Pfafflin F, Junge A (1992) Sex Reassignment: Thirty Years of International Follow-Up Studies after SRS – A Comprehensive Review, 1961-1991. English translation (1998) available on the Internet at http://209.143.139.183/ijtbooks/pfaefflin/1000.asp (this link may be broken now, sorry)
“Pfafflin and Junge concluded that SR treatment was generally effective in relieving gender dysphoria, and that its positive results greatly outweighed any negative consequences. They found overall that the results of SR in FMs were somewhat more favorable than in MFs. Pfafflin and Junge noted that satisfactory results of SR were reported in over 70% of MFs and in nearly 90% of FMs in the earliest reviews, conducted through 1984. Those results improved to 87% satisfactory results in MFs and 97% satisfactory results in FMs in a more recent review by Green and Fleming (1990), which considered only studies performed after 1980.” (from a paper by A Lawrence – much more at http://www.jenellerose.com/htmlpostings/transsexual_surgery_its_pros_and_cons.htm including a detailed summary of Pfafflin & Junge)
Green R, Fleming D (1990) Transsexual surgery follow-up: status in the 1990s. Ann Rev Sex Res 1: 163-174.
(Found 87% of satisfaction for male to female transsexual and 97% of satisfaction for F to M transsexual.)
Lawrence A, Factors associated with satisfaction or regret following male-to-female sex reassignment surgery. Archives of Sexual Behavior Vol 32(4), Aug 2003, pp. 299-315
Abstract: This study examined factors associated with satisfaction or regret following sex reassignment surgery (SRS) in 232 male-to-female transsexuals operated on between 1994 and 2000 by one surgeon using a consistent technique. Participants, all of whom were at least 1-year postoperative, completed a written questionnaire concerning their experiences and attitudes. Participants reported overwhelmingly that they were happy with their SRS results and that SRS had greatly improved the quality of their lives. None reported outright regret and only a few expressed even occasional regret.
Lobato M I; Koff W J; Manenti C; da Fonseca Seger D; Salvador J; da Graça Borges Fortes M; Petry A R; Silveira E; Henriques A A
Follow-up of sex reassignment surgery in transsexuals: A Brazilian cohort. Archives of Sexual Behavior Vol 35(6), Dec 2006, pp. 711-715
This study examined the impact of sex reassignment surgery on the satisfaction with sexual experience, partnerships, and relationship with family members in a cohort of Brazilian transsexual patients. A group of 19 patients who received sex reassignment between 2000 and 2004 (18 male-to-female, 1 female-to-male) after a two-year evaluation by a multidisciplinary team, and who agreed to participate in the study, completed a written questionnaire.
None of the patients reported regret for having undergone the surgery. Sexual experience was considered to have improved by 83.3% of the patients, and became more frequent for 64.7% of the patients. For 83.3% of the patients, sex was considered to be pleasurable with the neovagina/neopenis. In addition, 64.7% reported that initiating and maintaining a relationship had become easier. The number of patients with a partner increased from 52.6% to 73.7%. Family relationships improved in 26.3% of the cases, whereas 73.7% of the patients did not report a difference. None of the patients reported worse relationships with family members after sex reassignment. In conclusion, the overall impact of sex reassignment surgery on this cohort of patients was positive.
Cohen-Ketteinis P T; van Goozen S H M.
Sex reassignment of adolescent transsexuals: A follow-up study. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry Vol 36(2), Feb 1997, pp. 263-271
Abstract: Investigated postoperative functioning of the 1st 22 consecutive adolescent transsexual patients of a gender clinic who underwent sex reassignment surgery. Postoperatively the group was no longer gender-dysphoric; they scored in the normal range with respect to a number of different psychological measures and they were socially functioning quite well. Not a single S expressed feelings of regret concerning the decision to undergo sex reassignment.
I think it’s great that people feel better about themselves after having sex change surgery. I’m not saying they shouldn’t have it. I feel so much better about myself now that I’ve had my ED diagnosed correctly and can take a little $5 pill for it. But my insurance doesn’t cover it, my insurance SHOULDN’T cover it, and taxpayers damn sure shouldn’t have to pay for my increased sexual enjoyment.
By the way, and I realize this is totaly off-topic, the bibliography Johanna presented is every bit as good or better than most of the ones my fellow grad students present with their semester papers. Very impressive.
