gidreform.org
GID Reform Advocates
Because our identities are not disordered
GidReform.org

Home
GID (Adult)
GID (Child)
TF
DSM-V
Papers
Advocates
Organizations
Professionals
Blog
The Book

Gender Madness in American Psychiatry Gender Madness in American Psychiatry: Essays from the Struggle for Dignity,
by Kelley Winters (2008)
gendermadness
.com

Sexual and Gender Diagnoses of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM), A Reevaluation , Karasic and Drescher, Eds. (2005)
Order from IFGE
Winters Images Maritime and Landscape Photography
scenes of serenity amidst a world of turbulence and intolerance

Essay Series on Gender Diagnoses in the DSM-V

June 24, 2009

Revision Suggestions for Gender Related Diagnoses in the DSM and ICD

WPATH 2009, Oslo, Norway
Read and post comments at gidreform.wordpress.com.

See also, May 18-- Beyond Conundrum: Strategies for Diagnostic Harm Reduction .

Ehrbar, Randall D., Psy.D.
Winters, Kelley, Ph.D.
Gorton, R. Nicholas, M.D

a synopsis of the presentation to

The World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH)
2009 XXI Biennial Symposium
June 19, 2009
Oslo, Norway

For the complete presentation text, please see www.gidreform.org/wpath2009/

Starting with different beliefs and assumptions about appropriate diagnoses for transgender and gender variant individuals suffering from gender dysphoria, the members of this panel have reached similar conclusions about desirable changes to diagnostic categories in the next version of the DSM and ICD. Important points of agreement are that revised versions of diagnoses such as GID, Transsexualism, and GID in children 1) should center on gender dysphoria, which is distress associated with sexed characteristics of the body and/or social gender role, 2) should be large enough to encompass all of those who need it including those with non-binary gender identities, and those who do not wish to fully medically or socially transition to the “opposite” gender, 3) should be narrowly defined to only include those who are experiencing gender dysphoria (and are therefore presumably in need of treatment), not to those who are merely gender non-conforming. We will discuss the different premises and constructs on which the three authors base their conclusions and explore how despite these significant epistemological differences, the same conclusions become apparent. We will also discuss placement of diagnostic categories, nomenclature, “exit clauses” for trans-people who no longer experience gender dysphoria, cultural and sociopolitical significance of diagnostic categories and discourses around such categories, and appropriate diagnosis of distress primarily due to discrimination and oppression rather than gender dysphoria.


Introduction:

We come at this issue from a variety of different backgrounds and viewpoints differing on whether there should be a diagnosis at all or what kind of diagnosis it should be. When I first approached Dr. Nick Gorton and Dr. Kelley Winters they both were a bit skeptical, in fact, because they perceived that the other had very different viewpoints. Yet we agree about fundamental principles of treatment and rights for trans people. We may just differ in the ways that we think these things can best be accomplished. In the process of working on this talk we discovered that not only do we share common basic principles, but even had some common ground about utility of having a diagnosis and what such a diagnosis should look like if there is a diagnosis. . We were also able to generate compromises that could accommodate those areas where we do have fundamental differences. One of the first things we did in preparing for our talk was to write in 30 words or less our fundamental beliefs about diagnosing transgender people with an illness and what that does for the community.

What We Think:

  • Winters – Individuals whose gender identity or expression differ from assigned birth-sex are labeled mentally disordered in the DSM-IV-TR, inflicting harmful social stigma and barriers to transition care.
  • Ehrbar – Practically, diagnosis is needed for access. Conceptually, it makes sense to categorize gender dysphoria as a mental health disorder.
  • Gorton – GID (by any name) belongs in DSM-V. Revisions can foster acceptance among consumers without compromising scientific accuracy. Diagnosis facilitates insurance coverage and disability protections.

We also explicitly identified our common ground is with regard to access to care, non-discrimination, social justice, and civil rights. We have a good deal of common ground about how we think the world should be. In fact, we suspect that most if not all of the folks here at WPATH share these fundamental beliefs. , I It’s worth reminding ourselves that we do agree that trans and gender variant people shouldn’t be subject to discrimination, should have access to health care and should have civil rights and protections.


