More and more countries are rectifying their procedures for dealing with gender dysphoria when it comes to providing hormone blockers to people at an early age.
Puberty blockers are used in minors with gender dysphoria to stop or delay the adolescent maturation process in order to reduce the sexual differentiation of this stage with a view to a later surgical gender transition.
The side effects associated with these treatments are objective, very worrying and, in many cases, irreversible.
Chile is one of the last countries to suspend therapies for children who express their desire to change sex. The Ministry of Health of that country has announced that it will postpone the start of the treatments until new reliable scientific evidence is published.
The government document explains that the Ministry of Health will provide professional psychosocial support to the child, his family and social environment. It also explains that it has analysed international evidence on hormone therapy.
Experts were convened to review the evidence on the use of gonadotropin blockers and cross-hormone therapy in trans and gender-diverse adolescents before a decision was made to discontinue their prescription.
However, as announced by the Undersecretary of Public Health, Andrea Albagli, the processes already underway will not be suspended and will continue.
As Ministry spokespeople have reported, “in this way, priority is given to the principle of the best interests of children and adolescents, as set out in the regulations of article 26, first paragraph, of Law 21,120.” Likewise, the agency urges the experts to work on gonadotropin blockers and cross-hormone therapy in adolescents.
More countries are joining in the rejection
Other countries that have also decided to stop this type of treatment due to the lack of solid scientific evidence about its effectiveness and side effects in adolescents are the United Kingdom, Germany, Finland, the Netherlands, Norway, France and Sweden.
In other countries such as Canada, Australia or some US states such as Arkansas or Missouri, medical professionals and associations also warn of the low evidence available on the efficacy and safety of these therapies and the need for a review of these procedures.
