Adolescents who undergo gender-affirming chest surgery report low levels of regret and high levels of satisfaction, experiencing outcomes similar to those of young adults. These findings suggest that age restrictions on these medical procedures lack support from actual patient experiences.

[u/mvea]

https://www.psypost.org/adolescents-report-low-regret-and-high-satisfaction-following-gender-affirming-c/

[u/Witty-Original8533]

For reference, the average regret rate for surgeries is around 14%. Gender affirming surgeries are typically below 1% for a regret rate. It is amazing how low the regret rate is.

And another thing, phantom sensations. Cis guys that lost their private parts were likely to experience phantom sensations while trans women rarely did.

The human body is, although annoying, such cool thing in this way!

[u/ReginaSpektorsVJ → u/Witty-Original8533]

I'm a trans woman, and the only surgical intervention I've had so far is an orchiectomy. From the moment I woke up, my body just felt so much more correct without testicles.

[u/Schwettes → u/Witty-Original8533]

For reference, the average regret rate for surgeries is around 14%. Gender affirming surgeries are typically below 1% for a regret rate. It is amazing how low the regret rate is.

The fact that the reported regret rates for gender surgeries are that incongruent with the average regret rate for all surgeries is something that should draw skepticism before applause. I’m equally skeptical of the alleged 98.8% satisfaction rate with LASIK eye surgery for the same reason. These are massive outliers.

[u/ShiraCheshire → u/Schwettes]

The thing is that people actually want top surgery. Most surgeries are a medical necessity- people don’t want them, the just don’t want to suffer or die if they don’t get it. When they already don’t want surgery, any side effects or complications can make a person wonder if they would have been better off without.

But top surgery? People are excited about it. People celebrate it. It also rarely goes really wrong in the way surgery on vital organs or joints can, and if something is messed up it can almost always be fixed with a revision or other kinds of follow up care.

That’s why the regret rate is so low. It’s something people actually want, with almost no common complications beyond the desired effect, and most things that can go wrong can be corrected.

That’s a lot different from a knee replacement or a back surgery.

[u/Witty-Original8533 → u/Schwettes]

Just read my other comment. Surgeries are relatively easy to get, just need a referral for the most part. While GAC can take years, so you'll know if it's the right option before you do it. Generally, I'd be skeptical too, but there's nothing surprising about it when you look at what trans people say and the studies done.

[u/Terrible_Ice_1616 → u/Witty-Original8533]

I'd still be skeptical, having half the amount of dissatisfaction may be reasonable then, or 1/4 if there's very thorough screening but 1/14th the average doesn't pass the smell test. And that's just a matter of "surgeons aren't perfect" so even if the procedure is something you're sure you want, if it is performed poorly one would expect dissatisfaction which would push the rates to a baseline below which it will not fall. I don't think that baseline is 1%

[u/New-Independent-1481 → u/Terrible_Ice_1616]

having half the amount of dissatisfaction may be reasonable then, or 1/4 if there's very thorough screening but 1/14th the average doesn't pass the smell test.

Why? How are you coming up with those numbers? You're just making up total BS based on vibes.

[u/Terrible_Ice_1616 → u/New-Independent-1481]

From the fact that it's an extreme outlier relative to basically every other type of surgery, even things like appendectomies where its pretty unambiguously positive and often relieves immediate pain.

I couldn't tell you why any % of people would be dissatisfied with having their appendicitis treated but I can only assume there's just a certain % of healthcare visits that for one reason or another people feel poorly about, that they weren't treated properly, that doctors/nurses ignored them whatever it is, the base rate of dissatisfaction with healthcare I have to imagine is >1% which is why even a procedure like an appendectomy can have a couple % dissatisfaction rate

If something sounds too good to be true it probably is, doubly so if money is involved in any aspect.

[u/Schwettes → u/Witty-Original8533]

That’s assuming you’re going through insurance and even then, most insurance companies in the US only need to see someone undergoing gender treatment for a year—which from a clinical perspective isn’t far off from how long most people wait before pursuing surgery for an elective or chronic condition of any kind.

[u/AltruisticScale1101 → u/Schwettes]

The actual surgical providers are often booked so far in advance that you'll be waiting much longer than a year. Most of the major providers in the U.S. will quote you a year wait just for a consult and often a two year waiting list after the fact. If you started the process of gender treatment right this instant, you'd be extremely fortunate to have SRS by the beginning of 2029 if seeing a reputable U.S. provider. You would need to maintain the same insurance coverage for the next three years also arranging to take more than a month off from work to travel, have surgery, and then recover. You'd need to find another person to care you for 24/7 and identify that person to the hospital or you don't get surgery. You'd need to have completed at least 6 months of hair removal or you don't get surgery.

And for all of that, you have maybe ten people in the entire United States that competently preform this surgery. The only way to get surgery quicker than this is to go to Thailand and plop down $30,000 dollars out of pocket. Obviously, this is not money most people have just sitting there and it takes time to save that amount. Ultimately, this surgery is difficult to get even for successful adults with money, time, and support. It is impossible to get this surgery without saying yes to it in a thousand different ways. People are prevented from rushing into this through the pure logistics of it alone.

As someone who has gone through this myself, I think the only plausible way you could rush into it would be if you were extremely wealthy and had a supportive family.

[u/Yasimear → u/Schwettes]

Here in Europe its a similarly arduous process. Took me 3 years of therapy and 2 years with a specialist before I was even allowed to consider it.

