Ms Assigned – The DSM belongs to the American Psychological Association, so I doubt they’ll take Canada into consideration. I believe Canada generally uses the DSM but makes adjustments occasionally.

The DSM diagnosis of a mental disorder obviously causes a degree of stigmatization. The way I see it, the problem isn’t with trans-folk, it’s with the world’s perception of them and the resulting discriminatory behaviors displayed towards them.

The ‘diagnosis’ of transgenderism isn’t important. The underlying depression is what needs to be diagnosed.

Being TG is not an illness. Gender variance is present in every species in nature.

The reluctance of insurance companies to cover trans-people is pure and simple discrimination that helps perpetuate the stigma and is also one of the underlying causes of the depression.

Maybe by 2012, public opinion will change enough that the APA will consider alternate diagnoses criteria for ‘GID’ and put it into another category where it belongs.

It’s a physical problem with a physical cure.

That’s my opinion.

Jillian

If that were to happen then it would become illegal to use that diagnosis in Canada since it would conflict with anti-discrimination laws being based on sexual orientation. It would not be legal to use any diagnosis that differentiates in any way on a basis of sexual orientation.

Boo states:
> In any event, if you want to transition the “official” way, you need a diagnosis to justify hormone and surgical treatment.

That cannot affect the DSM process, the APA is at pains to point out that it is a diagnosis document and not a treatment document. Even if it were true that a GID diagnosis is useful because it opens the door to treatment that is not allowed to be taken into account when deciding whether to simply delete the diagnosis (which is what should will happen because stigma and shame is caused by the diagnosis existence, without the DSM the stigma will go, at this point all the DSM does for transfolk is to facilitate stigma and hate)

No, that’s the SOC. The DSM describes diagnoses. (Or maybe you meant to write “makes no recommendation for treatment”?) In any event, if you want to transition the “official” way, you need a diagnosis to justify hormone and surgical treatment. Of course, more and more people are going farther and farther outside official channels to transition, which will only increase if Zucker and Blanchard have their way with DSM V. But if you want to use an American, Canadian, or European surgeon, you’ve pretty much got to have 2 letters officially stating that you have GID.

I think the autogynephile model does fit a few trans people, but it is not a complete model as Blanchard believes. So I am worried that in the next DSM, GID gets split into homosexual and heterosexual transexuals.

It doesn’t completely fit anyone. Even mega-AG cheerleader Anne Lawrence has made claims about herself that contradict it. But the issue isn’t what you or I or anyone else believes, except for the people sitting on the committees writing the diagnoses. That happens to include Blanchard and Zucker. Bailey included his hope that they’ll split the diagnosis in his book. I think they’re telegraphing what they’ll at least try.

Remember, the DSM makes recommendation for treatment. Period. That’s explicitly stated. Even for non-controversial disorders where treatment is fairly obvious, the DSM does not specify treatment. Boo’s fear (above) that trans people will need such and such to transition because of the DSM is without base.

I also feel obligated to clarify that the Gender Identity Disorder does not include all transgender people – only those for whom their gender identity and body causes distress and lack of real world functioning. In my experience, very few trans people also have GID. But Zucker over-diagnoses it (in my opinion) because he equates gender identity as causing the distress whereas I think it’s almost always transphobic people that causes the distress. Regardless, that fact will also not change in the DSM V because it relies on the way every “disorder” is defined in the DSM.

Jim, you may want to do more research into Zucker. He’s Nicolosi’s equivalent in the ex-trans movement. Zucker wants nothing less than preventing as many children as possible from “becoming” trans and sees ex-gay-like therapy as the way to do it.

The concern is that they’re aiming to spilt GID into diagnoses of “homosexual transsexualism” under sexual or gender disorders, and “autogynephilia” under paraphilias, meaning if you can’t convince your therapist that you’re exclusively attracted to guys, you’ll have to get diagnosed with a paraphilia to transition. (And if you can, then you get diagnosed as an uberslut.)