Johanna I’m sad to say that Cuba may not join that list as soon as has been reported. Just a couple of months after making those statements Mariela was slapped down and was forced to publish an editorial in her department’s web site stating that her department’s focus is not gay and transgendered issues, and that no gay pride (“orgullo gay”) events would be sponsored by them
Keep in mind that Mariela is the daughter of Raul Castro, Fidel Castro’s younger brother and current acting president, if she is getting slapped down it is coming from either Fidel or Raul. So it seems that until at least one of those two is gone no changes in that area will be possible.
Might want to check again, there, Mr. Cartwright, because it certainly was.
If we’re willing to pay our tax dollars to make one group of people feel better about themselves, why are we drawing the line at transexuals? Why should we foot the bill for rape victims? And what do you think we should do when the attack left gross physical damage along with the psychological scars? If a woman is raped, and the rapist slashes her face up, do we cover the “elective” surgery to repair the scars? If we don’t, why not? What if their doctor determines that such surgery is necessary to their recovery? If we do, then why this, and not gender reassignment?
Which is why any sort of national health care program needs to be designed so that what constitutes a necessary service is determined not by direct vote of the populace, but by doctors familiar with the latest advances in the relevant field. Otherwise, you stand a good chance of seeing your tax dollars fund everything from healing crystals to homosexual re-education camps. Both of which would be a far bigger waste of our time and resources than funding procedures that can actually help people, like gender reassignment surgery.
Here’s something I haven’t seen mentioned in this thread before.
Just as there is a range of treatments for some dental conditions, from root canal through expensive implants, or for post-mastectomy care (no reconstructive surgery through breast reconstruction and implants), so is there an option short of full sex-reassignment surgery for male-to-female transgendered women.
It’s called “bilateral orchiectomy,” and it is simply the removal of the patient’s testicles (or poison factories, as I like to call them). Many MTFs who can’t afford full SRS or who don’t want it, for whatever reason, opt for orchiectomy instead. I believe it costs around $1500, but whatever it costs, it’s a hell of a lot cheaper than SRS.
Assuming an MTF prisoner can complete the Benjamin Standards Of Care’s mandated “real life test,” (which would be very problematic in prison, as Broomstick and Una have noted) an orchiectomy seems to me like a reasonable accommodation between the needs of the prisoner and the needs of society.
As others have said in this thread. Have you anything more insightful to add? I assume you’ve read this entire thread, and have a unique contribution to make and weren’t just posting out of reflex. :rolleyes:
Qadgop the Mercotan may find this encouraging in his efforts to dispense HRT. Transgender Inmate Settles Civil Rights Suit with Orange County
“The resulting policy changes will formalize policies regarding provision of hormones to transgender inmates and training for medical and corrections staff.”
Nice for them, but in my state, the Legislature itself passed a law prohibiting not only GRS, but also making it illegal for physicians to prescribe hormones to treat gender identity disorder in inmates.
I’ll admit I’ve only read a page or so of the thread (and may be repeating other’s thoughts), but I’m basing my decision on “lifestyle” definitions.
In my opinion, gender-reassignment is a lifestyle choice, and should therefore not be covered at taxpayer’s expense. As Tastes… stated, I would compare it to a breast augmentation for a female inmate.
I did read some of the responses in the thread in regards to crippling depression brought on by “gender innacuracy” (my phrase)…but it doesn’t pass the common-sense test (for me).
In regards to treating congential issues that worsen later in life, that would seem to be an easy “yes” for treatment of such.
As a physician, I prefer to make clinical decisions using evidence-based medicine, not common-sense tests. I find that what makes sense to a given individual is often not grounded in actual reality.
And evidence-based medicine tells us that gender disorders are indeed legitimate conditions. Which treatments are best for such conditions is what is in dispute, not whether such a condition is a lifestyle choice.
But then I was trained as a medical scientist, which undoubtably affects my outlook in this area.
An update on this. Mariela Castro, Raul Castro’s daughter and head of the Cuban Sexology Institute is now saying that she hopes to get the initiative for state paid sex change operations in the December legislature session, or if not then in next year’s June session. She adds that the June date might work better because it gives her a chance to “make aware (sensibilizar in spanish), the population.”
Not only no, but hell no. It serves no legitimate penological purpose, it’s not necessary to sustain the life of the prisoner, and it would ordinarily be elective surgery if the prisoner were a free man/woman. So no.
Oh well, glad I read this information before I got on a boat. ¡Abajo Fidel! ¡Canadá sí! ¡Cuba no!