Re-assessing the Triadic Model of Care for Trans Patients Using a Harm-Reduction Approach.

IF 1.8 3区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Health Care Analysis Pub Date : 2020-12-01 Epub Date: 2020-11-01 DOI:10.1007/s10728-020-00416-8
A F Gruenewald
{"title":"Re-assessing the Triadic Model of Care for Trans Patients Using a Harm-Reduction Approach.","authors":"A F Gruenewald","doi":"10.1007/s10728-020-00416-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The World Professional Association for Transgender Health's Standards of Care (WPATH SOC), now in its seventh edition, is a frequently cited, internationally recognized, evidence-based document that details a comprehensive framework for gender-related care of trans people. However, the WPATH SOC still relies heavily in some cases on gatekeeping practices, dubbed \"triadic therapy,\" or a process where a trans patient is encouraged to seek out psychotherapy, and hormone therapy, and only then be able to engage in surgical options for transitioning. I use G. Alan Marlatt's harm reduction framework to argue that the triadic process creates its own set of harms that trans people have to contend with, especially insofar as it focuses on resolving gender dysphoria in a demanding, moralizing, and top-down way as opposed to enriching trans lives by reducing harms that prevent us from flourishing. Using Marlatt's criterion that harm reduction ought to be bottom-up, low threshold, and not moralizing, I develop a list of suggestions for what ought to be centrally considered in treating trans patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":46740,"journal":{"name":"Health Care Analysis","volume":"28 4","pages":"415-423"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10728-020-00416-8","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Care Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-020-00416-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The World Professional Association for Transgender Health's Standards of Care (WPATH SOC), now in its seventh edition, is a frequently cited, internationally recognized, evidence-based document that details a comprehensive framework for gender-related care of trans people. However, the WPATH SOC still relies heavily in some cases on gatekeeping practices, dubbed "triadic therapy," or a process where a trans patient is encouraged to seek out psychotherapy, and hormone therapy, and only then be able to engage in surgical options for transitioning. I use G. Alan Marlatt's harm reduction framework to argue that the triadic process creates its own set of harms that trans people have to contend with, especially insofar as it focuses on resolving gender dysphoria in a demanding, moralizing, and top-down way as opposed to enriching trans lives by reducing harms that prevent us from flourishing. Using Marlatt's criterion that harm reduction ought to be bottom-up, low threshold, and not moralizing, I develop a list of suggestions for what ought to be centrally considered in treating trans patients.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用减少伤害的方法重新评估变性患者护理的三合一模式。
世界跨性别健康护理标准专业协会(WPATH SOC),现在是第七版,是一个经常被引用的,国际公认的,以证据为基础的文件,详细介绍了跨性别者性别相关护理的全面框架。然而,在某些情况下,WPATH SOC仍然严重依赖于把关实践,被称为“三合一治疗”,或者是鼓励变性患者寻求心理治疗和激素治疗的过程,只有这样才能进行手术选择。我用G. Alan Marlatt的减少伤害的框架来论证,三合一过程创造了它自己的一套伤害,跨性别者必须与之斗争,特别是当它专注于以一种苛刻的、道德化的、自上而下的方式解决性别焦虑,而不是通过减少阻碍我们繁荣的伤害来丰富跨性别者的生活时。使用Marlatt的标准,即减少伤害应该是自下而上的,低门槛的,而不是道德化的,我提出了一系列建议,建议在治疗变性患者时应该集中考虑什么。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
期刊介绍: Health Care Analysis is a journal that promotes dialogue and debate about conceptual and normative issues related to health and health care, including health systems, healthcare provision, health law, public policy and health, professional health practice, health services organization and decision-making, and health-related education at all levels of clinical medicine, public health and global health. Health Care Analysis seeks to support the conversation between philosophy and policy, in particular illustrating the importance of conceptual and normative analysis to health policy, practice and research. As such, papers accepted for publication are likely to analyse philosophical questions related to health, health care or health policy that focus on one or more of the following: aims or ends, theories, frameworks, concepts, principles, values or ideology. All styles of theoretical analysis are welcome providing that they illuminate conceptual or normative issues and encourage debate between those interested in health, philosophy and policy. Papers must be rigorous, but should strive for accessibility – with care being taken to ensure that their arguments and implications are plain to a broad academic and international audience. In addition to purely theoretical papers, papers grounded in empirical research or case-studies are very welcome so long as they explore the conceptual or normative implications of such work. Authors are encouraged, where possible, to have regard to the social contexts of the issues they are discussing, and all authors should ensure that they indicate the ‘real world’ implications of their work. Health Care Analysis publishes contributions from philosophers, lawyers, social scientists, healthcare educators, healthcare professionals and administrators, and other health-related academics and policy analysts.
期刊最新文献
Sustainability as an Intrinsic Moral Concern for Solidaristic Health Care. Recontextualization and Imagination: The Public Health Professional and the U.S. Health Care System. Childbirth as Fault Lines: Justifications in Physician-Patient Interactions About Postnatal Rehabilitation. Ethical, Psychological and Social Un/certainties in the Face of Deemed Consent for Organ Donation in England. "I Do Not Believe We Should Disclose Everything to an Older Patient": Challenges and Ethical Concerns in Clinical Decision-Making in Old-Age Care in Ethiopia.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1