their hands.

[Fencesitter]

No, homosexuality was removed from the DSM some time ago.  And that's the point I'm making here.  The fact it was removed from the DSM gave the plaintiffs the ability to say. "This is not a mental disorder and the experts have said so."  TGs cannot say that.

Look at my posting again, I made the point that it's not homosexuality per se which is in the DSM or ICD, but if you suffer like hell from it. If I remember well, just having an "ugly" nose is not in the ICD or DSM either, but if you suffer from a lot of complexes because of that, you get a diagnosis.

[Julie Marie]

There seems to be a general consensus here that you don't need a GID diagnosis to be covered for DIG related emotional distress.  If that's the case, then you don't need GID to be in the DSM to get insurance coverage for emotional problems arising from being TG.

My insurance carrier refused to cover every physical treatment, right down to hormones, because they said this is a mental disorder according to the DSM.  They will cover all the therapy I want to pay half for for as long as I live.  Because this is seen as a mental disorder, I have paid for every penny of my transition, continue to pay for blood tests and hormones completely out of pocket.  Most of the people I know who have health care coverage are in the same boat.

By that line of reasoning it serves no beneficial purpose to keep TG in the DSM but rather hurts us.  Every bit of emotional distress we feel can be considered post traumatic stress disorder.  That's a lot more accurate than gender identity disorder.

Once you have transitioned and are living full time you will most likely encounter some prejudice and some discrimination and that's because most people think TGs are messed up IN THE HEAD!  Anyone who wants to agree with them, go right ahead.  Just don't drag the rest of us down with you, please.

[pebbles]

Once you have transitioned and are living full time you will most likely encounter some prejudice and some discrimination and that's because most people think TGs are messed up IN THE HEAD!  Anyone who wants to agree with them, go right ahead.  Just don't drag the rest of us down with you, please. [/color][/font]

The point i'm getting at is it's not right to discriminate or persecute people because prejudice people you think your "insane" and your attitude seems to be that you think it is alright.

[Steph]

You raise some very valid points Julie...

[ /color]

To your second issue, what is normal?  Do we define normal according to man's law or according to nature's law?  In nature, normal is unique.  No two things are identical.  So, according to nature's law, we are very normal.  Remember: it's not nice to fool with Mother Nature!  As far as your opinion that you were disordered because society refused to accept you for who you are, that doesn't wash with me. They screwed up simply by the fact that we are who we are because of what's between our ears, not what's between our legs.

While nature may create each of us according to mother natures laws, and takes us away, we, as unique human beings, have to live our lives according to mans law and unfortunately mans law sees being TS abnormal, and the medical community supports this for the time being.  It's pretty hard to argue that we are normal when our minds tell us that we are in the wrong body and we seek to have our genitals modified/removed as part of treatment for our condition (I have intentionally simplified here). If it is taken off the books, how will MD's diagnose a person is TS.  Would the doctor be able to perform a series of tests to determine this?  Would he refer the patient to a pshrink and if so where would the pshrink go for a guide to diagnosis.  This whole issue is not as simple as getting us delisted and personally I believe that the condition be modified as outlined in the draft DSM5 if adopted it will go a long way towards improving the lives of TS.

As far as the DSM being used against us, US citizens use their constitution against fellow citizens, and the same happens with the DSM, as long as there are humans there will be discrimination.  I know, I know, it doesn't make it right, it's just a fact of life.

-={LR}=-

[YellowDaisy]

but i think if it's not considered a mental disorder, other people may be more discriminant. if people understand that we didn't choose this, and that we are doing it for our own good, i think there would be less discrimination, but if people look at it as there being nothing "wrong" with us, they may just dismiss us with labels. that's just my thoughts on it.
Post Merge: August 09, 2010, 04:30:08 PM

I don't think you've thought this through. I'm afraid I disagree with everyone in this thread.

If it's not confirmed to be a physical birth defect identifiable at birth and it's not a mental illness the NHS has no obligation to treat it as begin a transsexual is then apparently nothing more than a lifestyle choice.

Gender Identity Disorder is a mental disorder with biological roots as much as any other disorder of the brain untreated this condition spawned alot of co-morbid factors in me and others why else do you think depression and attempted suicide is so common within those who are untreated?

