“Gender Affirming” Hormone Treatments for Kids

A recent NBC News article proclaimed Hormone therapy linked to lower suicide risk for trans youths, study finds and it referenced its source as The Trevor Project, a suicide prevention and crisis intervention organization for LGBTQ young people. While I can see the benefits of more research on this subject, I was curious about the base study and its implications. Hang on, here we go. Base study
 
The study was a survey and, in these cases, often the most important thing is to review question design. However, I could not find the full set of 142 questions published anywhere. So, while we have no complete set of questions, for the sake of discussion let’s assume that the survey questions had no inherent bias and were appropriately vetted.
 
What about the analysis itself? It appeared to be well thought out and methodologically thorough.  However, one thing gave me pause. In the Limitations portion of the paper it notes, “causation cannot be inferred due to the study’s cross-sectional design.” It does reference other papers that come up with similar results to bolster its case, but that does not mean they make this study correct. That was concerning.
 
What else do we know about the study? First, despite a one-sentence disclaimer at the end of the paper and a conflict of interest statement at the beginning, the survey was still obviously conducted for The Trevor Project. I’ll let you make of that what you will.
 
Second, individuals 13 to 24 years old were surveyed and asked about depression, anxiety and other mental health states. These were young people who wanted to receive hormone treatments and either did or did not receive them. For the group who were denied the treatments, the study suggests they were more depressed.
 
Think about that for a moment. For those of you who have ever had a teenager in this age range, what happens when they don’t get something they really want like a car for their 16th birthday or a later curfew? They get upset, moody, often angry, and it “negatively affects how you feel, the way you think and how you act” (American Psychiatric Association’s definition of depression). Do you see where I’m going with this?
 
Third, even if the findings in this study are correct, this type of study does not support giving hormone treatments to kids, and yet that is where we are headed as a nation. The ability for a child or youth to make life-changing decisions is simply not there, given that key decision-making parts of the brain aren’t even fully developed until at least 25 years old. Further, some professional medical organizations identify the onset of puberty as early as 10 years old, which would then imply that using puberty blocking drugs for “transitioning” at this early age is a potential course of action. In fact, there are already cases of children in our country receiving these puberty blocking drugs for transitioning purposes as early as 12 years old.
 
So, what are the takeaways from all this? Why am I picking on this one study?
 
As I mentioned, the way the study was conducted had merit, but its self-admitted causation limitation prevents one from drawing reliable conclusions. Therein lies a significant problem. Organizations like The Trevor Project and the media will use it to draw conclusions and bolster arguments for hormone treatment for kids. This is particularly true for The Trevor Project, since it’s their study.
 
The next thing to emphasize is that a parent has to step in and simply say no to a child who believes they should be another gender, and as a result, wants to make this type of life-altering decision. If that same child reaches adulthood and then decides to take transition-related hormone drugs, that is their choice, but this decision should not be driven by a 12-year-old.
 
So, here’s the point in all this. Dangers lie ahead if we continue down this path of encouraging and justifying life-altering hormone treatments to kids who may be experiencing depression for a host of reasons other than gender confusion. Further, it behooves us to regularly “look behind the curtain” when the media make huge assertions like this.
 
We don’t let our young children decide who they might marry, what their vocation will be, what religion they may believe, or where they will live as an adult. We talk with our kids about these ideas and consider all the options, so they can decide when they are an adult. In other words, we parent. No matter the child, it is our responsibility to help them make informed decisions, and that doesn’t mean affirming a life-altering decision by the same child who comes home with string art for your wall.