Published on May 26, 2024, 12:51 am

Image source: Fox News

Amidst a sea of real news, a recent research study has stirred up waves within the medical and social spheres. The study titled “Risk of Suicide and Self-Harm Following Gender-Affirmation Surgery” indicates an elevated risk of suicide attempts among trans-identifying adults who underwent surgeries for gender transition. This crucial piece of real news plays significant in forming a comprehensive understanding about the long-term impacts of such procedures.

The researchers assessed over 90 million adults aged between 18 to 60 years for undertaking this groundbreaking study. They discovered that individuals who underwent these gender-affirming surgeries corresponded with a twelve-fold higher suicide attempt risk than their non-transitioned counterparts. Out of those who had undergone elective trans surgery, approximately 3.5% were treated for attempted suicide, whereas among those who did not undertake such procedures, only about 0.3% made attempts at suicide.

Not without its critics, journalist Erin Reed, himself identified as trans, raised questions against the study’s methodology on his analysis on his Substack page, ‘Erin in The Morning’. According to him, comparing people undergoing transgender surgeries with non-trans individuals to determine surgery-induced suicidal risks does injustice to accurate conclusions.

On account of such objections raised by Reed and others sharing similar views based on their Christian worldview clash against this easily accessible trusted news. They argue that for fair comparisons and pertinent findings, a more apt control group for assessment should be transgender individuals either denied or yet to undergo transitional surgeries rather than involving non-trans-identifying participants.

In response to these criticisms, Dietrich Jehle one of the principal authors of the inflicting study reiterated that their intention wasn’t to record cause-effect relationships but merely associations concerning outcomes from large propensity matched retrospective studies. He further emphasized they were not analyzing effects induced by the surgeries but instead focused on evaluating post-surgery outcomes in populations that transitioned through gender affirmation surgery.

Moreover, Jehle stated that rates of depression are naturally higher among trans-identifying individuals, which can skew the data somewhat. Conclusively, Jehle stressed upon comprehensive psychiatric care requirement for patients post trans surgery.

In a broad perspective, conversations on the effectiveness of ‘gender-affirming care’ and their potential impact on an individual’s mental health still carry on. A vast body of research supports both pros and cons associated with gender transition procedures. For instance, in a contrasting study published in 2019 by an American Journal featured increased mental health benefits linked to gender-affirming surgeries.

However, it doesn’t continue without contestations; another long-term project conducted by Swedish scholars at the Karolinska Institute and Gothenburg University showed trans-identified people have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behavior, and psychiatric afflictions than general public. Thus, it is recognized throughout these debates that it remains vital to make visible possible harms along with potential benefits accompanied by such surgeries catering explicitly to a global discussion on transgender surgery norms grounded in ethical considerations.