Yesterday I mentioned that Dr. Ken Zucker has been named as the leader of the group that would be recommending/making changes to appear in the next updates to the DSM. This is horrible news for trans people, their families, and those who care about them. As fate would have it a story appeared on NPR today to demonstrate why. The title of the story is: Two Families Grapple with Sons’ Gender Preferences: Psychologists Take Radically Different Approaches in Therapy.
The story contrasts two families with sons who have significant gender issues at a young age. The first story is about a boy named “Bradley” who enjoyed playing with feminine things. The parents didn’t think much about it, but as their son got older it seemed to get worse.
And as Bradley grew older, his discomfort with things male also grew. He would shun other boys — he played exclusively with girls. Again, this concerned Carol, but she wasn’t frantic about it.
One day their son was beat up by two 10-year old boys at the playground for playing with a doll, and the parents decided to seek help. They turned to, of all people, Dr. Ken Zucker in Toronto. After months of evaluation, Dr. Zucker diagnosed this child with Gender Identity Disorder (duh).
Zucker, who has worked with this population for close to 30 years, has a very specific method for treating these children. Whenever Zucker encounters a child younger than 10 with gender identity disorder, he tries to make the child comfortable with the sex he or she was born with.
So, to treat Bradley, Zucker explained to Carol that she and her husband would have to radically change their parenting. Bradley would no longer be allowed to spend time with girls. He would no longer be allowed to play with girlish toys or pretend that he was a female character. Zucker said that all of these activities were dangerous to a kid with gender identity disorder. He explained that unless Carol and her husband helped the child to change his behavior, as Bradley grew older, he likely would be rejected by both peer groups. Boys would find his feminine interests unappealing. Girls would want more boyish boys. Bradley would be an outcast.
As difficult as it was, the parents followed Zucker’s advice to force him to behave more like a boy.
“He turned to coloring and drawing, and he just simply wouldn’t play with anything. And he would color and draw for hours and hours and hours. And that would be all he did in a day,” Carol says. “I think he was really lost. … The whole way that he knew and understood how to play was just sort of, you know, removed from his house.”
His drawings, however, also proved problematic. Bradley would populate his pictures with the toys and interests he no longer had access to — princesses with long flowing hair, fairies in elaborate dresses, rainbows of pink and purple and pale yellow. So, under Zucker’s direction, Carol and her husband sought to change this as well.
The story goes on to contrast this approach with a more understanding, sensitive one. A couple is faced with a similar situation, and they allow their son to transition at a young age.
The story ends by acknowledging that Bradley and his parents are struggling with trying to force him to be a boy. Compare that to the other scenario:
For their part, Joel and his wife Pam say they are clearly happy with the choice they’ve made. Joel says he now thinks of Jonah as his daughter, and he says that she — Jona — is thriving.
“She’s so comfortable with her own being when she’s simply left to be who she is without any of these restrictions being put on her. It’s just remarkable to see.”
The unfortunate reality is that far more clinicians in North America follow Dr. Zucker’s methods. He says nearly 80 children are on his waiting list at the moment.
This is a difficult subject, and there are no one-size-fits-all answers. However, I’m fully convinced that by the time many of us reach middle age and have dealt with our gender issues for our entire lives we’re far more damaged and scarred by all the debris of hiding it, rejecting it, fearing detection, and trying to be who others expect us to be than we are by our gender issues themselves. Being transgender is not an easy life, Lord don’t I know. But forcing children to be who and what you want them to be only sets them up for difficulty later in life. That’s not the right answer.
Note: The audio of this story is also available at the NPR website, and it should be noted that this is Part 1 of a two part story.
In a related story, is anyone surprised that the story of the grade-schooler in PA who is transitioning at school is getting broader exposure? A website called “Stop the ACLU” has an article titled “Public School Helps Parents Create 9-Year-Old Transsexual.” Jeez. Autumn Sundeen wrote a good article about some of the questionable journalistic practices of “outing” this child over on Pam’s House Blend (read it here). And, the local CBS affiliate ran a story on it tonight (read it here). The good news is that at the end of the story they don’t provide Dr. Zucker’s contact information, or Stop The ACLU - they provide a link to the always wonderful TransYouth Family Allies.
With Dr. Zucker taking the lead on GID in DSM, does anyone have any doubt as to where this is headed?
