关于跨性别和性别不符合儿童的后续研究和“抵制”理论的批判性评论

Q1 Social Sciences
Julia Temple Newhook, Jake Pyne, Kelley Winters, S. Feder, C. Holmes, Jemma Tosh, M. Sinnott, A. Jamieson, Sarah Pickett
{"title":"关于跨性别和性别不符合儿童的后续研究和“抵制”理论的批判性评论","authors":"Julia Temple Newhook, Jake Pyne, Kelley Winters, S. Feder, C. Holmes, Jemma Tosh, M. Sinnott, A. Jamieson, Sarah Pickett","doi":"10.1080/15532739.2018.1456390","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background: It has been widely suggested that over 80% of transgender children will come to identify as cisgender (i.e., desist) as they mature, with the assumption that for this 80%, the trans identity was a temporary “phase.” This statistic is used as the scientific rationale for discouraging social transition for pre-pubertal children. This article is a critical commentary on the limitations of this research and a caution against using these studies to develop care recommendations for gender-nonconforming children. Methods: A critical review methodology is employed to systematically interpret four frequently-cited studies that sought to document identity outcomes for gender-nonconforming children (often referred to as “desistance” research). Results: Methodological, theoretical, ethical, and interpretive concerns regarding four “desistance” studies are presented. The authors clarify the historical and clinical contexts within which these studies were conducted to deconstruct assumptions in interpretations of the results. The discussion makes distinctions between the specific evidence provided by these studies versus the assumptions that have shaped recommendations for care. The affirmative model is presented as a way to move away from the question of, “How should children's gender identities develop over time?” toward a more useful question: “How should children best be supported as their gender identity develops?” Conclusion: The tethering of childhood gender diversity to the framework of “desistance” or “persistence” has stifled advancements in our understanding of children's gender in all its complexity. These follow-up studies fall short in helping us understand what children need. As work begins on the 8th version of the Standards of Care by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, we call for a more inclusive conceptual framework that takes children's voices seriously. Listening to children's experiences will enable a more comprehensive understanding of the needs of gender-nonconforming children and provide guidance to scientific and lay communities.","PeriodicalId":56012,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Transgenderism","volume":"13 1","pages":"212 - 224"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"95","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A critical commentary on follow-up studies and “desistance” theories about transgender and gender-nonconforming children\",\"authors\":\"Julia Temple Newhook, Jake Pyne, Kelley Winters, S. Feder, C. Holmes, Jemma Tosh, M. Sinnott, A. Jamieson, Sarah Pickett\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15532739.2018.1456390\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Background: It has been widely suggested that over 80% of transgender children will come to identify as cisgender (i.e., desist) as they mature, with the assumption that for this 80%, the trans identity was a temporary “phase.” This statistic is used as the scientific rationale for discouraging social transition for pre-pubertal children. This article is a critical commentary on the limitations of this research and a caution against using these studies to develop care recommendations for gender-nonconforming children. Methods: A critical review methodology is employed to systematically interpret four frequently-cited studies that sought to document identity outcomes for gender-nonconforming children (often referred to as “desistance” research). Results: Methodological, theoretical, ethical, and interpretive concerns regarding four “desistance” studies are presented. The authors clarify the historical and clinical contexts within which these studies were conducted to deconstruct assumptions in interpretations of the results. The discussion makes distinctions between the specific evidence provided by these studies versus the assumptions that have shaped recommendations for care. The affirmative model is presented as a way to move away from the question of, “How should children's gender identities develop over time?” toward a more useful question: “How should children best be supported as their gender identity develops?” Conclusion: The tethering of childhood gender diversity to the framework of “desistance” or “persistence” has stifled advancements in our understanding of children's gender in all its complexity. These follow-up studies fall short in helping us understand what children need. As work begins on the 8th version of the Standards of Care by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, we call for a more inclusive conceptual framework that takes children's voices seriously. Listening to children's experiences will enable a more comprehensive understanding of the needs of gender-nonconforming children and provide guidance to scientific and lay communities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":56012,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Transgenderism\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"212 - 224\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"95\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Transgenderism\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2018.1456390\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Transgenderism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2018.1456390","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 95

摘要

背景:人们普遍认为,超过80%的跨性别儿童在成年后会认同为顺性别(即停止),并假设这80%的跨性别身份是一个暂时的“阶段”。这一统计数据被用作阻止青春期前儿童进行社会转型的科学依据。这篇文章是对这项研究的局限性的批判性评论,并警告不要使用这些研究来制定性别不一致儿童的护理建议。方法:采用批判性回顾方法系统地解释了四项经常被引用的研究,这些研究试图记录性别不一致儿童的身份结果(通常被称为“抵制”研究)。结果:提出了关于四项“抵抗”研究的方法、理论、伦理和解释问题。作者澄清了这些研究进行的历史和临床背景,以解构对结果解释的假设。讨论区分了这些研究提供的具体证据与形成护理建议的假设。平权模式的提出是为了回避“孩子的性别认同应该如何随着时间的推移而发展?”的问题转向了一个更有用的问题:“在儿童性别认同发展的过程中,应该如何得到最好的支持?”结论:将儿童性别多样性与“克制”或“坚持”的框架捆绑在一起,阻碍了我们对儿童性别复杂性理解的进步。这些后续研究在帮助我们了解儿童需要什么方面存在不足。随着世界跨性别卫生专业协会制定第八版《护理标准》的工作开始,我们呼吁建立一个更具包容性的概念框架,认真对待儿童的声音。倾听儿童的经历将有助于更全面地了解性别不一致儿童的需求,并为科学和非专业社区提供指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A critical commentary on follow-up studies and “desistance” theories about transgender and gender-nonconforming children
ABSTRACT Background: It has been widely suggested that over 80% of transgender children will come to identify as cisgender (i.e., desist) as they mature, with the assumption that for this 80%, the trans identity was a temporary “phase.” This statistic is used as the scientific rationale for discouraging social transition for pre-pubertal children. This article is a critical commentary on the limitations of this research and a caution against using these studies to develop care recommendations for gender-nonconforming children. Methods: A critical review methodology is employed to systematically interpret four frequently-cited studies that sought to document identity outcomes for gender-nonconforming children (often referred to as “desistance” research). Results: Methodological, theoretical, ethical, and interpretive concerns regarding four “desistance” studies are presented. The authors clarify the historical and clinical contexts within which these studies were conducted to deconstruct assumptions in interpretations of the results. The discussion makes distinctions between the specific evidence provided by these studies versus the assumptions that have shaped recommendations for care. The affirmative model is presented as a way to move away from the question of, “How should children's gender identities develop over time?” toward a more useful question: “How should children best be supported as their gender identity develops?” Conclusion: The tethering of childhood gender diversity to the framework of “desistance” or “persistence” has stifled advancements in our understanding of children's gender in all its complexity. These follow-up studies fall short in helping us understand what children need. As work begins on the 8th version of the Standards of Care by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, we call for a more inclusive conceptual framework that takes children's voices seriously. Listening to children's experiences will enable a more comprehensive understanding of the needs of gender-nonconforming children and provide guidance to scientific and lay communities.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Transgenderism
International Journal of Transgenderism Social Sciences-Gender Studies
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: International Journal of Transgenderism, together with its partner organization the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), offers an international, multidisciplinary scholarly forum for publication in the field of transgender health in its broadest sense for academics, practitioners, policy makers, and the general population. The journal welcomes contributions from a range of disciplines, such as: Endocrinology Surgery Obstetrics and Gynaecology Psychiatry Psychology Speech and language therapy Sexual medicine Sexology Family therapy Public health Sociology Counselling Law Medical ethics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信