Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 340 posts

Re: Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

#211

Post by Foober223 »

aidenn0 wrote: post #196
jjeaff wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How should one phrase that sentence without it becoming completely confusing? Would it be offensive to say "a person with an x and y chromosome"? Even though gender is only a social construct... for some reason, taking estrogen will have totally different effects on a person, depending on that gender.

It's always going to be confusing but I believe "transgender woman" is unambiguously someone assigned male gender at birth who identifies as a woman.

What if a biological male is assigned female gender at birth? Would they be transgender, or just female?

Re: Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

#212

Post by mobilejdral »

floatingatoll wrote: post #134
fwip wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The good news (for this boy) is that 13 days of hormone therapy are unlikely to cause any permanent changes. Infertility/sterility is usually only expected after years of HRT - and even then, often returns if HRT is ceased.

Your statement needs a clarification: > 13 days of hormone therapy are unlikely to cause sterility . Yes, it's possible he won't end up sterilized by this. However: The breast growth triggered in men by medical doses of estrogen is not reversible and requires surgery to correct. There will be social ramifications for life. There may be other (non-virility) physical ramifications for life.

2mg of E2 for only 13 days and he needs surgery? Sounds very much like something a lawyer would say. At most a few mm of development/widening of the areola with the start of development under. Not noticeable unless you are actually measuring them weekly. It is common enough that a someone will have to go off HRT after only a few weeks and anything underlying breast development will undo itself, but not the areola. But full blown gynecomastia that is irreversible? That takes a lot longer.

Perhaps he was already overweight, high fat percentage (which results in high e2 in males) and some gynecomastia already?

Further I would be willing to bet that he was swallowing all 2mg at once and not taking the pills sublingually or buccally split across the day.

It is up to the lawyers to decide and maybe he had better breast development than any trans woman I know, but everything in my experience tells me that noticeable gynecomastia takes longer than 13 days on e2.

Re: Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

#213

Post by mobilejdral »

0xy wrote: post #29
fwip wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The good news (for this boy) is that 13 days of hormone therapy are unlikely to cause any permanent changes. Infertility/sterility is usually only expected after years of HRT - and even then, often returns if HRT is ceased.

You are correct in that such a low dose for a short period of time is unlikely to have major problems, but HRT is not a risk-free treatment. It increases risk of heart disease, stroke, blood clots and more.

If you are taking non-bioidentical hormones yes, but if you are taking bioidentical hormones it is a different story.

Re: Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

#214

Post by apocolyps6 »

jjeaff wrote: post #195
pgcj_poster wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> men pursuing a change in gender are expected to sign their name or initial in the box at least ten times in a row in order to receive their prescription This is not true, at least not anywhere I've gotten Estradiol. Also, while I'm sure you intended to be respectful with your comment, most people getting this treatment see themselves as women who are changing their bodies to match their gender, not as men who are c…

How should one phrase that sentence without it becoming completely confusing? Would it be offensive to say "a person with an x and y chromosome"? Even though gender is only a social construct... for some reason, taking estrogen will have totally different effects on a person, depending on that gender.

You could say "people with male/masculine bodies" or you could specify you mean sex rather than gender.

Re: Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

#215

Post by syshum »

ponsin wrote: post #198
syshum wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not familiar with the case you are speaking of, and often times people over state what happens in minimum security facilities also I see you one of many that confuse rehabilitation with giving people a slap on the hand, or "club med" type of facilities. Retribution is in no way needed to prevent Vigilantism (Vigilantism is never justified or justice). Actual justice, and restitution prevents that just fine. Reha…

Added source of the case to the OP. And yes, retribution is designed to prevent vigilantism. As that is psychology I can't really give a better source than [0]. Obviously retribution is not meant to go by itself, but along with rehabilitation. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retributive_justice#Purposes

>>American who at age 16

And you believe we should not treat minors different than Adults? this is another area where i disagree with many, as I 100% disagree with this modern trend of prosecuting teens as adults

Re: Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

#216

Post by qtplatypus »

