There is the potential irreparable harm to wrongfully starting hormone replacement at early puberty. There is also irreparable harm to wrongfully withholding hormone replacement at early puberty, when the practitioner is certain that the patient is in fact transsexual. Starting HRT before the growth plates close will allow the patient to develop a gender-appropriate skeletal structure, and will also prevent the development of inappropriate secondary sex characteristics and encourage the development of appropriate secondary sex characteristics. Ultimately the question comes down to trusting the practitioner to correctly identify juvenile transsexuals.
There are generally accepted guidelines for treating juvenile transsexuals.
It appears that the medical care practitioners in this case are following those guidelines, since they are delaying the administration of testosterone until age 16 as called for by the HBIGDA’s guidelines.
In this case, the determination that the patient is transsexual is concurred in by the patient, the patient’s legal guardian, the patient’s care providers, and an impartial judicial body. Opposing that determination, at this point, sounds to me more like an irrational attachment to outmoded theories of gender identity than any sound scientific or ethical objection to the procedure.
A lot of transsexuals know that they’re “in the wrong body” by the time they’re five. I have friends who knew they were transsexual at age two. It is not at all unreasonable that some transsexuals will be sufficiently certain in their gender identity at age 13 as to justify treatment. The HBIGDA’s collective experience is that this is the case, and they wrote their guidelines based on that experience. How many more people would you force Alex to prove his gender identity to before allowing him hormone replacement? The dozen or so he’s proven it to already apparently aren’t enough for some people.