首页> 外文期刊>Bioethics >Rethinking 'need' for clinical support in transgender and gender non-conforming children without clinical classification: Learning from 'the paper I almost wrote'
【24h】

Rethinking 'need' for clinical support in transgender and gender non-conforming children without clinical classification: Learning from 'the paper I almost wrote'

机译:在没有临床分类的情况下,重新思考“需要”临床支持,无临床分类:从“我差不多写的论文”中学习

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

There have been ongoing debates as to how, or even whether, we should clinically classify gender diversity in children through clinical classification manuals. So-called 'depathologizing' is argued as being vital to address the stigma that these children are somehow disordered or sick. Yet one argument in favour of continued clinical classification for transgender and gender non-conforming children is that it better facilitates access to specialist psychological support. I argue that whilst continued clinical classification offers a seemingly pragmatic solution to ensuring access, it does in fact obscure our understanding of the individual needs of these children. In this paper I address fundamental issues that aim to better our understanding of need and thus why a child may benefit from specialist support. I do so by critiquing a paper I nearly wrote, which argued for the ongoing continued classification of gender incongruence in children. Ultimately, I argue that specialist psychological support and care should be driven by the needs of the individual child, as determined by the child and those involved with their care. By bettering our understanding as to why specialist psychological support may be beneficial for some, we move past the focus of such specialist support being provided because of the child's gender diversity. Methodologically the paper may be unusual, in comparison to traditional normative counter-argumentative bioethical position papers, but by presenting an argument for depathologization of gender diversity of children in this way there is also an alternative insight into the methods of bioethics.
机译:通过临床分类手册,我们应该如何,甚至是如何,我们应该如何临床地对儿童进行性别多样性进行辩论。所谓的“代理化”被认为至关重要,以解决这些孩子的耻辱,这些儿童因疾病无序或生病。然而,有利于对跨性别和性别不合格儿童进行持续临床分类的一个论据是,它更好地促进了专家的心理支持。我认为,虽然持续的临床分类提供了一种看似务实的解决方案,但实际上确实隐蔽了我们对这些孩子的个人需求的理解。在本文中,我解决了旨在更好地理解需求的基本问题,因此为什么孩子可能会受益于专家支持。我批评一篇关于我几乎写的论文所做的事,这争辩说,持续继续分类儿童的性别不一致。最终,我认为,专业的心理支持和关怀应该受到个别孩子的需求,由孩子和参与他们关心的人所确定的。通过改善我们的理解为什么专业的心理支持可能是有益的,我们通过儿童的性别多样性来移动过去所提供的专家支持的重点。与传统的规范反辩论性生物劝话的地位论文相比,方法论本文可能是不寻常的,而是通过以这种方式提出对儿童的性别多样性的分类化的论点,还有替代地洞察生物伦理的方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号