The Authors’ Shared Vision:

  • End discrimination on the basis of gender identity and expression
  • Gender identity and expression that differ from assigned birth sex do not, in themselves, constitute a mental disorder or an impairment in competence
  • Hormonal and/or surgical transition treatments to relieve gender dysphoria are medically necessary
  • Insurance and health care coverage for medically prescribed transition treatment
  • Legal recognition/documentation for all people that is consistent with their gender identity and expression.
  • Reform must fit everyone’s needs, but as a social justice movement we must weigh more heavily the needs of those least enfranchised.

Summary of Proposed Diagnosis:

  • Dx Criteria – Both A and B
    • A: Strong and persistent distress with physical sex characteristics, or ascribed social gender role, that is incongruent with persistent gender identity.

      B: Distress is clinically significant or causes impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning, when this distress or impairment is not solely due to external prejudice or discrimination.

  • GD in remission
    • No longer meets criteria, needs treatment to maintain remission

  • ‘Exit clause’
    • No longer meets criteria, doesn’t need treatment to maintain remission

Key Points:

  • It’s about Dysphoria, not difference from assigned birth sex
  • Respectful Language
  • Not too Big; Not too Little; but Just Right
  • Accurate Classification Placement
  • Remove Tranvestism/Fetishism Categories

Our main points are: 1) gender dysphoria is the conceptual center of the diagnosis, 2) use respectful language in nomenclature and description of individuals, 3) include those who are in need of inclusion, do not include those who should not be, 4) move the diagnosis out of the sexual and gender identity disorders chapter, 5) and remove transvestic fetishim.


About the Authors:

Randall Ehrbar is a clinical psychologist with extensive training and experience working with transgender clients. He has also been actively involved in the American Psychological Association’s efforts to address transgender concerns.

Kelley Winters is a writer and consultant on gender diversity issues in medical, employment and public policy.

Nicholas Gorton is a medical doctor who provides primary care to many transgender clients at Lyon Martin Health Services

Copyright © 2009 Randall Ehrbar, Kelley Winters, Nicholas Gorton

Blog Index:

2010Apr20
Comments on
Draft Revisions
to the DSM5
2010Apr16
Why You
Should Sign
the Petition
2010Feb10
DSM-V
Proposed
Criteria
2010Feb06
Taxing
Medical Necessity
2009Nov03
Update: Statement
on GID & TF
in the DSM-V
2009Jun24
WPATH Presentation:
Revision Suggestions
for Gender Diagnoses
2009May30
Guest Blog
Stop Sexualizing Us!
2009May27
Guest Blog
Aligning Bodies with Minds
2009May23
Call to Action for Affirming APA Position Statements
2009May18
Beyond Conundrum: Strategies for Diagnostic Harm Reduction
2009Apr22
Transvestic Disorder and Policy Dysfunction in the DSM-V
2009Jan24
Book Announcement:
Gender Madness in American Psychiatry
2008Dec16
Guest Blog
What is the Body For?
2008Dec6
Guest Blog
DES's Other Daughters
2008Nov26
The Gender Gulag:
Voices of the Asylum
2008Nov19
Autogynephilia, Infallible
Derogatory Hypothesis
Part 2
2008Nov10
Autogynephilia, Infallible
Derogatory Hypothesis
Part 1
2008Nov02
Disordered Identities,
The Ambiguously Sexual Fetish
2008Oct28
Disallowed Identities,
Disaffirmed Childhood
2008Oct20
Blinded Me With Science:
The Burden of Proof
2008Sep15
Balancing Views on
Gender Diversity
in the DSM-V Process
2008Aug20
Blinded Me with Science:
Devolution of the DSM
2008Aug14
Diagnosis vs. Treatment:
Psychosexual Stigma
2008Aug08
Diagnosis vs. Treatment:
Barriers to Medical Care
2008Jul21
Blinded Me With Science:
Sampling Error
2008Jul16
Top Ten Problems
with the GID Diagnosis
2008Jul07
Disordered Identities:
The Focus of Pathology
2008Jul01
Diagnosis vs. Treatment:
Horns of a False Dilemma
2008Jun24
Maligning Terminology:
Language of Oppression
2008Jun16
Beyond Denial:
GID Diagnostic Criteria and Gender-Conversion Therapies


Read and post comments to this essay series at gidreform.
wordpress.com

gidreform.org gidreform.org

You may need to enable javascript active content to view all of this page

Send comments and suggestions about this site to
Return to the GIDreform.org Home Page
Copyright 2004,2009 Kelley Winters, GID Reform Advocates