The Moral and Human Rights Perspectives of Gender Affirmative Surgery
Portfolio Revisio
“Re-vision—the act of looking back, of seeing with fresh eyes,
of entering an old text from a new critical direction…” – Adrienne Rich
Background
This semester you’ve worked on developing a personal writing process drawing from the strategies we’ve employed. Although revision has been key to each assignment cycle in that you’ve revised from draft stages to a final copy, this assignment will give you the opportunity to more fully invest in revision by starting from what was once a final draft. The “Description of Changes” document helps you identify how much revision you’ve done, and encourages you to take ownership and justify the writing choices you’ve made, which ensures you have good reasons for making them.
Part 1: Major Revision
1. Choose one of your previous assignments and revise it:
Keep in mind that revision does not simply entail making surface edits or merely implementing the changes that I suggested. Revisions should be both significant and self-initiated. This is your opportunity to participate in the rigorous peer-review process that all scholars must undertake before publishing a paper in a legitimate journal.
Suggestions: changing the targeted audience and writing style, adding and subtracting ideas, pushing your analysis further, streamlining the overall argument or shifting directions, reconsidering structure, and clarifying any issues with grammar and mechanics, as needed. Ultimately, the point is to produce a new VISION (get it? Re-VISION?) of your original idea. If you earned a high grade on a certain essay originally and wish to polish it up for the portfolio, be sure that still engage in the revision process to earn credit for this assignment.
2. Type a separate “Description of Changes” document:
Along with the final copy of the revision, include a document that describes and justifies the major changes you made. What did you change and why? Make sure you explain where the revision came from—whether it was self-motivated or inspired by a comment from a peer or me. If you decide not to make a significant revision that I suggested in my comments on the original draft, that’s fine; note what you didn’t change and explain why. Rather than itemizing a number of minor sentence-level changes involving grammar or style, please just summarize them briefly.
Part 2: Minor Revision
Choose one other previous essay and one writing aspect you would like to improve (e.g. crafting introductions, composing topic sentences, analyzing a source or example). In your chosen essay, you will revise the one aspect you have chosen. Include a note at the beginning or in your title that lets me know what your focus was, and put your changes
The Moral and Human Rights Perspectives of Gender Affirmative Surgery
Name
University
Professor
Subject
Date
The Moral and Human Rights Perspectives of Gender Affirmative Surgery
Gender affirmation surgery emerged over 90 years ago in Europe. In the first 50 years of its existence, gender affirmation surgery evolved from a rare treatment with uncertain outcomes to an accepted procedure for medical diagnoses in America and Europe (Mumford, 2023). Today, it is challenging to argue against gender affirmation surgery from a moral or human rights perspective. This difficulty is especially so with the growing empirical evidence suggesting that such procedures are critical for the well-being of transgender people. However, the fact that not all procedures go according to plan means that decisions on gender affirmation procedures should be made by individuals willing to take risks. This scenario means minors should never be subjected to the procedures until they are old enough to give informed consent. Before coming to this conclusion, it is essential to clarify the morality of the practice and explore how human rights apply to the same.
I came across an interesting study that highlighted the demerits of Gender Affirmative surgery (GAS). The prevalence of regret among transgender and gender non-conforming individuals who undergo gender-affirmation procedures (GAS) remains uncertain (Bustos, et al., 2021). The experience of regret has the potential to result in both medical and mental health complications, raising concerns about the suitability of these operations for certain individuals. The objective of this study was to assess the frequency of regret among transgender individuals who received gender-affirming surgery (GAS) and examine the characteristics related with this regret. A comprehensive analysis was conducted, encompassing a total of 27 studies, which collectively involved 7928 transgender patients who undergone various forms of gender-affirming surgery (GAS). The combined prevalence of regret following (GAS) was found to be 1%, with a 95% confidence interval ranging from less than 1% to 2%. In total, 33% of individuals got transmasculine treatments, while the remaining 67% underwent transfeminine procedures. The occurrence of regret among individuals who have undergone transmasculine and transfeminine operations was found to be less than 1% (95% confidence interval: less than 1% to less than 1%) and 1% (95% confidence interval: less than 1% to 2%), respectively. A collective sum of 77 individuals expressed remorse regarding their decision to undergo gender affirmation surgery (GAS). According to Pfäfflin's regret classification, a total of 28 individuals experienced light regret, while 34 individuals experienced extreme regret. The majority of individuals expressed evident remorse as per the criteria established by Kuiper and Cohen-Kettenis.
