Have there ever been any scientific studies validating RLE? In other words, has anybody ever compared outcomes for people who waited a year for their surgeries vs. outcomes for those who were not required to wait a year?

If anyone knows of such a study, I'd be interested if you could point me to it.

Don Montgomery and charles mattecole tried to do just such a study in about 1986 in CXH in London - but they ran into ethical and selection bias problems. It was impossible to hide what they were doing and of course all the patients who were being held back started finding ways to bypass the system. In the end I don't think it was ever published but I'll run a check on pubmed later when I'm at home. (I'm on the wards in the hospital at the moment.)

No, have you looked at references in SOC7?  I will ask my contacts though.

If there was such a study its clearly not going to be very solid. Medicine is full of studies that contradict each other, and you end up needing more and bigger. The fact that its so hard to find even one study suggests that even if there is one its not something that should be relied on.

For obvious reasons its hard to even conduct such a study, and I suspect its best to look elsewhere. For example how many people start their RLE with the intent of surgery then back out? Because they don't want surgery rather than not being able to afford it, fearing surgery, etc. I assume that for someone who's going to successfully complete RLE then surgery, that it would make no difference if they did RLE or not.

Then there's the question that even if it is scientifically validated does that mean we should enforce this on people? Smoking kills, but we don't ban it. So does drinking, being fat, and so on. On the other hand many recreational drugs are banned, which I don't agree with in principal (I might be wrong as I lack any real knowledge on the subject). I think its all social and cultural and therefore a matter of choice. I also believe that WPATH is written from a very narrow cultural viewpoint, and doesn't acknowledge it.

Personally I'd guess the one year is a social construct. Doctors just made it up because they feel the need to do something and justify these decisions to others. That may well have been the expedient thing to do decades ago, but I strongly disagree with it. My body, my life, and they can ... off!

Not sure it was particularly "scientific", but Charing Cross (the main NHS gender clinic in the UK) requires a two year RLE.  Their justification?  Evidently, around 20 months, there's a spike in people wishing to detransition.  Hmm.  Not sure who conducted that "research", nor whether it was conducted properly by trained researchers or whether it was merely the secretaries spending an afternoon looking through files and seeing who dropped off the radar just before two years was up.

Everyone has their limit.  If I had to "prove" I was trans enough for surgery in a trial that took two years, the chances of me giving up would spike too.  Does it mean I'm any less trans?  Nah.  Just means I've finally been broken and can look forward to a short future of alcoholism, depression, drug abuse, etc.

An anachronistic hoop to jump through.

I think RLE could be replaced with "outness". There is no part of my life at this time where I haven't told people I'm trans. I'm very unlikely to back out now.

On to my main point. I'd be dubious of any such study. Too many social science experiments regarding complex subjects are poorly structured. Add in that this kind of study probably wouldn't be constructed by a social scientist and I can pretty much guarantee that it would be useless. It would have to be a long term study and would need a large sample, 50 or more. Exit interviews would be needed to determine why people gave up. Honestly, if a competent therapist has diagnosed you and is willing to attest to that you should be good to go. I see no benefit in existing in an uncomfortable, unnatural state before you're allowed to fix the problem.

Anyway, that's not what the thread is about and I should just delete this post but I'm not gonna.

Firstly, I will aks for forgivness if what Im about to say is found unrelated and/or offensive.

If you are asking this question in terms of wether or not I know If any scientists have tried validating a forced RLE then no.

But if your asking if I know wether or not ther has been any studies that could help validate it, then Kind of.

Amy Cuddy, offers a ted talk, presenting finding on body luanguage. She talks about how our state of mind affect our body luanguage, but in addition to this shows how, body luanguage can also affect our minds. If you can Id sugest watching it, this talk is very intresting.

This perticular ted talk sugests that, by living in our role, our minds will become acustomed to any scocial changes required to do so. Having freedom to exspress our gender identity, will make us more comfatable in that role.

However, this talk in itself is not RLE validating and has no Trans focus, but can be used to highlight some advantages of RLE.

PS, once again, sorry if I failed to understand your question.

I have no evidence RLE has been validated scientifically and question whether any study could be certain of someones personal behavior for a year or two.  Even an intrusive electronic device could not guarantee I am actually in a RLE.  How is that even defined???  If MtF or FtM is there a dress code or any possible proof reasonable to expect?  Just like the well known narratives, someone could learn the game in an effort to get the treatment they need.