Damorian wrote: post #149
ed25519FUUU wrote: post #78

> “Estrogen is not a treatment for ODD. I can’t be more emphatic about that,” McGough said. “You won’t find a reference anywhere that supports the use of estrogen for ODD.” Well certainly the doctor got this theory from someplace. They believed this young man would be better behaved if he had less testosterone and more estrogen, and went ahead with a treatment against scientific evidence (and ethics quite frankly). S…

Not to defend the doctor, but common sense? Sex hormones obviously have a huge effect on behavior, and anyone who has interacted with both men and women can see these effects. I'll refer you to the following study to answer your question about "non-science based theories and treatments": https://www.bmj.com/content/363/bmj.k5094

However “Common sense” is often wrong. That is why you can’t treat people based on whatever hunch you have. Also you would hope that common sense and basic medial ethics would make you avoid violating the Nuremberg code.

Re: Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

#217

Post by qtplatypus »

nullc wrote: post #86
swayvil wrote: post #46

"oppositional defiant disorder" That's what they call mouthy rebels these days

Meh. It's a real thing. A small but not trivial portion of the public immediately lapses into a near-rage at anything that appears to be an authority figure. People seem to grow out of it. Maybe it's PTSD from poor interactions with past authorities, maybe it's some kind of pack hierarchy hold over, who knows-- but it appears to be a pretty widespread phenomena. It doesn't stop being real just because the description…

It seems this young man has perfectly rational reason to be enraged at authority.

Re: Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

#218

Post by dmix »

dvtrn wrote: post #123
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yet apparently this is the reality of modern society. This news article exists because it’s an exception, not the rule. Don’t confuse this with normal or common treatment. Even one case is too many, obviously, but it’s not the norm.

Don’t confuse this with normal or common treatment What are these normal treatments? Pharmaceuticals like Ritalin and Adderall? Asking because I don’t know not that I’m taking this anywhere, but when people talk about behavioral control of children acting out of line with some kind of “norm”, I’m uneducated as to what the norm is or what the status quo for this is. What I do know (via anecdotes of having sister who w…

> medicating kids was for a long time the norm and is being harshly critiqued and challenge more recently

My mom bought into this stuff in the 1990s and I never had proper treatment as a child. Only until I was an adult and saw a doctor myself was I properly diagnosed. The medication was a life-saver in my 20s.

As much as pro-pharma stuff is being pushed behind closed doors there's also tons of pseudoscience "appeals to nature" fallacies [1] being pushed in all public channels, where all chemicals are treated with suspicion. I wish there was more of a balance in the media, because this anti-pharma narrative is everywhere now.

I'm not surprised this manifested into anti-vaxxers. Anyone saying that medication as a solution is still treated with reverence in popular discourse is deceiving themselves. Doctors have all heard the stories by now too.

But that also doesn't mean doctors haven't played a big role in this, including those who massively over-prescribed painkillers, benzos, and antidepressants in the last few decades - which have help distract from all the real positive benefits they provide.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature

Re: Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

#219

Post by arp242 »

bzb3 wrote: post #154
ed25519FUUU wrote: post #78

> “Estrogen is not a treatment for ODD. I can’t be more emphatic about that,” McGough said. “You won’t find a reference anywhere that supports the use of estrogen for ODD.” Well certainly the doctor got this theory from someplace. They believed this young man would be better behaved if he had less testosterone and more estrogen, and went ahead with a treatment against scientific evidence (and ethics quite frankly). S…

It certainly worked, no? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23864426

That's a rather strange definition of "worked".

Re: Boy, 16, was given estrogen at L.A. juvenile hall, suit says

#220

Post by andykx »

Foober223 wrote: post #211
aidenn0 wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's always going to be confusing but I believe "transgender woman" is unambiguously someone assigned male gender at birth who identifies as a woman.

What if a biological male is assigned female gender at birth? Would they be transgender, or just female?

1. When is that going to happen? (Genuinely curious if it does happen)

2. It is really up to the person.

Post reply on HN