Speaking of doubt as to where things are headed, what about the Democratic Presidential race? Is there any doubt there, either? I think not, and all but the most die-hard Clinton fans cling to any hope at all. It’s all over but the shouting.
With both Dr. Zucker and Dr. Blanchard on the Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders Work Group, I can see that the deck is stacked against us. Do we have any allies in the Work Group?
I avoided the NPR story on purpose as the issue of how to deal with young children is a pretty tough thing. I have very mixed emotions about what is the best course of action. On the one hand, I do think that kids should be enocuraged to be who they are and if that means helping them transition at a young age, so be it.
At the same time, I wouldn’t wish this life on anyone and any chance to avoid it should be taken, maybe. I can honestly say that I was in no way prepared at such a young age to decide what was the right thing to do and yet I know that isn’t always the case. There are a lot of days that I find myself wishing that my life had turned out very different. I would give anything to have been able to make it as male and believe me, I tried as hard as I could. Things haven’t turned out well and yet I really see no other alternative.
Would life had been better had I told my parents how I felt when I was 8 years old? Perhaps, but I really don’t think I was prepared to deal with that at such a young age. I guess what I’m saying is that it’s a slippery slope and there doesn’t need to be one universally accepted approach.
I believe that parents should let their children be children. Don’t put a gender on them. If they want to play with trucks or want to play with dolls, let them. What is it going to hurt. I just hope that this future generation will accept the dress code, like we did in the 60’s, with the more causual look and the girls didn’t have to wear the skirts/dresses. I know a lot of us would have loved to wear the skirts, but we didn’t have to so there was no decision there. If the students can wear what they want and be who they want, that would make a big difference in how we perceive ourselves and maybe GID will be cured forever. I do believe that the Zuckers of the world will lose out. We are becoming a lot more common now. Hopefully, someday, the surgery for FtoM will be cheaper and intelligent. I’m sure that the technology is here, it’s just getting someone to invent it. I believe we will be mainstream in about 20 years. I only wish I could live to see it.
Sheila
I saw a program last night that kind of tangently is related to this. It was a documentary about the blood doping done to the female East German atheletes during the 60’s and into the 80’s.
The young girls, some as young as ten were sent to special schools to train to be atheletes. The government began feeding the girls and young women various forms of steriods and testostrone without their knowledge. Well you can guess what happen.
The last part of the program dealt with what happened to the some of the women. One woman ultimately transitioned to male, another finds herself stuck somewhere inbetween, shes given up living as a woman but she doesn’t live as a man either. Quite a few of the girls have died from cancer. All in all a very sad story.
Reading about the two children and how they were treated brings back some painful memories of my own life as a boy. I was essentially forced to play with boy things and hang out with boys just because of the stigma associated with boys who play with girl things. NOT being allowed to play with girls or “girl toys” in my opinion only makes early dyshporia even worse. My own son has been allowed to have dolls early on. For him, he enjoyed the company of his little sister, then quickly marched off to play with his young boy friends along with their imaginitive boyish pirate adventures. I feel very sad for Zucker’s young patients. Someone needs to get this guy off the workgroup!
A heart-wrenching read. Thanks for bringing this to our attention, Donna.
Zucker and his ilk will eventually fall by the wayside. The only question is how much more wreckage from the lives of the children who grow up hating themselves, hiding themselves and possibly killing themselves will accumulate.
The sooner those who are truly transsexuals are able to transition, the better the chance for a good life.
I’m surprised that the “Dream Team” being assembled to update the DSM doesn’t include the eminent Dr. J. Michael Bailey, as well.
Talk about an end result being predetermined ! This is basically like appointing Capt. Hazelwood to a commission on preventing oil spills – after all, he is an “expert” in the field.
Thanks for this heads’ up, Donna. Often as transition fades into the past of our lives, we don’t see these things as often as we should I do hope that this will not end badly, but North American history on matters dealing with transsexuals since 1998 has not been encouraging
I’ve been following this development and like you saw the irony of the announcement and the NPR piece. The latter is really quite distressing. That poor kid. At least the second one has a better chance although I hate the way the parents’ comments have been ‘normalised’ (all the [he]s etc). Unfortunately UK gender care also turns to the DSM for guidance so Zucker’s appointment has wider affects than just the US.
