Journal of Medical Ethics 46 (11):761-762 (2020)

Authors
Brian D. Earp
Oxford University
Abstract
We thank the commentators for their thoughtful responses to our article.1 Due to space constraints, we will confine our discussion to just three key issues. The first issue relates to the central ethical conundrum for clinicians working with young people like Phoenix: namely, how to respect, value and defer to a person’s own account of their identity and what is needed for their well-being, while staying open to the possibility that such an account may reflect a work in progress. This conundrum thus relates both to what will be beneficial for that person and what constitutes respecting their autonomy, and clinicians must dwell on these questions when deciding what forms of medical intervention to offer. D’Angelo,2 Lemma3 and Wren4 highlight the importance of considering Phoenix as a ‘whole person in context’ 2 prior to initiating treatment or care. In this way, they advocate for a process of ‘therapeutic exploration’,4 which includes taking sufficient time to explore Phoenix’s personhood with them so as to support them in achieving an ‘authentic self-discovery’.2 We agree with these authors that identity development is a complex, life-long process that is influenced by biological, psychosocial and relational aspects, all of which may contribute to an individual’s desire to pursue gender-affirming interventions. To explore the various factors—both conscious and unconscious—that might be motivating Phoenix’s decision to pursue ongoing puberty suppression, D’Angelo,2 Lemma3 and Wren4 describe a comprehensive psychological approach to working with transgender and gender diverse individuals and propose questions to guide such discussions. Consistent with this approach, we stipulated that Phoenix had undergone regular psychological counselling and that the psychologist had judged that ‘Phoenix’s distress is significant and enduring…not a symptom …
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1136/medethics-2020-106942
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 54,466
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

New Way of Being a Person?Bernadette Wren - 2020 - Journal of Medical Ethics 46 (11):755-756.
Who is Phoenix?Roberto D'Angelo - 2020 - Journal of Medical Ethics 46 (11):753-754.

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Author’s Response: Enactivism, Autonomy, Self and Other.Shaun Gallagher - 2018 - Constructivist Foundations 14 (1):37-41.
Response to the Commentaries.Julian Savulescu & Donna Dickenson - 1998 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 5 (3):263-266.
How to Live Without Identity—And Why.Kai F. Wehmeier - 2012 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90 (4):761 - 777.
Response Suppression in Perceptual Defense.Robert B. Zajonc - 1962 - Journal of Experimental Psychology 64 (3):206.
Justifying an Adequate Response to the Vulnerable Other.Kavanagh Chandra - 2016 - Ramon Llull Journal of Applied Ethics 7 (7):57-70.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2020-10-22

Total views
2 ( #1,353,718 of 2,374,858 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #369,908 of 2,374,858 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes