Gender Affirming Care - McNamara vs Grossman & Crenshaw - Health Subcommittee Hearing (6/14/2023)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 июл 2024
- The US Committee on Energy and Commerce held hearings on 14 June, 2023 which included debate over a proposed amendment which would restrict graduate medical education funding to pediatric hospitals that performed certain gender affirmative care. The bill was sponsored by Texas rep Dan Crenshaw and a lively debate over the issue took place in the hearing.
Testimony given and questions taken by:
Dr. Meredithe McNamara, MD, MS, FAAP, Assistant Professor, Yale School of Medicine
Dr. Miriam Grossman, MD, Child, Adolescent, and Adult Psychiatrist
Key Moments - Chapters:
00:00 Master Edit
00:00 McNamara Testimony
00:09 Professional Background
00:57 Medical Political Issue
02:05 5 Categories of Misinformation
02:33 Gender Dysphoria Medical Condition
03:13 Medical Trainees
04:00 Banning Transgender Kids
04:32 Trans Teen Example
05:15 Grossman Testimony
05:31 Professional Background
05:47 Sex Assigned at Birth
06:31 European Halt on Intervention
08:05 Suicide
08:32 Psychotherapy
08:54 Debate Over Standards of Care
09:59 Experimental Care
10:38 Question to Dr McNamara
12:36 Misinformation
13:01 Conversion Therapy
13:28 Suicidality
14:12 Correction regarding precocious puberty
14:20 Growth of Affirmative Care Clinics
14:37 Q: Is the US an outlier?
14:59 Clarification on Precocious Puberty
17:30 Q: What are the long term impacts?
17:35 New Population
18:24 Q: Shifting Population and Long Term Outcomes
18:42 ROGD Population
19:13 Parental Rights and Privacy
19:42 Question Dr McNamara
20:22 Q: What would be the impact on Care?
22:14 Q: Impact on Training?
23:19 Q: Impact on Pediatric Workforce?
24:16 Question McNamara
24:16 Q: Importance of Pediatric and Mental Health care
26:02 Question Dr. McNamara
26:07 Statement on Politicization
27:36 Statement on Suicide
29:07 Q: How does Affirmative Care improve outcomes?
31:12 Question McNamara
31:12 Q: What impact will bill have on Trans Youth and Peds Workforce?
34:04 Question Dr. Grossman
35:40 Q: What treatments for dysphoria are backed by data?
39:42 Question McNamara
39:46 Statement on Government Role in Healthcare
42:46 Q: Please Explain Informed Consent in Affirmative Care
45:21 Statement from Vice Chair
45:58 Statement on Partisan politics
47:03 Q: What is age appropriate gender affirming care?
48:19 Q: Do Professional Associations Support Affirmative care?
48:33 Q: Is the US an outlier?
50:52 Question McNamara
50:58 Statement about partisan politics
53:06 Q: Anything to add or correct?
54:48 Statement Crenshaw
59:35 Statement on Politicization
01:01:04 Q: What type of care would be disrupted?
01:01:54 Statement regarding Boston Children's Hospital and Surgery
01:02:45 Q: What of the dangers to healthcare workers?
01:04:05 Statement
01:05:59 Crenshaw Statement about Culture War
01:06:35 Q: Concern for unknown long-term effects of affirmative care?
01:07:00 Q: What do you mean by cherry-picked data?
01:07:41 Q: Wouldn't you want strong evidence of benefits for therapy?
01:08:18 Q: Is there any strong evidence of benefit at all?
01:08:51 Question McNamara and Grossman
01:09:24 Q: Is an XY Chromosome Assigned at Birth?
01:10:26 Q: Have there been controlled trials of the benefit of affirmative care?
01:12:06 Crenshaw Statement on Affirmation
01:14:16 Q: What of the lack of evidence?
01:15:01 Q: How have professional associations been affected by activists?
01:16:11 Question McNamara
01:17:15 Q: What of Low Quality evidence for Standards of Care ?
01:19:12 Q: What is the process that patients and families go through to get care?
01:19:58 Q: What is the importance of having both medical and mental care?
Sources:
- energycommerce.house.gov/even...
- Bill text: crenshaw.house.gov/_cache/fil... 
Развлечения
A young adult is not age 12, or 13 through 17, they are children. There is no denial of gender dysphoria as a medical condition. Mental illness is a medical condition. Dr McNamara is a medical doctor, a pediatrician. She should have her license stripped, and any other doctor who encourages children in this dangerous and harmful assault on their young bodies! Thank you to Dr. Grossman and others like her who to continue to speak out against this insanity.
As a psychiatrist myself, though retired and not practicing, I do wonder how a pediatrician obtains “informed consent” from a child. One would have to first ask the question of whether the child has the capacity to make that decision. Do they really understand the risks, benefits, alternatives to the treatment and can they manipulate information appropriately and make a clear and consistent choice? If they cannot, then as a doctor, remember your first job is to first do no harm.
Dr grosman is amazing.
I can't believe we let it get this far.
If it’s a private matter than we as tax payers have no business funding these private matters!!
Depopulation agenda
100% agree
Grossman nuked McNamara with her Testimony. McNamara smug look after was priceless. #Yale has fallen. Her opinions do not reflect your stance. However, what she is doing on your campus reflects her opinion. If that's the case, you are in support of her.
“That is why it is critical that this body bases its decision on facts and accurate information”
-McNamara
Good thing Dr. Grossman was there with all the facts and accurate information.
Blair White said it best: "Having a transgender child is like having a vegan cat, we all know who is making the lifestyle choices there."
Thank goodness for people Like Dan Crenshaw, and Doctor Grossman..those who would stand up and be the shield to protect innocent children, even against all the threats and at the risk of their own detriment doing this.
Shes a Yale graduate in medicine and all she has to say to back up her evidence is, "the standards of care", i think she needs to ask for her college tuition back.
Hat off to Dr Grossman...
Thank God, that as a Brit, all this nonsense was stopped in its tracks. It seems that across the pond, the lunatics are running the asylum
As an European this thing is from another planet. My strongest argument here is as a kid your are not allowed to drive, vote, smoke and drink but you are allowed to consent on treatments that can be irreversible? Where is the logic in that? No! As long as my kid can wait for his 18 birthday to be considered an adult and be liable for what he dose, for sure he can wait with this until that ages.
As a psychiatrist myself, though retired and not practicing, I do wonder how a pediatrician obtains “informed consent” from a child. One would have to first ask the question of whether the child has the capacity to make that decision. Do they really understand the risks, benefits, alternatives to the treatment and can they manipulate information appropriately and make a clear and consistent choice? If they cannot, then as a doctor, remember your first job is to first do no harm.
I'm not American. But I am surprised as to why some legislators, who seem to be knowledgeable as they speak but don't get to the core of this debate. There are risks in the administration of gender affirmation therapy specifically irreversible surgeries, puberty blockers on adolescents
Crenshaw asked relevant questions. Dr. McNamara thinks she is the "standard" herself and that the world should follow her without asking questions.
Hats off for Dr. Grossman. Republicans rock now. If once more I hear life-saving or suicide, I will puke. They not letting Dr. Grossman speak
The choice, and financing, for such things should be of the parents.
It should not be on the government to decide...
However, life-altering decisions that'll make the child infertile and might be regretted down the line, should probably not be offered to children below the age of 18.
Anyone going through the trans phase, becomes a permanent consumer of medicine... The health care world certainly has a motive to keep it a thing, and to have children with hardly any knowledge of anything, make life altering decisions based on their current whims.
"Vulnerable children"... Well yeah, they are vulnerable to themselves as well, especially when the modern media puts such a massive emphasis on display the opposite gender as portraying the qualities they want in life, let alone, how vast political moves push for such moves.
No government or medical organization should gain extra funds on such things, or push such forms of automatically affirming concepts on kids.
The field is certainly compromised by how everything in it revolves around kids that barely know how to function.
I'd say the whole field is rather compromised, due to both the financial benefits creating permanent medical users, and the political motives of far left ideologies to alter the public concept of male and female, to create easy supporters and to remove the responsibility of when a child grow up to realize them made a deadly mistake, and there is no turning back from it.
Well said
You should be a writer or some kind of influencer. You have a way with words.
@@JusticeFortheSilenced Well, I am an animator 😅
Only uploaded my odd animations on youtube, never thought about being an influencer though.
Thanks for the compliment!
You made very good points because that is exactly the reality. It would be better if people who felt this way did so at an appropriate age. Even still nobody can deny that this agenda is definitely being pushed. No matter how hard they try to act like they care or as if they are being bullied or persecuted is ludicrous. In fact it’s quite the opposite. They’re trying to get everyone to get on bird via the media hollywood and corporations being a major factor.
Crenshaw was spot on challenging Dr. Macnamara.
If your head ends in a point
Crenshaw is a traitor
Dr macnamara is a medical doctor and has no place discussing psychiatric issues. This is the problem with psychiatry their are too many medical doctors trying to treat people with psychiatric problems.
So, I believe there's no reason to allow children to undergo such treatments that are better than the reasons to just have them wait until they're an adult; and no I don't think "they might commit suicide" is a good argument. Mainly because I'm not convinced suicide itself is negative. It's an act of agency but dying is not a bad thing, it isn't a good thing either, we're born dead. Life is simply the act of delay. Somebody else hastening the inevitable is wrong. However, doing it yourself? The only reason why anyone can possibly conceive of this as a negative thing is if they see death as a negative thing, and they'd prefer for a suicidal person to stick around for their own purposes.
"Preventing suicide" isn't a medical concern. Medical concerns are the result of injury that occur outside of the control of the patient.
Mitigating suicide is a matter for therapy.
That being said, the reason why I've commented under your comment is because: psychiatrists are *always* medical doctors. They go to med school like every other medical doctor, however, after they finish, they take up a psychiatric residency.
A pediatrics doctor is in most cases well versed in psychiatric issues they may encounter. So McNamara is fully qualified to talk on this, especially since this was a pediatric hospital funding bill.
That being said, her arguments were utterly self-referential. Therefore, even if the conclusion was true, they can't be seen as convincing by any reasonable person.
The arguments against it were stronger and more rooted in what the literature states about this. Therefore, even if the conclusion is untrue, as presented; it's the only defensible argument here.
Furthermore, this is the first committee debate I've ever watched. The way this is conducted is abhorrent. These *non-expert* politicians that aren't citing *ANY* evidence, merely asserting that it exists, are calling the people actually citing *anything*, promoting pseudoscience and misinformation? That's ridiculous and shameful. If they aren't coming with facts and actual logical arguments, they need to shut up and listen. That is all. The absolute state of American politicians is shameful. Appeals to emotion. Appeals to false consensus. Ad hominem.
Dr. McNamara's evidence was the Standards of Care (the treatment guidelines put forth by a trans advocacy group, not the actual legal standards of care which govern malpractice). The WPATH's SOC *is* very well researched. However, it's advocacy research. Certainly, it shouldn't be outright dismissed, but it's abundantly clear from reading the 120 page SOC that it isn't objective at all. It doesn't include refutations to any of the empirically based criticisms levied at the many studies they've used (and there are many). It simply doesn't consider any academic criticisms at all and doesn't feel it needs to justify this exclusion. To use *that* as your only piece of evidence...that's simply foolish.
I'm absolutely embarrassed by this showing. This wasn't a debate in any reasonable understanding of the word. Largely, it was just people talking nonsense.
They need to get ahead of this and stop these teachers in the schools who are pushing these ideas unto the children as early as pre-school and up.
Listening to some of these doctors discuss the pharmacokinetics of GnRH agonists for patients with F64.9 was scary. Especially the first doctor. She never once discussed the fact > 80% of those patients are either neurodivergent, on SSRIS, or on other psychiatric systems.
I also find it interesting that the ONLY advocates for these GnRH agonists are those to test on MALE patients 👀👀 Why is NOBODY talking about this?? I'll tell you why. Testosterone is the strongest sex hormone the human body. Once a male goes through puberty it becomes harder even with years of estradiol, progestin, and spironolactone to appear feminine.
So in order to prevent them appearing "clockable" like Caitlin Jenner or Dylan Mulvane. They want these boys to look like a Kardashian.
Dr. McNamara is clueless and her being nervous shows the lack of confidence she has with her insane views.
What world do we live in when the wisest statements in the room come from the Texas Republican? 😅. The medical professionals supporting “gender care medicine” should be ashamed of themselves.
We can not support dogmas or ideologies.
i don't even know how this is a conversation ....this is not normal
Many of these people with their non-argument arguments and hysterical hypocrisy are actually exhausting to listen to.
Is trying to change your sex/gender the only legal contract a child under the age of 18 can enter , even if one or two parents disapprove,?
Wow what happened to this world
Is your website down?
WHERE ARE THE DETRANSITIONED KIDS?...WTF A WOMAN IS?
Are you feeling persecuted, Boris?
@@PesquisasMormonas persecuted?...sure but due to the stupid "war" on drugs nothing to do with gays...why???
We all feel persecuted by gender ideology and pedophiles.
Like Chloe Cole? They're out there.
Everyone knows what a woman is...even the people who adhere to nonsense. Which is why every single male that claims to be a woman tries as much as possible to appear as a Female.
The deft have gone anti science and pro mengele over e hysteria.
Can tell right off the bat she has the goofy left look
Excuse me, I'm liberal and I don't condone this at all. Don't politicize everything.
All of this woman's education and experiences are either waste or fake Yale university should check on her
Miller Meeks Iowa has serious balls…..McNamara….apex paediatrician…so called….don’t u know basics about XX and XY chromosomes….look at this narcissist…she should be sacked. Cheers to Crenshaw…
Pandemic tick tock onset dysphoria.
She is absolutely wrong ,let see when she get kidsor gran dkids will think that way
Democrats must allow their doctor to have the last word to push their misinformation.
Stop politicizing this. I and my Democrat friends do not condone this in any way. Stop assuming.
@donnasaathoff1220 I'm not assuming NOTHING. It comes out of the mouth of the doctors who are pushing this process. the doctors who know this is horrible, Irreversible Sterilization of a child knows the long term issues. A child who still believes in the Ester bunny has no idea of the repercussions of this procedure. A child under 18 can even get a tattoo unless a parent signs a form.
Have a conscious instead of just pushing political propaganda.
Although I do believe that puberty blockers and cross sex hormones can sometimes be harmful to youth, Ms. Kuster at 39:46 made an excellent argument that the federal government shouldn’t have a say in healthcare. I’m Pro-freedom.
Freedom to sterilize, castrate and make what would be those with healthy bodies and turn them into medical patients for life? Albeit, a shorter life that's cut in half due to the extreme side effects of these "treatments" but I digress....
Using children as guinea pigs for experimentation, that the medical industry is profiting highly on, isn't pro-freedom. Its child abuse and exploitation
But, then again, Dan Crenshaw made a good point. It’s such a contentious issue, should Federal tax payer money be used on transgender medical procedures?
You are right, the government probably should stay out of health care. Maybe they should stop funding all aspects of healthcare. They key point of this legislation isn't the government having a say in healthcare, it's about what the government is willing to help pay for. They medical facilities are allowed to continue to perform these procedures, they just don't get the benefit my tax dollars to do it.
@@acderath right, and that's Dan Crenshaw's point. I understand both sides, really. Another video on this channel (about the Ohio legislation) describes Sweden's watchful waiting approach to transgender healthcare. So, maybe they should have more people speaking about the newer approaches to minor transgender health care regiments. There could be more variations on how it is handled than these pediatricians are asserting.
At what cost?
private medical details and cases call for private funding, not our tax dollars (D) congress critters!
What is this (D)?
Lunacy