Letters
Child health
Volume 211 - Issue 3

Everyone agrees transgender children require more science

Authors:  Ken C Pang, Carmen C Pace, Michelle A Tollit and Michelle M Telfer

Med J Aust 2019; 211 (3): 142-142.e1. || doi: 10.5694/mja2.50237
Published online: 5 August 2019
Download PDF (134 KB)
Share: Share on Blue Sky Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share by email

To the Editor: Writing recently in The Lancet, Byng and colleagues1 argue that our clinical guidelines on care of transgender children that appeared in the MJA2 use imprecise language, do not consider long term effects, and lack robust evidence. Several points the authors raise are valid and indeed align with what we and others have written about the state of evidence and need for high quality research in the field.3,4 However, it is important to provide additional clarification.

First, the phrase “sex assigned at birth” is not intended to mislead as Byng and colleagues have claimed5 but is standard terminology for clinicians who work in transgender health (the guidelines’ primary intended audience).6

Second, the authors fail to acknowledge not only our direct call for more research on the guidelines’ opening page but also the detailed description of the long term effects of hormonal treatment, which is a key component of the guidelines.2 Moreover, in calling for more research, they ignore existing efforts to improve evidence in this field.7

Third, the authors raise the issue of de‐transition, which refers to the observation that some individuals who identify as transgender may eventually return to living as a member of their birth‐assigned sex. This subject has gained attention in mainstream media, which appears to be the authors’ source of information on this topic.5 While more research is needed, existing studies show true de‐transition is uncommon. For example, only 0.4% of 27 715 transgender people surveyed in the United States de‐transitioned because they felt transition was not right for them; more often, de‐transition occurred due to outside pressures (eg, parents, family, religion) and discrimination.8

In summary, Byng and colleagues’ call for more high quality research is not novel and has long been acknowledged by those of us in the field. Moreover, withholding gender‐affirming treatment via wait‐and‐see strategies mentioned by the authors is not without harm,9 and development and ongoing revision of guidelines such as ours will ensure that transgender individuals receive the best care based on up‐to‐date empirical evidence.

Authors

  • Ken C Pang1,2
  • Carmen C Pace1,2
  • Michelle A Tollit1,2
  • Michelle M Telfer2
  • 1. Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC
  • 2. Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, VIC

Correspondence: ken.pang@mcri.edu.au

Competing interests

No relevant disclosures.

References

View this article on Wiley Online Library

More like this

Child health Research 13 August 2026 Open Access

Watchful Waiting Compared With Immediate Antibiotics for Urban Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children With Uncomplicated Acute Otitis Media (WATCH): A Non-Inferiority Randomised Controlled Trial

Jennifer S. Reath, Hasantha Gunasekera, Sanja Lujic, Amanda J. Leach, Letitia Campbell, Robyn Walsh, Tim Usherwood, Geoffrey K. Spurling, Claudette A. Tyson, Deborah A. Askew, Kelvin Kong, Chelsea J. Watego, Peter Morris, Wendy Hu, Penelope A. Abbott

Child health Consensus statement 1 July 2026 Open Access

Progressing Cross-Sector Collaboration for People With Eating Disorders and Higher Weight: Priority Actions From an Expert Roundtable Using a Modified Nominal Group Technique

Hiba Jebeile, Leah Brennan, Tracy Burrows, Xochitl de la Piedad Garcia, Angelique F. Ralph, Supreet Saluja, Evan Atlantis, Sarah P. Garnett, Carmel J. Harrison, Eve T. House, Natalie B. Lister, Lisa Moran, Milan K. Piya, Elizabeth Rieger, Evelyn Smith, Phillipa Hay, Sarah Trobe

View more