Five-year-old boy lives as girl in youngest case of Gender Identity Disorder
- Thread starter spudbynight
- Start date
You missed the bit out where you paid him to do it and made a video...
[FnG]magnolia;21311981 said:But - and I haven't read the whole thread so I may have missed this - no one who has commented is a professional in any of the fields which would be requisite for their opinion to mean anything.
Other than, "I'm a parent and RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE ..."
As I said, haven't read the thread so if there are competent professionals discussing this then I'll shut my mouth
There are lots of qualified professionals who have come up with all sorts of crap in the past. Just because someone is medically qualified doesn't mean they can't be questioned.
Man of Honour
This I already know, Uni is simply a measure of potential ability to apply one's self.
The little guy in the story needs room to grow and find his own potential, my youngest son is two, if at three he decides he wants to wear a dress and be a girl, no.
He would have that opportunity at a later time in life when he had the power of reason and debate to explain how he felt, also the power of rational thinking to fully explore his own feelings and desires.
And ill be be there for my little chap if he ever go's in that direction, he will still be my son/daughter and ill still love him/her just as much.
What the parents are doing is not allowing the child to develop to a point where life is not a story book anymore. let the little guy play a role, let him play with tea sets and dolls, but balance it all, don't dress him as a girl, don't change his whole life at such a young age when he cannot possibly comprehend what he is doing.
Totally agree and that is especially pertinent due to the past practice by the medical establishment on gender issues. Still that does not change the fact the child is 5 years old and anyone with a degree of sense could see there is no way they should be making such decisions at that age. The established norm now even when there is an obvious discrepancy between genotype and phenotype expression is to wait until that person is old enough to make an informed choice and to support that child and its family through such a troubling time. History has taught us that such an approach is the best strategy and that is backed up strongly by both evidence (both quantitative and qualitative).
Man of Honour
Just to make sure I'm understanding you correctly: your position on this would be that a final* clinical diagnosis should wait until the child is old enough to make an informed decision but not to try and force them into wearing "normal" clothes?
If that's the case then I think I'm in agreement as 5 does seem a shade young to be labelling children as if it is an absolute and will always remain so - however I would point out that children are capable of making decisions at a very young age that they will happily stick to for the rest of their lives. The precise thought process may not be as rigorous as that of an adult but that doesn't necessarily mean the decision is incorrect or has less importance to them. It seems quite obvious that children mature at different rates and that in some cases they are perfectly capable of making significant decisions about aspects of their lives at times when their peers are pondering such weighty matters as Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles or Power Rangers but as an overall stance I think we should be wary of labelling people too inflexibly, especially when they are still developing.
*I'm aware that final in this sense is akin to the quote about a poem never being finished, merely abandoned but it's simply to illustrate that it's not an interim conclusion.
I would argue that there should never really be any sort of "gender enforcement" one way or the other in any child.
So yes I would strongly suggest no diagnosis should be made until a later age for a variety of reasons:
1/ This is not an overly visible issue. This is not like some intersex issue where we can we easily establish a root cause, for example Congenital Adrenal Hypoplasia or Turner Syndrome. We can not test for and see any structural changes at either a macro or micro scale. I have very little doubt that it is the same process at the end of the day we just can not see the structural changes as our understanding is so poor. But at the moment the decision to diagnose will always be made subjectively. In light of the ramifications about such a decision and with it being so intrinsically led on the verbalisation of the patient then one should be adequately sure what the patient is saying which leads on to ...
2/ The child has a level of development that is not sufficiently advanced for making such a decision. In light of the Gillick/Fraser etc and such cases as Re W we can quite clearly see that the established age for a child to make a decisions that agrees with medical advice is within the 11-13 age range and against it more in the 14-16 age range. And even then the parental influence on that decisions against the child holds strongly throughout. Which leads us onto ...
3/ The parents believe this is the case. If the parents want this then you really have to ask if the child's best interests are being met. Yes I could fully understand that such issues are troubling and very difficult for them but the fact remains some of the things described are very unusual when compared to what we know about how children going through such things cope. One wonders whether they are seeing things appropriately.
So the child is too young to make the decision, evidence shows that when parents make the decision for a the child it leads to worse outcomes and the medical establishment has so botched this up in the past that it should have absorbed the lessons and not be rushing to make such decisions.
The issue here and what differentiates it from a purely intersex problem is that is not entirely visible. What experience has shown us with children is that forcing them to assume a gender role that they feel to be wrong leads to massive mental health problems and very high suicide risk in early adulthood. Where the best results have been achieved is by facilitating the child through their life until they are able to make this decision in an informed manner. They are the ones that should be deciding this no-one else but at an appropriate time. The social and health care system should be there to help them with that journey not apply labels at such an age.
Last edited:
Er, what?
This is a 5 year old child. As has been demonstrated by countless people, 5 year olds are not rational and generally do whatever they want. They will play and pretend to be all sorts of things - it's what kids do.
Unfortunately, his parents seem to be extremely incompetent (and could quite possibly be mentally ill themselves), and their utter rubbish, hopeless parenting means they can't deal with this 'problem'.
They have probably hounded the NHS into diagnosing this in order to try and hide the fact they are useless.
