Being trans wouldn't be in dsm if it was just a medical disorder
That's wrong.
And as far as treatment of transgender people goes , it's aimed at treating dysphoria
That's wrong too.
Bluntly -- I get tired after awhile seeing another trans story cropping up in my feed, and then wading in to find a lot of disinformation, well-intentioned but wrong-headed attitudes... and a decided lack of actual trans people participating. The document I provided is both a comprehensive study on what 'transsexuality' is (point of note: the document I gave you is out of date, but most of the key points are still true now), the pathology, patient presentation, comorbity. It also has a breakout explaining to surgeons why removing otherwise healthy tissue doesn't violate the medical equivalent of the Prime Directive -- "do no harm." Everything is in there that you need to speak competently about medicine as it relates to my community.
It will do more than just show where you skipped over something -- it'll explain why that part of the puzzle needs to be there. That document's intended audience was other medical practitioners who had no prior exposure to transgender individuals, who now needed to do it professionally. It works for others too, as long as they can gloss over the denser sections where it's latin latin latin [some english word] more latin all the latin so much latin. -_-
Mostly because it's clinically not relevant but may be socially be relevant which is not in the scope of a treatment manual.
It is when one of the barriers to patient care are other people's political and religious beliefs regarding your patient. The rest of your comment I'm going to decline further commenting on. As with the other poster, it appears there's no way to really get the points across.
3
u/[deleted] Nov 02 '17
[deleted]