Donna, As you doubtless know from the original article (http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/18543504.html), TYFA (Trans Youth Family Allies) has been working with the parents of the 9-year-old Pennsylvania trans girl, her parents and school officials to facilitate her transition. Apparently, it was only by Kim Pearson’s extreme persistence that she was able to get the original story from the local CBS affiliate pulled, since they too were about to “out” the child by revealing the school that she attends. Don’t these people have any concept of what that can do? And why is the specific school relevant to this story? I don’t understand it.
Dr. John Money’s approach to gender identity played an significant part in the ultimate finality with David Reimer’s final outcome of suicide. Dr. Money’s theory, posits socialization for gender identity, was proven a failure when David realized that he was a boy not a girl. For those who do not know David, he had is penis removed at birth; Dr. Money told parents he could treat David as a girl and his program would provide a positive outcome. At an early teenage age David realized and vocalized he was not a her. Therefore Dr. Money’s theory was disproven; gender identity is not a choice. Now what does this have to do with Dr. Zucker? Reparative or Conversion Therapy has already been proven as ineffective and has no empirical supporting research and no evidence based practice basis. Zucker is very bad for our community and we must speak up. “Silence interprets as approval.”
Josephine
I have a simple question: If the psyche/brain is more sex-determining then the visible organs (like a penis for e.g.), isn’t it important for transsexual people to recognize that boys can be born with a vagina and girls can be born with a penis. I think this is nature – and no one has the right to manipulate these facts. Nobody has the right to force a girl that is born with a penis to behave like a boy, cause she never had been a boy. The biggest problem and violation of human rights is, that so called “gender-experts” have theories about gender standing in opposite to the nature and science, they don’t respect the existance of transsexual people. It is obvious, that the term Gender Identity Disorder has only to to with misuse of power and praying pseudo-scientific theories about sex and gender. For me it is time to wake up: Think about it… why can it be, that there’s one sentence in the world that never was seen as true sentence? It’s this one: “I am born in the wrong body”. Every scientist who would knew his responsibilty to huamn society first would try to find out, if it could be that this sentence can be true – and now it seems that it is much more possible, that poeple can be born with genitals that stand in opposite to their birth sex as to believe in gender identity disorder. Make a try – compare both views: First think about girls, who can be born with a penis, think about, why they feel like they feel, think about theiir behaviour in childhoood, aso… and as second step think about gid. And now count how many questionmarks you have on both sides. Maybe then you will recognize that people like Mr. Zucker believe in much more implausible psedo-scientific things, as you, when you say: Yes, it can happen, that girls can be born with a penis and boys with a vagina. I think the gender-experts abuse transsexual childs – and they like to abuse them, and cause they made the definitions like gender identity disorder, they think they have the licence to kill. As long as transsexual people will not fight for their rights and tell the people who they are, as long as they use terms lik gid, m2f, f2m, aso, nothing will change. If you want to change the world, believe in yourself.
Here is the part 2 of the NPR story mentioned above. I believe it to be a much mor positive story than #1:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90273278
Responding to #12 – Josephine. If memory serves me correctly the Money case revolved around David having “his” penis injured irrepairably during circumcision. I believe he was about 18 months or older when he was taken to Money for “treatment” — which also included nude sessions with “his” twin brother(!) and Money taking pictures of the incidents. David did ultimately commit suicide — also the fate of his twin?
Dee
Gender Variance is present in every species and is not an abberation or disorder or disease. It simply is.
It’s not a mental issue, it’s a physical one. One that has been stigmatized by society to the point where transgender people are made to feel guilt or that they are ’sick’ in some way, for simply ‘being.’ Sure they get depressed. Who wouldn’t?
The idea that children should be forced into stereotypical gender roles against their will so that they will ‘grow up to be gay’, which is what Zucker imagines all trans-people actually to be, is ridiculous. But that’s what he proposes.
Children.
Sometimes I feel that everyone’s gone mad.
I personally feel that we should wait and see something like a draft of what this panel comes up with. Then we can protest based on reason. Otherwise we transsexuals, as a community, look like a bunch of emotional basket cases. Reacting merely to names. Suppose we get them removed and instead get psychologist who’s point of view is based on pure ignorance? (trust me that can be much worse than anything Bailey, or Blanchard would do.)