It's a mental illness and I disapprove of your stigma against mental illness in general Yeah it's a mental illness and it deserves to be treated as much as any other. I don't give a >-bleeped-< what trans-phobic conservatives say or what there gross misconceptions about it begin. Bucking to those ideas really just propagates there lies "Just begin in your head and you can be talked out of it."

My transsexuallity is in my head. It's in my brain current study seems to show the gross anatomy of it is incongruent with the gross anatomy of my body but I can't fix my brain otherwise I would have.

A congenital limp or birthmark wouldn't be funded under most insurance plans or the NHS because that's cosmetic regardless of the anxiety (Well a limp might be depending on it's cause.), Of course what we need to do is much deeper than just cosmetics.

i agree. i look at it from a similar perspective.

[Jeatyn]

I don't think you've thought this through. I'm afraid I disagree with everyone in this thread.

If it's not confirmed to be a physical birth defect identifiable at birth and it's not a mental illness the NHS has no obligation to treat it as begin a transsexual is then apparently nothing more than a lifestyle choice.

Gender Identity Disorder is a mental disorder with biological roots as much as any other disorder of the brain untreated this condition spawned alot of co-morbid factors in me and others why else do you think depression and attempted suicide is so common within those who are untreated?

It's a mental illness and I disapprove of your stigma against mental illness in general Yeah it's a mental illness and it deserves to be treated as much as any other. I don't give a >-bleeped-< what trans-phobic conservatives say or what there gross misconceptions about it begin. Bucking to those ideas really just propagates there lies "Just begin in your head and you can be talked out of it."

My transsexuallity is in my head. It's in my brain current study seems to show the gross anatomy of it is incongruent with the gross anatomy of my body but I can't fix my brain otherwise I would have.

A congenital limp or birthmark wouldn't be funded under most insurance plans or the NHS because that's cosmetic regardless of the anxiety (Well a limp might be depending on it's cause.), Of course what we need to do is much deeper than just cosmetics.

This is the point I was trying to make but I think you managed to verbalise it much better.

People with mental disorders are still perfectly "normal" people. They just happen to have a chemical screw-up somewhere in the brain which requires treatment if it hinders their quality of life. Sounds identical to GID if you ask me.

I don't think removing it would improve the social stigma at all. If somebody points or makes a crack at a transwoman for being a "man in a dress" - would waving a certificate in front of their face saying they have a medical problem and aren't crazy really make the idiot making the comments change? I'm pretty sure dwarfism has always been a medical problem yet I can't go out in public with my dwarf sister without seeing her getting yelled at and talked about. Idiots will always be idiots, no matter what the label.

I am surprised however at the amount of american health insurance policys that don't cover the cost of hormones. The NHS will pay for therapy, hormones, hair removal and GRS. I agree with the fact that they will not fund BA or FFS, seeing as their are tons of bio-women born flat/small chested or with masculine facial features who wouldn't be funded. (although in rare cases if said small chest brings about severe emotional distress then BA would be funded)

[spacial]

I can understand there will be some difference of opinion between those of use who are old and wearing out and the younger ones who can still climb the stairs without hearing their knees crack.

In my time, working in psychiatry, one of the saddest things I saw was a lot of old women, in their 60s 70s and 80s, shuffeling around in carpet slippers, clutching their hand bags, stairing into space and often muttering to themselves.

A quick check of their case notes showed many had been admitted with social deviency. In other words, as young women, they had become pregnant. In those days, the only way to get an abortion was to be admitted into a mental hospital.

I don't trust psychiatrists, people who work in psychaitry, psychiatric social workers and especially charlitans who call themseves therapists. I am very disturbed at the idea of accepting a mental health disgnosis simply to get free, or partly free treatment.

I really think you are playing with fire here.

You may find insurance companies are prepared to pay $100k a pop for SRS. Equally, you may find that some preferr the cheaper option of a dose of ECT and a pocket full of chloropromazine.

Many of you have experiences hostility from family, especially parents. How long will it be before some well connected parent has their GID off spring admitted to a mental hospital as a rather more respectable alternative to admitting to the neighbours that their precious can't cut it with the opposite sex?