I know some trans people that have been on HRT for years and are definitely not "out."   They could, however, muster the "proof" for a year of RLE with enough pictures dressed for the part.  RLE has had real value for me as a personal test I volunteered for but not as a requirement.

I don't trust anything from her.

Quote from: iKate on July 23, 2015, 03:44:55 PM
I don't trust anything from her.

Why not?

Quote from: Serverlan on July 23, 2015, 07:53:21 PM
Why not?

OK, first off, a newcomer here may not post a link per ToS 1.  Second,  Anne Lawrence has been discredited by the trans and medical communities over ->-bleeped-<- and other controversial things. 

We're not going there.

I do not know of any "scientific studies, but would you like to know how it will go before you jump headlong first? I personally think RLE is a great idea to prepare you for things you may need assistance with before or during.

Quote from: Jessica Merriman on July 23, 2015, 08:16:22 PM
I do not know of any "scientific studies, but would you like to know how it will go before you jump headlong first? I personally think RLE is a great idea to prepare you for things you may need assistance with before or during.

Well living as a woman doesn't prepare you for having a vagina (anymore than having a vagina prepares you for living as a woman). Not everyone who wants a vagina wants to live as a woman, just as not everyone who lives as a woman needs a vagina.

But notwithstanding all that, there is a difference, between saying "RLE is a great idea" and saying "we cis people who have no idea what body or social dysphoria feels like, decree that no trans person can alter his/her body without passing a year long test of our devising." The only thing worse would be basing it on conjecture and assumption rather than scientifically obtained data.

Quote from: Jill F on July 23, 2015, 08:06:20 PM
OK, first off, a newcomer here may not post a link per ToS 1.  Second,  Anne Lawrence has been discredited by the trans and medical communities over ->-bleeped-<- and other controversial things. 

We're not going there.

Well, sorry, I had no idea about Lawrence. I thought I was helping.

You seem very angry.

Quote from: Serverlan on July 23, 2015, 11:33:30 PM
Well, sorry, I had no idea about Lawrence. I thought I was helping.

You seem very angry.

You did help, thank you. I saw the link before it was wiped and read the attached paper. It was very interesting and helpful.

I can't speak for anyone, but I don't think anyone is angry with you.  People are angry at the various charlatans who make our transitions more difficult by spreading misinformation among the science and medical community, so the reminder of their existence tend to inflame passions.

Not withstanding the author's notoriety, the paper was interesting and relevant. Again, thank you.

Right Suzi - I have now checked pubmed and a couple of more specialist medical indexes aimed at the Psych community, and to my utter astonishment I can find nothing of direct relevance. This seems to be one of those treatment plans which is used on the basis that "we have to do something to try and confirm our diagnosis, and no one can think of anything better."

If I decide to take the Psych career option, (one of many paths I am considering) this may yet provide an interesting validation study for a young trainee psychiatrist who wants to make a name for herself...

Does the waiting time really depend on RLE?  From a medical standpoint, most of the changes from HRT happen in the first 2 years, and it can take almost that long to complete laser/electrolysis, right?   So maybe the time is set out to accommodate all the potentially reversible changes, before you attempt the most irreversible permanent step(s)?

For me, after ~ 9 months RLE I'm already having trouble seeing how I can endure another year or more of tucking all day, every day, even from a practical health standpoint.  Whenever someone is a little suspicious of my gender, their eyes always go there, and I don't know how other girls can get away without tucking if they want to pass?

The best anecdotal evidence I can think of that RLE is not particularly useful and an unnecessary hurdle is that the newest revision of the WPATH guidelines significantly deemphasize it to the point of pretty much being able to ignore it.

Quote from: GendrKweer on July 25, 2015, 09:50:48 AM
The best anecdotal evidence I can think of that RLE is not particularly useful and an unnecessary hurdle is that the newest revision of the WPATH guidelines significantly deemphasize it to the point of pretty much being able to ignore it.

You mean for HRT rather than SRS? I don't think I saw much change with respect to surgery.

After being gate-keepered by a RLE believing doctor who was sexually inappropriate towards me my replacement doctor gave me hormones immediately by informed consent.  If I'd had to wait out a year of RLE without HRT I'm more than certain I would've either topped myself or mutilated myself.  As soon as I started HRT I went full time because my mind wasn't being twisted into knots by T anymore.

This was over twenty years ago by the way when everything was still in the dark ages.