In principle I think consenting adults should be able to do whatever they want with their own bodies, but consent needs to be informed and the person needs to be mentally capable of consent. You need some degree of gatekeeping just to reach that bar. And this is going to be an even bigger concern with children.
I wasn't there, though I have learned that generally the local pharmacy would do the gate-keeping. Now the local pharmacy does what the computer says to do based on whatever regulations were input by the back office.
There was a huge decline in morphine addiction simply by requiring that products containing morphine be labeled as such.
I don't know why you'd trust them any more than a drug dealer, and historical anecdotes about opium addicts suggest it's a valid comparison.
If you look critically at the research papers being published on these topics as a means to champion it, your hopes will be dashed.
If we let children do as they do because it was their body then where would we be as responsible parents.
However, if a seventeen year old decides to have sex with a 40 year old, we would find it morally reprehensible and all agree that she could not consent to use her body that way.
I don’t know how to rectify these two commonly held beliefs.
In the former case the doctors conflicts of interest don't seem so strong, in the latter case the doctors conflict of interest is overwhelmingly self-evident, so there is much higher risk of the doctor consciously working against his patients interests when the patient is still a minor in a major power differential.
One causes sterilisation, one causes pregnancy, western society is specifically very very against 17 year olds being pregnant and are anti-natalist and sex-negative more broadly.
That said, I'm not sure these articles are intended to improve treatment options. Rather, the goal seems to be eliminating transgender care altogether.
What's missing from this post is a sense of timescale and the steps taken throughout a patient's journey. There was no mention of patients publicly presenting as their preferred gender as a first step towards transitioning, prior to any medical intervention; I'm not sure if that's a red flag or if I just have outdated knowledge on treatment practices. I understood that the doctors seemed to be improvising with the treatment of patients, but the inconsistencies between patients' treatment weren't highlighted.
That being said, gate keeping what I do with my body is wrong. I knew all the potential side effects when I transitioned. I read the wpath in full. I was comfortable with all the risks.
This type of critical judgment of children's health care is needed and I hope the doctors are being more rigorous than what the author suggests.
I feel terrible for the girls who made a decision they regret and lost parts of their body that made them happy. Their doctors, and parents failed them. I am also happy that so many people were able to successfully transition.
The timing of the article is concerning with so many states trying to withhold life saving care I worry that the nuance of this article will be lost.