American mental hospitals are very backward compared to most of the world. Their insistance of using diagnostic lables rather than symptoms as criteria is dark ages stuff.  Some of their practices were abandoned here in Europe and many other parts of the world 50 or 60 years ago.

If there were a single cause of GID, such as brain development or indeed anything else, then there may be some case. But the reality is that there is no single cause. GID is not a condition that can be described in terms of a single category. GID is a syndrome. Identified by symptoms. More importantly, its treatment is dependant upon the needs and wishes of the individual.

I apologise for being rather blunt here. But these are the real issues.


Edit, I've just re-read this post and realised that, by forgetting an important figure, the post doesn't make a lot of sense.

The line: was a lot of old women, in their 60s 70s and 80s, Should read was a lot of old women, in their 60s 70s and 80s, admitted 40, 50 years earlier......

[brainiac]

How about we work on removing the stigma against mental illness instead?

I'm sick of hearing, "we're not crazy like those other people" as a justification for this. That's buying into EXACTLY what created this problem in the first place-- the idea that mental disorders make people freaks to be looked down upon. It's appalling. Bedlam is long gone, so why is this still so pervasive?

There's a reason people refer to these things as "disorders" instead of "illnesses" nowadays. A disorder is exactly what it sounds like-- a harmful disruption to your well-being, which would benefit from treatment. The label is there so that you can get the most appropriate treatment (how accurate these labels are is something that obviously needs to change in the next DSM... No more "NOS" BS!  spacial is spot on about using categorical labels rather than symptoms for diagnosis.). It also acknowledges that you SHOULD be able to get help, so that's something that should in theory (and sometimes in practice) force insurance companies to do their jobs and help you get what you need.

It doesn't mean you're flawed or should be looked down upon, no more than needing an antibiotic for a cut means you are.

...And that doesn't mean reducing mental disorders to "pop a pill and everything is solved". Sigh.

[Julie Marie]

Throughout the history of mankind (here I go again, I'm a glutton for punishment) society has always selected certain people or groups of people and labeled them in such a way as to make it socially acceptable to discriminate against them, make them social outcasts, make them criminals, punish them, torture them and even kill them.

The list includes:
Christians
heretics
witches
blasphemers
handicapped
Jews
women
blacks
gays
transgender

And many more, but the point is all were stigmatized at some point in history, all were dehumanized by a society and all suffered without any real benefit to society.  But along the way society softened their views and much, if not all of the prejudice eventually died.  And that is what has to happen with us.  It takes time and it takes progress.  Allowing TG to remain in the DSM isn't progress.

Gays & lesbians fought for its removal for a reason - to advance their cause which is equal rights.  And look where they are today.  This isn't a matter of de-stigmatizing mental disorders, it's a matter of ending the belief that trans people are mentally deranged and as such cannot be trusted to make good decisions for themselves or others.  The idea isn't 'it's okay not to be normal', the idea is we have sound minds and therefore should enjoy all the same rights as everyone with sound minds.

[Jeatyn]

Nothing on that list requires medical help apart from Trans and handicapped, and being handicapped is quite obviously a physical problem.

it's a matter of ending the belief that trans people are mentally deranged and as such cannot be trusted to make good decisions for themselves or others.  The idea isn't 'it's okay not to be normal', the idea is we have sound minds and therefore should enjoy all the same rights as everyone with sound minds.[/color][/font]

Mentally disordered people still have rights and are capable of making decisions for themselves like everyone else (except in EXTREME cases)

[michelle]

When gays and lesbians are allowed to get married and have all of the legal rights and benefits that heterosexual couples do it won't matter what sex or gender they classify a transgender person as because the marriage of a transgender will be either a heterosexual marriage, a lesbian marriage, or a gay marriage and it won't matter if a person is classified as male or female as far as marriage is concerned.   Then we will have to deal with dress codes on and off the job.
Post Merge: August 10, 2010, 04:45:46 PM
The other big problem that heterosexuals have with transgenders is what we feel we need to do to our physical bodies to have them reflect our genders.    They feel that we must have a disorder to make those changes.