Soldato
Indeed, If a child decides to play with a Barbie, or dress in Mummys make up and shoes. To start looking at these things as Gender issues is silly. It's a 5 year old child, experimenting with things. Let the kid wear the makeup, let the kid play with a barbie! It hurts nothing! And its hardly going to make the kid grow up to be gay or gender confused. The kid hasnt connected the dots yet.
A kids mind doesnt work like this
Barbie = girls toy = oh noes i'm either gay or transgender
Should probably add that cutting off your own junk is a tad too far though
Last edited:
Yes, I'm quoting wikipedia, but I have nothing better to hand. Someone mentioned GID from DSM-IV earlier but seemed to miss there is a specific coding for GIDC; 302.6 Gender Identity Disorder in Children
Also from wiki;
"The current edition of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10) has five different diagnoses for gender identity disorder, including one for when it manifests during childhood.
F64.2 Gender identity disorder of childhood: A disorder, usually first manifest during early childhood (and always well before puberty), characterized by a persistent and intense distress about assigned sex, together with a desire to be (or insistence that one is) of the other sex. There is a persistent preoccupation with the dress and activities of the opposite sex and repudiation of the individual's own sex. The diagnosis requires a profound disturbance of the normal gender identity; mere tomboyishness in girls or girlish behavior in boys is not sufficient. Gender identity disorders in individuals who have reached or are entering puberty should not be classified here but in F66.-."
Hmm, that sounds somewhat like what's being described in the OP. Someone should go tell whoever puts these books together that they are wrong because "common sense" from people on OcUK says all they need is a bit of firm discipline.
Also from wiki;
"The current edition of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10) has five different diagnoses for gender identity disorder, including one for when it manifests during childhood.
F64.2 Gender identity disorder of childhood: A disorder, usually first manifest during early childhood (and always well before puberty), characterized by a persistent and intense distress about assigned sex, together with a desire to be (or insistence that one is) of the other sex. There is a persistent preoccupation with the dress and activities of the opposite sex and repudiation of the individual's own sex. The diagnosis requires a profound disturbance of the normal gender identity; mere tomboyishness in girls or girlish behavior in boys is not sufficient. Gender identity disorders in individuals who have reached or are entering puberty should not be classified here but in F66.-."
Hmm, that sounds somewhat like what's being described in the OP. Someone should go tell whoever puts these books together that they are wrong because "common sense" from people on OcUK says all they need is a bit of firm discipline.
Associate
It's worth remembering that what ever diagnosis this child has been given, they will not recieve any medical treatment until 16/18*. All they are doing at the moment is "dressing up", using female pronouns, and playing with dolls instead of action men. None of which is irreversible should the child change their mind in the future. I really don't understand why people feel so threatened by these parents allowing their child to express themselves in the way they are obviously (for the moment anyway) most comfortable. Nothing irreversible is being done to this child, probably precisely because a 5 year old is not capable of making such life changing decisions. Let's all untwist are knickers here.
As a youth worker, and someone who works in health care, I'd rather this child wore a dress and had long hair than required surgery for a self inflicted amputation. Apart from anything else, should the child manage to do themselves an injury, they would most likely be left with some long term damage which, if if it a phase, would have a dramatic impact on their life which would reach far beyond memories of wearing a dress...
Finally exploring our identity and the ways of expressing that identity is exactly what children are MEANT to do, and that is all this child is doing, albeit in a slightly more unusual way than most.
* Sauce - http://wpath.org/Documents2/socv6.pdf
As a youth worker, and someone who works in health care, I'd rather this child wore a dress and had long hair than required surgery for a self inflicted amputation. Apart from anything else, should the child manage to do themselves an injury, they would most likely be left with some long term damage which, if if it a phase, would have a dramatic impact on their life which would reach far beyond memories of wearing a dress...
Finally exploring our identity and the ways of expressing that identity is exactly what children are MEANT to do, and that is all this child is doing, albeit in a slightly more unusual way than most.
* Sauce - http://wpath.org/Documents2/socv6.pdf
One of the dumbest reactions is "oh but the child will be bullied!"
Punish the bullies then, end homo and trans phobia, make it as unacceptable as racism.
In 30 years people will look back at most of GD and have the same opinion of the comments as how we look back at the racists who were opposed too interracial marriage.
Yes it most likely can be justified but that does not mean it is correct or necessary. All the work they do with this family can be done without such a label attached and all the implications that will follow on from that. Shining a spotlight on such issues to raise awareness and acceptance is one thing - shining a spotlight on an individual case is hardly going to be beneficial. At least no-one is trying "to cure" the kid so the establishment has made some progress.
Soldato
I can't remember what I was doing when I was 3 or 4. So how does this kid know he wants to be a girl?! Crazy.
Well done for missing the point, it has nothing to do with intolerance or phobias. It's to do with diagnosing at such a young age and the knock on effect that has. You can't say that the effects, the media attention, the parental guidance, the schools response. Won't change the kids upbringing.
Oh and you can never stop bullying, so you should minimise the chances. I know my parents thought long and hard about names. What it could be shortened to and what you could make with the initials and all that.
Last edited: