DSM V Preview

For those of you who are following the DSM revision controversy as it unfolds, here is a recently launched website by the Association for Women in Psychology Committee on Bias in Psychiatric Diagnosis, spearheaded by Paula Caplan. It takes on the problems with a number of categories, including Gender Identity Disorder, Parental Alienation Syndrome, and Female Sexual Dysfunction.

Some highlights of the upcoming DSM V:

[1] The Paraphilias Subworkgroup is proposing two broad changes that affect all or several of the paraphilia diagnoses, in addition to various amendments to specific diagnoses. The first broad change follows from our consensus that paraphilias are not ipso facto psychiatric disorders. We are proposing that the DSM-5 make a distinction between paraphilias and paraphilic disorders. A paraphilia by itself would not automatically justify or require psychiatric intervention. A paraphilic disorder is a paraphilia that causes distress or impairment to the individual or harm to others. One would ascertain a paraphilia (according to the nature of the urges, fantasies, or behaviors) but diagnose a paraphilic disorder (on the basis of distress and impairment). In this conception, having a paraphilia would be a necessary but not a sufficient condition for having a paraphilic disorder.

This approach leaves intact the distinction between normative and non-normative sexual behavior, which could be important to researchers, but without automatically labeling non-normative sexual behavior as psychopathological. It also eliminates certain logical absurdities in the DSM-IV-TR. In that version, for example, a man cannot be classified as a transvestite—however much he cross-dresses and however sexually exciting that is to him—unless he is unhappy about this activity or impaired by it. This change in viewpoint would be reflected in the diagnostic criteria sets by the addition of the word “Disorder” to all the paraphilias. Thus, Sexual Sadism would become Sexual Sadism Disorder; Sexual Masochism would become Sexual Masochism Disorder, and so on.

and

Transvestic Disorder
A. Over a period of at least six months, in a male, recurrent and intense sexual fantasies, sexual urges, or sexual behaviors involving cross?dressing. [11]
B. The fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.

Specify if: [12]
With Fetishism (Sexually Aroused by Fabrics, Materials, or Garments)
With Autogynephilia (Sexually Aroused by Thought or Image of Self as Female)

and

302.85 Gender Identity Disorder in Adolescents or Adults
Gender Incongruence (in Adolescents or Adults) [1]
A. A marked incongruence between one’s experienced/expressed gender and assigned gender, of at least 6 months duration, as manifested by 2* or more of the following indicators: [2, 3, 4]
1. a marked incongruence between one’s experienced/expressed gender and primary and/or secondary sex characteristics (or, in young adolescents, the anticipated secondary sex characteristics) [13, 16]

2. a strong desire to be rid of one’s primary and/or secondary sex characteristics because of a marked incongruence with one’s experienced/expressed gender (or, in young adolescents, a desire to prevent the development of the anticipated secondary sex characteristics) [17]

3. a strong desire for the primary and/or secondary sex characteristics of the other gender

4. a strong desire to be of the other gender (or some alternative gender different from one’s assigned gender)

5. a strong desire to be treated as the other gender (or some alternative gender different from one’s assigned gender)

6. a strong conviction that one has the typical feelings and reactions of the other gender (or some alternative gender different from one’s assigned gender)

Subtypes
With a disorder of sex development
Without a disorder of sex development
[14, 15, 16, 19]

and

For the adult criteria, we propose, on a preliminary basis, the requirement of only 2 indicators. This is based on a preliminary secondary data analysis of 154 adolescent and adults patients with GID compared to 684 controls (Deogracias et al., 2007; Singh et al., 2010). From a 27-item dimensional measure of gender dysphoria, the Gender Identity/Gender Dysphoria Questionnaire for Adolescents and Adults (GIDYQ), we extracted five items that correspond to the proposed A2-A6 indicators (we could not extract a corresponding item for A1). Each item was rated on a 5-point response scale, ranging from Never to Always, with the past 12 months as the time frame. For the current analysis, we coded a symptom as present if the participant endorsed one of the two most extreme response options (frequently or always) and as absent if the participant endorsed one of the three other options (never, rarely, sometimes). This yielded a true positive rate of 94.2% and a false positive rate of 0.7%. Because the wording of the items on the GIDYQ is not identical to the wording of the proposed indicators, further validational work will be required during field trials.

Continue reading “DSM V Preview”

US Tax Court Rules GID Expenses Deductible

From TaxProf Blog:

In a long-awaited decision, a fractured (8-5-3) Tax Court today ruled in O’Donnabhain v. Commissioner, 134 T.C. No. 4 (Feb. 2, 2010), that male-to-female gender reassignment surgery qualifies as a deductible medical expense under § 213, reversing the IRS’s position in Chief Counsel Advice 200603025.  The 8-judge majority held that:

  • TP’s gender identity disorder is a “disease” within the meaning of  § 213(d)(1)(A) & (9)(B).
  • TP’s hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery were for the treatment of disease within the meaning of  § 213(d)(1)(A) & (9)(B), and thus not “cosmetic surgery” excluded from the definition of deductible “medical care” by § 213(d)(9)(A).
  • TP’s breast augmentation surgery was directed at improving her appearance did not meaningfully promote the proper function of her body or treat disease within the meaning of § 213(d)(9)(B), and thus was “cosmetic surgery” excluded from the definition of deductible “medical care” by § 213(d)(9)(A).

Judge Gale wrote the 69-page majority opinion, joined by Judges Cohen, Colvin. Marvel, Morrison, Paris, Thornton, and Wherry.  Judge Halperin (12 pages), Judge Holmes (joined by Judge Goeke) (23 pages), and Judge Goeke (joined by Judge Holmes) (6 pages) wrote separate concurring opinions.  Judge Foley (joined by Judges Gustafson, Kroupa, Vasquez, and Wells) (8 pages) and Judge Gustafson (joined by Judges Foley, Kroupa, Vasquez, and Wells) (21 pages) wrote separate opinions concurring in part and dissenting in part.

Amazing news. GLAD is having a community conference call with the attorneys who worked on the case, and NCTE is supporting the call. For more info on how to participate, check after the break.

Continue reading “US Tax Court Rules GID Expenses Deductible”

Nepal

I’ve always wanted to see Nepal, and it seems now I’ve got an additional reason to go:

The traditionally conservative country’s Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that “lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual and intersex are natural persons irrespective of their masculine and feminine gender and they have the right to exercise their rights and live an independent life in society.”  Nepali homosexuals are afforded all of the same rights as their heterosexual counterparts, and Nepal has even offered a “third sex” option for its national ID cards.  Gay and gay-friendly clubs now abound in Kathmandu and the Blue Diamond Society keeps the gay, lesbian, and transgendered community appraised of relevant information with a brightly-colored and cheerful website.

(thanks to Cris for the link)

Transgender College Athletes

An interesting article from Inside College Ed on trans athletes at the college level states:

For the most part, athletic teams at high schools and colleges are segregated by sex and divided into men’s and women’s teams. For transgender students, determining on which gender’s team, if any, they will be allowed to play can be a difficult process fraught with misconceptions, ignorance and discrimination. Few high school or collegiate athletic programs, administrators or coaches are prepared to address a transgender student’s interest in participating in athletics in a systematic, fair and effective manner. Few athletes have been given the information that would prepare them to participate on a team with a teammate whose gender identity is different from the sex they were assigned at birth.


From the NYS Pride Agenda

GENDA could pass this winter – take action now!

Last week when we wrote to you about the Senate marriage vote, we told you we’d be reaching out again soon about our plans for 2010. Today, we’re updating you on our legislative priority for this winter: to pass the Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act (GENDA).

GENDA would amend the state’s human rights law to include anti-discrimination protections based upon gender identity and expression, providing crucial civil rights protections for transgender New Yorkers by banning discrimination in housing, employment, credit, public accommodations, and other areas of everyday life. It would also add gender identity and expression to the state’s bias crime laws to help protect transgender people from violence. Last month, Governor Paterson signed an Executive Order prohibiting discrimination based on gender identity and expression for state employees—but our work isn’t over until ALL New Yorkers are protected by a comprehensive law banning discrimination against transgender people.

We need you to take action NOW. With just two phone calls to Senators, you can help us win:

1. Call Senator Tom Duane, lead sponsor of GENDA, at (518) 455-2451. Ask Senator Duane to bring the bill to the floor for a vote in February.

2. Call your own Senator to tell them that you expect them to bring GENDA to the floor and vote in support of it. You can find your State Senator’s Albany phone number here.

Here are some talking points for your calls:

1. Remember to tell your Senator the number of the GENDA bill (S.2406).

2. Ask your Senator to vote for GENDA, and if you are able to attend a legislative meeting, ask to meet with him or her to discuss the urgency of passing this bill right away.

3. Tell them about the urgent need for GENDA:

  • Due to difficulty with job discrimination, one-fifth of transgender New Yorkers have incomes below $10,000 a year.
  • 28% of transgender New Yorkers have experienced a serious physical or sexual assault motivated by hate.

4.  Remind them that GENDA enjoys broad support statewide, including:

  • 78% of New York voters
  • Unions representing 2.1 million working New Yorkers
  • 30 Fortune 500 companies based in cities like Rochester, Corning, New York City and White Plains
  • 547 clergy and lay leaders representing over 20 different denominations

Continue reading “From the NYS Pride Agenda”

Paul Scott: Wasting Your Time

There’s a guy named Paul Scott who’s running for Secretary of State in Michigan. You know, that state that gets TB when the rest of the country has a cough.

I haven’t been flabbergasted for some time, but this hatefulness blew me away. In his opening bid to become Secretary of State, he lists four things he aims to do:

There are also policies that I will work to change:

  • I will stand strong against illegal immigration by verifying a valid social security number before issuing anyone a driver’s license, an issue Representative Dave Agema has been pushing for 3 years.
  • I will actively push to encrypt the traceable RFID chip in the enhanced driver’s license.
  • I will make it a priority to ensure transgender individuals will not be allowed to change the sex on their driver’s license in any circumstance.
  • I will work tirelessly to repeal the over $100 million dollar tax increase on drivers in the form of driver responsibility fees.

The third one, which I’ve put in bold, completely surprised me. I thought for a minute I was reading a parody & checked the page to make sure it wasn’t The Onion. On the one hand, I’m kind of blown away that the need for gender marker changes on ID is even being recognized as something transgender people need to do. On the other: really? Is blocking a transgender person’s right to change their gender marker a key issue?

Wow. Maybe his tag line should be “Vote for Paul Scott: He’ll Waste Everyone’s Time with Big Brother Bullshit.”

(h/t to Adrien and Paula, via FB)