The American Academy of Pediatrics is not only refusing to debate Resolution #27, brought forward by AAP member physicians, which calls for an evidence-based evaluation of the so-called “affirmation model”, but is attempting to get the Justice Department to silence any dissent.
This Statement by the AMA asks the Justice Department to “investigate the increasing threats of violence against physicians, hospitals and families of children for providing and seeking evidence-based gender-affirming care.” The fact is the care they provide is anything but “evidence-based”, being based instead on sex denialism, junk science, politicized directives from WPATH, and, of course, profit.
You can help by writing a letter to the AAP and urging them to debate Resolution #27. Here is a sample letter confronting the AAP on their unethical medicalization of minors, written by Our Duty, which you can adapt when sending your own:
[Your name and address, if including]
Dr. Moira Szilagyi, M.D., Ph.D, FAAO
President, American Academy of Pediatrics
10833 Le Conte Ave., Suite 22-395
Los Angeles, CA 90095
Dr. Sandy L. Chung, M.D., FAAP
President-Elect, American Academy of Pediatrics
13135 Lee Jackson Memorial Hwy., Suite 201
Fairfax, VA 22033
Dear Dr. Moira Szilagyi and Dr. Sandy Chung,
[Insert your brief story if you know someone who has been subjected to “gender-affirming care”]
If the American Academy of Pediatrics’ true mission is to “champion optimal physical, mental and social health and well-being of all infants, children, adolescents and young adults,” I am confounded by its singular treatment for gender confused children and youth, namely social transition (adopting the child’s delusional belief that he or she is the opposite sex) and medical transition (irreversible puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgeries) in lieu of treating the child’s underlying self-loathing or confusion, or first addressing any mental health co-morbidities or developmental issues. I am perplexed by its utter rejection of the independent systematic evidence reviews conducted by public health agencies in Finland, Sweden, and the UK. The AAP has an opportunity to return to evidence-based medicine, instead of following the unintelligible and unsupported WPATH guidelines. The misnamed “Standards of Care” 8 are filled with statements such as, “…a systematic review regarding outcomes of treatments in adolescents is not possible,” “…the number of studies is low,” “…there are few outcome studies that follow youth into adulthood,” and “At present, no clinical cohort studies have reported on profiles of adolescents who regret their initial decision or detransition after irreversible affirming treatment.” How can the AAP blindly align with WPATH, an advocacy group whose advice even the 9th circuit rejects as standards? Those who developed WPATH’s recommendations include non-medical professionals and not a single independent doctor. Most notably, contributors to the adolescent section includes Susie Green, the CEO of Mermaids, now under investigation for sending breast binders to children against parents’ wishes and dispensing medical advice without a license. Why is a purported prestigious society like the AAP following WPATH, an entity that utilizes the Delphi method — the “lowest level of evidence for making causal inferences and are thus subordinate to meta-analysis, intervention studies and correlation studies.” — to obtain consensus and that has adopted the concept of “eunuch” — a gender identity centered around surgical removal of male genitals — as suitable for minors. This is the antithesis of the AAP’s mission.
The “Dutch model” is based on a mere 55 children, ignored the death of the one child from surgical complications, and has never been repeated. This unconfirmed model is the foundation for all childhood, adolescent, and young adult gender interventions ascribed to by WPATH and now the AAP.
Five pediatricians submitted Resolution #27 to implore the AAP to conduct a comprehensive, systematic review of the available evidence to update the AAP’s 2018 position on care. AAP leadership barred its members from commenting on Resolution #27, based upon an unconvincing excuse that a new rule required a sponsor for the Resolution before it would be circulated to the membership. Although I am not surprised no sponsor was obtained given the swift vitriol one receives when questioning gender treatments, I was nonetheless disappointed. It is a pediatrician’s edict to protect children and provide only evidence-based, beneficial treatments. Despite the AAP’s own members’ displeasure in the suppressing of discourse, the AAP continues to ignore the breadth of scientific literature that outlines the lack of supportive data for these treatments.
I entreat the AAP to conduct an independent systematic review of the science. If the AAP continues to promote harms on children and young adults, it will bear the indelible mark of a society that could have prevented a cataclysmic medical scandal that victimized children and youth. The AAP can change course, rather than leading the sterilization of a generation, as well as contributing to what lies ahead — a marked increase in suicides as these children mature and suffer horrific regret.
I agree wholeheartedly with the AAP’s request that Attorney Merrick Garland investigate the campaign of “toxic misinformation” about the actual science and harms to children by the affirmative care model. I relish an independent review of whether hospitals and clinics have been obtaining the proper informed consent of before children are irreversibly harmed. Any investigation into violation of medical protocols will be extremely helpful for the prosecution in medical malpractice cases.
NAME – identify yourself by occupation and state as well as party affiliation please.]