I am also far more worried by Zucker than Blanchard. Zuckers ideas could lead to no legal treatment for anyone. Blanchards ideas are merely unsavory to our sex-negative judeo-christian puritanical culture. At least they lead to treatment for those who need it.
Why Kenneth J. Zucker Should Resign as Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders Chair
By Shelley Janiczek Woodson, Ph.D.
The American Psychiatric Association (APA) recently announced the names of members of work groups who will review information to be used in the development of the fifth edition of the APA’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V). Kenneth J. Zucker, Ph.D. was appointed Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders Chair. Dr. Zucker is best known for his work in “treating” hundreds of gender-variant children with “reparative therapy,” a “curative” approach to Gender Identity Disorder that is variously considered to be treatment of choice, ill advised or tantamount to child abuse by professionals in the mental health and human service fields.
How was Dr. Zucker chosen for this position? According to APA President Carolyn B. Robinowitz, M.D., “The work group members were chosen for their expertise in research and clinical care.” By these criteria, Dr. Zucker is a good choice. While I strongly disagree with a number of conclusions Dr. Zucker draws from his research data, and I contend that the phrases “reparative therapy” and “clinical care” do not belong in the same sentence, I think it illogical to conclude that Dr. Zucker is not an expert in the field of disorders of gender identity. He is an expert insomuch as he possesses special skills and knowledge in the area, acquired from training and experience.
It is notable that ethical qualities and expertise are separate issues. Recall that in 1946, twenty-three German physicians were prosecuted for participating in war crimes and crimes against humanity. These doctors used their expertise to conduct experiments on prisoners without their consent, and to design and execute a “Euthanasia” Program, systematically killing people they believed to be “unworthy of life.” At the time, these physicians were considered to be leaders in their field, experts.
My position regarding the appointment of Dr. Zucker is that, even though he is a well-known expert in the field of disorders of gender identity, he should recuse himself from participating as a work group or task force member. To put it simply, he should recuse himself because he has a dog in the fight.
The APA reports having made a significant effort to avoid conflicts of interest in the development of DSM-V. For example, all work group and task force members were required to disclose any relationships they may have with people or organizations that have an interest in psychiatric diagnoses and treatments. “We have made every effort to ensure that DSM-V will be based on the best and latest scientific research, and to eliminate conflicts of interest in its development,” explained Dr. Robinowitz.
In fairness, it could be argued that any mental health professional working with and/or studying transgender people has some inherent level of conflict of interest in the revision or elimination of the controversial diagnosis of Gender Identity Disorder. I, for example, am a bisexual psychologist who specializes in transgender issues; I am married to a transgender person. The difference between a psychologist like myself and Dr. Zucker is that I do not have a vested professional and financial interest in recommending the continued pathologizing of transgender people through the DSM system, nor do I have a vested interest in de-pathologizing transgender people for that matter. My professional identity and my financial livelihood do not depend upon the continuation of this diagnosis. For Dr. Zucker, there is a clear conflict of interest, exactly the sort of conflict of interest that the APA claims to have so diligently worked to avoid.
Dr. Zucker has a dog in the fight. And what a fight it is, with some psychologists and psychiatrists viewing gender identity disorders as serious mental illnesses and a growing number asserting that there is no disorder here at all, rather there is dis-ease with people who do not fit into an artificial binary gender system. Add the voices of a large transgender community, and a fight for human rights waged against a very powerful organization, the APA, might actually become a fair one.
For his part, Dr. Zucker contends that “transexuality” is a “bad outcome.” He further warns parents of gender-variant children of the “relation between GID and a later homosexual sexual orientation.” For Dr. Zucker, homosexuality is yet another “bad outcome.” I assert that, if one is in the business of “curing” transgender people, and business is booming, then the removal of Gender Identity Disorder from the DSM is most certainly, for them, a very “bad outcome.” Dr. Zucker advises parents of gender-variant boys: “The Barbies have to go.” My advice to the APA: “Dr. Zucker has to go.”
Shelley Janiczek Woodson, PhD
Dr. Janiczek Woodson is a bisexual, Licensed Psychologist living in Western Massachusetts. She and her spouse, Dr. Brett-Genny Janiczek Beemyn are educators, writers and Senior Associates of LGBT Associates of Western Massachusetts. thebeemyns@gogtt.net