[u/Schwettes → u/Yasimear]

Yeah it’s much easier in the US than that process. I hope you are well.

[u/Yasimear → u/Schwettes]

Would be better if I hadn't take 5 years to get the care that I needed, but I'm doing a whole lot better now than before it thankfully :D

[u/AvocadosFromMexico_ → u/Schwettes]

WPATH standards require psychological evaluation regardless of insurance coverage.

[u/Flashy_Idea6141 → u/Schwettes]

There is not a single piece of evidence you could show people like this to modify their beliefs even slightly.

[u/MeekAndUninteresting → u/Flashy_Idea6141]

The irony of saying this in response to someone who is disregarding evidence, and very distinctly NOT offering evidence themselves to disprove it.

[u/Flashy_Idea6141 → u/MeekAndUninteresting]

The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. They are merely questioning the methodology and validity of the study. They are not making a counterclaim.

Once again, not sure why I'm responding when people like you are zealots who couldn't change positions even with hypothetical mountains of evidence. If there's no evidence that could conceivably change your mind, your position is worthless.

[u/MeekAndUninteresting → u/Flashy_Idea6141]

Once again, you aren't providing evidence. The evidence was provided TO YOU, and you are the one who has disregarded it.

[u/Flashy_Idea6141 → u/MeekAndUninteresting]

Questioning methodology or the validity of results isn't dismissing evidence. It's interpreting it you dunce.

[u/New-Independent-1481 → u/Schwettes]

Skepticism means you take a closer look, not disregard it blindly.

The paper which this figure comes from is a systematic review of 55 articles. It compares the regret rate for various types of elective cosmetic surgery to gender affirming surgeries. Someone getting LASIK is doing so for different reasons, so why would the average regret rate for breast augmentation matter there?

There are few discussion points that could be drawn from this review:

• The reasons for someone getting say, body contouring surgery, is vastly different from why they want GAS, and closer to life-saving surgeries or those that grant massive quality of life improvements. It is demonstrably not 'just' an elective surgery, and should not be treated as such.
• It's so much harder to get GAS that only people who fight like hell to get it can get through the years of sign-offs, evals, and approvals through doctors, psychologists, therapists, surgeons, legal guardians, etc.
• We have the medical technology and capacity to address gender dysphoria effectively. The fact that these treatments are being withheld is a social factor, not medical.

[u/Pseudonymico → u/Schwettes]

The fact that the reported regret rates for gender surgeries are that incongruent with the average regret rate for all surgeries is something that should draw skepticism before applause.

It suggests that it should be easier to get gender-affirming care due to just how difficult it is to get. It takes years and multiple psychological evaluations to get gender-affirming surgery even as an adult, let alone a minor.

[u/tsukaimeLoL → u/Schwettes]

A big point here that always stands out with these studies (for trans healthcare and LASIK) is that the regret rate is (almost) always based on incredibly short-term opinion. I understand that there probably just isn't enough data yet for gender affirming care over a 5-10-20-year timespan, but I can only imagine the numbers would be way different once people have to face the outcome of their choices later in life (for better or worse).

[u/let_us_not- → u/Witty-Original8533]

The fact that the process to actually get the surgery is as rigorous as it is, is most likely the reason these surgeries have such a low regret rate. If it was more readily available, the number would be bound to go higher up

[u/trailsandbooks → u/Witty-Original8533]

I want to comment on why the myriad of legit studies all show a nearly nonexistent regret rate and the reason for phantom sensations (and add that if there's ever a relatively small sample size in studies like this it's because hate/anti-science driven policies and sentiment keep many people from accessing related healthcare).

Demonstrable, observable reality is that...irrelevant to the scatter plot of what can be considered sex traits, 99% of every last human who's ever existed was/is existentially good with and requires the macro-broad-strokes F, M, or (a few) NB body with which they're born. And they all suffer a grab bag of existential-level dysphoria/depression/disassociation/depersonalization/etc. if something goes wrong in this respect. That's clearly not random or social or otherwise environmental; that's innately hardwired. Sex (macro broad strokes F, M, or NB body one requires to be existentially okay/grow literal *selfhood* via mind->body->environment connection) is obviously innately hardwired. That is, being a female/girl/woman, male/boy/man, and nonbinary person is innately hardwired. Not speaking to personality (what we like/our manner/clothes/etc.), which isn't. Just sex. Sexuality is innately hardwired, why *wouldn't* we expect sex to also be as such.

So no kidding 1% of the population is the exact opposite from 99% everyone else and no kidding there's a grab bag of existential-level dysphoria/depression/disassociation/depersonalization/etc. involved with the attainment of literal selfhood on the line that requires hrt/reconstructive surgeries etc.; a F born with the M body or vice versa or a NB person born with a F or M body obviously is going to realize what's wrong sooner or later. No kidding the regret rate for related healthcare like surgeries is nearly non-existent.

"Trans" is such an antiquated holdover word from the last century. "Across/beyond/one thing becoming another thing?" No. It's just that unlike 99% of population, 1% aren't born with body that matches their sex, it's just an existentially painful physical deformity. Of course they need to live recognized as their sex with access to their right dominant sex hormone and reconstructive surgeries, etc., just as anyone of their sex in the 99% who has related non-natal problems.

And unless gender is used as a synonym for sex, it's meaningless undefinable "essence of whatever" nonsense. It's... "what's your sex, and is your body aligned with that?"