The article provides examples of clinics offering very few steps to treatment, and discusses doctors who bias in favor of treatment. It paints a picture supporting the conclusion that it would have been easy.
The gulf between the availability of specialist surgeons and pharmaceuticals is incredibly vast. If the article gave you the impression that you can just walk in and get your SRS did on a whim, perhaps you should reconsider its veracity or at least your understanding of the situation.
I don't have a any understanding of this situation or a horse in this race, was just pointing out that ancestor comment was justified based on the article, which also addressed availability of pharmaceuticals, btw.
It'd be nice to have literature or deeper investigation on this.
"Treatment" involves a number of different options, of varying permanence. It isn't "Okay, surgery scheduled for Tuesday" at every patient's first consulation.
I wouldn't be surprised if for most girls, treatment starts with wearing a binder, which is clothing.
The article is written from experience in one paediatric centre, when the pratice between different centres - and laws in different states - differ vastly.
Information about people seeking gender affirming care in different places and stages of transition is not refutable based on this article.
And it is anecdata - how many patients had positive outcomes? Article doesn’t tell you. What did the (brand new) centre learn from these cases with negative outcomes? What protocols was it using? Are they the same now? Are they common elsewhere?