As someone who has witnessed the dangers of gender affirmation surgery, I have developed an opposition to the practice, which means that my views might be biased. Before being judged as discriminatory, it is only fair to understand where my ideas are coming from. Were it not for gender affirmation surgery, my friend would still be alive. My friend was a transgender person who identified as male at birth. His transgender identity was visible by the time he was ten years old. His parents always wanted a girl. Since they could not get another child, they considered adopting one. However, they thought it would be easier to get their child a gender reassignment surgery to identify as a girl.
Even though my friend was aware of the transgender condition, he felt okay with it and believed he could choose what he wanted to identify with later. In other words, he had no problem identifying as a male. He was also okay with using they/them pronouns as his family embraced him and never made him feel isolated. The surgery seemed to have worked, but health conditions emerged later, resulting in my friend’s death. Seeing how close we were, his death devastated me, and I was left questioning why parents would subject their children to a procedure that risked fatal outcomes.
Even without the pain of my friend’s death, I still believe that individuals do not have a moral obligation to dictate the gender identification of another or attempt to change their gender without their consent. As an individual who believes no one should try to change nature, I would be okay with transgender people remaining transgender. This view means being opposed to the idea of gender affirmation surgery. However, I have no moral right to dictate what is good and bad for others, mainly if my situation differs from theirs.
Understandably, transgender people are among the most discriminated against populations worldwide, which explains their desire to identify as either male or female. The normalization of the binary identity and disregard for others are the leading causes of the pain and suffering faced by transgender people. Therefore, it is easy to argue that society is to blame for failing to accept and acknowledge transgender people. Recent research by Gerritse et al. (2023) indicated that many transgender people could be okay with their status but are afraid of being left behind. The waiting lines at facilities offering gender affirmation procedures are growing, which indicates how desperate many transgender people are to get their genders reassigned.
The issue of morality is difficult to argue because it is a question of what society believes to be right or wrong. Decades ago, gender reassignment was frowned upon until many successful cases changed people’s perceptions. Even so, countries, including the United States, allow healthcare workers to make conscientious objections to gender-affirmation surgery (Morrison et al., 2023). In this case, moral judgments appear to be left to the individuals. Those who believe it is ethical to conduct gender reassignment surgery will support it, and those who think it is unethical will have the chance and right to reject involvement. Personally, gender affirmation surgery is evil if it causes harm to individuals. If society can treat transgender people equally and embrace them without discrimination, prejudice, and stereotyping, they will learn to be proud of their identity. They would escape the dangers of gender affirmation surgery. On the other hand, individuals still wishing to pursue the procedures should not be prohibited, in which case the human rights argument comes in.
Ethical Argument
Besides human rights, the most compelling ethical argument for gender affirmation surgery is the suffering of transgender people and the empirical evidence suggesting that gender affirmation surgery positively influences their well-being. Gender affirmation surgery has been shown to improve the quality of life, eliminate gender dysphoria, and improve psychosocial functioning in transgender individuals (Leerdam et al., 2023). Levels of body dissatisfaction also decline, and overall mental health (including emotional, psychological, and social) well-being is improved (Achille et al., 2020). Therefore, there cannot be any moral justification to object to a medical procedure that improves the overall health of individuals.
If modern society believes homosexuality and abortion, among other contentious social issues, as morally acceptable, then society should be willing to accept the moral acceptability of gender reassignment. However, only individuals should be allowed to define their identities. Similar to how homosexual individuals decide for themselves that they are gay and lesbian, transgender people must be allowed to choose for themselves the gender affirmation procedures. My friend should have been allowed to choose ...