Refuting the Lie That Gender-Confused Children Will Commit Suicide Without “Transitioning”

It has become a common refrain in modern discourse: “Would you rather have a living daughter or a dead son?”

This emotionally charged question, repeated endlessly in media coverage, school board meetings, school counseling offices, and activist circles, implies that gender “transition” is a matter of life or death for children with gender dysphoria. The argument is simple and visceral—deny a child access to so-called “gender-affirming care,” and you are directly contributing to their suicide.

But is this claim supported by credible evidence? Where did it originate? What assumptions does it rely on?

And what are the actual outcomes for children and teens who undergo medical and surgical interventions in an attempt to live as the opposite sex?

This article seeks to peel back the layers of ideology and emotional manipulation surrounding this claim. We will examine the origins of the suicide narrative, the studies often cited in its support, and the many flaws in those studies. We will distinguish between causation and correlation, and address the biological and philosophical impossibility of “transitioning” from one sex to another. We will also evaluate what “gender-affirming care” actually involves—medically, surgically, and psychologically—including the disturbing details often glossed over by advocates.

We will then turn to the voices that are silenced in this debate—detransitioners, young people who regret their transition and now speak out about the deception and harm they experienced. Their stories stand as a sharp rebuke to the narrative that transition is the only path to peace.

Finally, we will examine the deeper causes of gender dysphoria in children and adolescents—factors like social contagion, trauma, sexual abuse, poor body image, and family dysfunction. In doing so, we’ll recover an often-overlooked statistic: approximately 70% of children with gender dysphoria will naturally outgrow it by the time they complete puberty—without hormones or surgery.

The claim that children will die if they are not affirmed in a transgender identity is not only false—it is deeply harmful. It substitutes propaganda for science, ideology for compassion, and permanent bodily harm for what should be careful, patient exploration of distress. Let us begin by identifying the origin of this dangerous narrative.

The Origin and Spread of the Suicide Narrative

The emotional weight of the suicide claim has been a potent tool in advancing the transgender movement, particularly as it pertains to children. But where did this narrative come from? Who originated it, and what does the evidence really say?

The Early Roots: Advocacy First, Evidence Later

The notion that children would die if not allowed to “transition” did not begin with a robust body of medical literature—it began as a rhetorical device advanced by LGBTQ+ advocacy groups. Organizations like the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the Trevor Project, and GLAAD were among the first to popularize the claim that transgender youth face astronomically high suicide risks if they are not affirmed.

In 2015, the White House, under the Obama administration, hosted a summit on LGBT youth in which suicide risk was repeatedly cited as a justification for gender-affirming treatments. The most common source used to support this claim was self-reported survey data—particularly from non-randomized, opt-in samples of transgender-identifying youth.

The Trevor Project’s annual surveys are frequently referenced in media reports and academic articles. Their 2022 survey, for example, claimed that 45% of transgender youth had “seriously considered suicide” in the previous year, and that “gender-affirming care” could help mitigate this risk. These numbers are staggering—but as we will see shortly, they are deeply flawed in methodology and interpretation.

From Anecdote to Dogma: How Media and Institutions Amplified the Message

The real acceleration came when mainstream media outlets—CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times, and even pediatric associations—adopted the suicide narrative wholesale. Without rigorous scrutiny, headlines blared:

“Trans Kids Face Suicide Risk Without Gender-Affirming Care” (NBC)
“The Science Is Settled: Transgender Youth Need Affirmation” (Washington Post)
“Puberty Blockers Save Lives” (The Atlantic)

In these narratives, to question transition was not a matter of scientific debate—it was tantamount to child abuse. Activist-physicians such as Dr. Jack Turban, a frequent contributor to the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (JAACAP), became go-to voices for the media, often citing their own studies or those of ideologically sympathetic colleagues. Turban’s work, however, is increasingly criticized for methodological flaws and biased framing (which we will address in detail in Part 4).

As this narrative solidified, it gained legal and institutional power. Schools began transitioning children without parental knowledge or consent, citing mental health risk. Courts began removing custody from parents who refused to affirm a child’s chosen gender identity. And in some cases, legislation—such as California’s AB 957—sought to mandate parental affirmation under threat of legal penalty.

This transformation of a weakly-supported hypothesis into a moral and legal imperative has had devastating consequences—not only for the children caught in the ideological crossfire, but for the credibility of medicine itself.

Suicide as Emotional Blackmail

It must be said plainly: threatening suicide is a common form of emotional blackmail. In many abusive relationships, one partner will say, “If you leave me, I’ll kill myself,” to coerce compliance. While suicidal ideation is a serious matter and deserves real care, it should never be used to short-circuit rational debate, informed consent, or parental responsibility.

Yet that is exactly what has happened. Parents are told that if they do not support cross-sex hormones or surgeries, their child will die—and that they will bear the blame. This is not healthcare. It is manipulation. And it’s time we held it up to the light.

Studies Cited in Support of the Claim—and Their Fatal Flaws

The suicide narrative depends heavily on a handful of studies that purport to show a direct link between denial of “gender-affirming care” and increased suicidality. These studies are widely circulated in the media and cited by medical professionals, school officials, and even government agencies. But do they actually prove what their proponents claim?

To evaluate this, we must carefully examine the studies themselves: their methodology, their underlying assumptions, and their conclusions. What we find is not settled science—but deeply flawed research.

Jack Turban and the Problem of Advocacy Research

One of the most frequently cited voices in this field is Dr. Jack Turban, a psychiatrist and outspoken advocate for transgender rights. His studies are often treated as authoritative, despite glaring methodological issues.

One of his studies is “Puberty Suppression for Transgender Youth and Risk of Suicidal Ideation (2020, Turban et. al.).

This study, published in Pediatrics, claimed that transgender youth who received puberty blockers were less likely to consider suicide than those who wanted but did not receive them.

Problems:

Sample Bias: The study used self-selected participants from an LGBT survey—not a randomized, representative sample.
Retrospective Reporting: Participants were asked to recall whether they had received puberty blockers and whether they had considered suicide. Such retrospective data is highly unreliable.
No Control for Comorbid Conditions: There was no attempt to control for mental health issues like depression or trauma, both of which are independently linked to suicidality.
Correlation, Not Causation: Even if a correlation were found, it would not prove that blockers prevent suicide—it could just as easily indicate that more mentally stable youth are more likely to receive medical care.

Despite these flaws, the media hailed the study as proof that puberty blockers “save lives.”

The Trevor Project Surveys

Another frequent source is the Trevor Project, a prominent LGBT youth advocacy organization. Their 2022 National Survey on LGBTQ Youth Mental Health is often used to claim that denying gender affirmation leads to suicide.

Claims:

45% of transgender or nonbinary youth seriously considered suicide in the past year.
Trans youth with access to gender-affirming care were significantly less likely to report suicidal ideation.

Problems:

Opt-In Survey: Participants were recruited online through LGBTQ+ support networks and social media—ensuring a highly biased sample.
Self-Reported Diagnoses: No medical records or evaluations confirm that respondents actually had gender dysphoria or a clinical diagnosis of depression.
Ambiguous Language: “Gender-affirming care” is not clearly defined—responses could be based on anything from clothing choices to surgery.
Confounding Variables Ignored: Factors like parental abuse, bullying, or prior trauma are not accounted for.

The Trevor Project is an advocacy group, not a scientific institution. Its surveys are designed to influence policy and public opinion, not to produce peer-reviewed, controlled research.

The 2011 Swedish Study: Misused and Misrepresented

Ironically, one of the strongest studies contradicting the suicide-prevention claim has been misused by activists for years.

In 2011, a long-term study in PLOS One by Cecilia Dhejne et al. followed individuals who had undergone gender reassignment surgery in Sweden. It found that even after surgery, transgender individuals had a suicide rate 19 times higher than the general population.

The authors explicitly state that this does not prove surgery caused suicide – but that transition did not eliminate suicidal tendencies.

Despite this, activists frequently misquote the study as proof that “affirming care” reduces suicide, when it in fact reveals the opposite: even with Sweden’s robust social support and medical care, long-term outcomes were deeply concerning.

What Real Experts Say

Dr. Stephen Levine, a psychiatrist and expert in gender dysphoria treatment, has testified that there is “no conclusive evidence” that medical transition prevents suicide. In fact, he warns that pushing children into medical transition may increase psychological instability, especially in those suffering from trauma or social contagion.

The Endocrine Society, in its 2017 guidelines, admits that the quality of evidence supporting medical transition for youth is “low” or “very low” across most categories.

The UK’s Cass Review, led by Dr. Hilary Cass and commissioned by the British government, found that the evidence base for pediatric transition was so poor that the NHS had to shut down the Tavistock gender clinic in 2022 and restructure the system.

Flawed Foundations

The most commonly cited studies rely on self-selected, self-reported surveys.
They often conflate correlation with causation.
They ignore or underreport mental health comorbidities and social factors.
Long-term studies show that transition does not eliminate suicide risk.

The scientific case for pediatric transition as a suicide prevention measure is not just weak—it is reckless. Making irreversible decisions based on this kind of data is not evidence-based medicine. It is ideological activism wearing a white coat.

Correlation vs. Causation—Why the Suicide Narrative Fails Scientific Scrutiny

The foundation of the claim that denying “gender-affirming care” causes suicide rests almost entirely on a fundamental confusion: the difference between correlation and causation. This confusion—often deliberate—has allowed activists and ideologues to present weak, suggestive data as if it were hard scientific proof.

But to make public health policy, influence parental rights, or justify irreversible medical interventions based on correlation alone is not only irresponsible—it’s dangerous.

What Is Correlation?

Correlation means that two things happen to occur together. For example, ice cream sales and drowning deaths are correlated: both increase during the summer. But one does not cause the other. The cause is a third factor—hot weather—that influences both variables.

In much the same way, transgender identity and suicidal thoughts may correlate—but that does not mean one causes the other. A third factor (or a combination of many) may be at play: mental illness, family dysfunction, trauma, bullying, or poor body image.

What Is Causation?

Causation is a much stronger claim: it means that one thing directly leads to another. To prove causation, a study must:

Be prospective (following participants over time).
Include a control group.
Randomize subjects when possible.
Account for confounding variables.

Most of the studies used to support the suicide-prevention claim fail all these standards. They are:

Retrospective: asking participants to recall past events or feelings.
Uncontrolled: lacking any comparison group not receiving intervention.
Non-randomized: relying on self-selected, ideologically skewed samples.
Confounded: ignoring other causes like depression, anxiety, trauma, or abuse.

Without these methodological safeguards, we cannot say that receiving “gender-affirming care” caused reduced suicidality—or that denying it caused increased suicide.

Confounding Factors in Suicidality Among Youth

Gender dysphoria does not occur in a vacuum. Suicidality in youth is multi-factorial and often arises from:

Clinical depression or anxiety
Autism spectrum disorders
Histories of sexual or physical abuse
Parental neglect or family conflict
Social media influence and peer contagion
Eating disorders or body dysmorphia
Coexisting personality disorders

A young person who identifies as transgender and also struggles with these issues is at a far greater risk for suicide. But that risk does not disappear because they are affirmed or undergo surgery. In many cases, the underlying trauma is never addressed, because the medical focus becomes entirely centered on the gender identity.

The “Transition or Suicide” Myth Fails Basic Logic

If “gender-affirming care” were truly suicide prevention, we would expect suicide rates among transgender individuals to drop after transitioning. But this is not the case.

As mentioned earlier, the 2011 Swedish study found that even after full medical and surgical transition, transgender individuals had 19 times the suicide rate of the general population. This persisted years after their procedures—long past any temporary stress of transition.

If transition were the solution, that suicide rate should have dramatically decreased. Instead, it remained tragically high.

This suggests what many clinicians suspect: transition does not resolve the deep, complex mental health struggles that often accompany gender dysphoria. In fact, in some cases, it may aggravate them.

Suicide Threats as Emotional Blackmail—Again

It must also be acknowledged that some children are taught to use suicidal threats as leverage. Influencers, peer groups, and even some therapists warn them that “if you aren’t affirmed, you might die.” This idea becomes internalized. A distressed teen might begin to believe, “If I don’t transition, I’ll kill myself”—not because it’s biologically or psychologically true, but because it’s what the culture has taught them.

This is not compassion. It is manipulation.

Good therapy does not encourage suicidal ideation. It challenges distorted thinking, explores the roots of distress, and offers healthy, long-term strategies for healing. Medicalizing that distress and masking it with hormones or surgery offers false hope at a devastating cost.

The Suicide Argument Is Scientifically Unjustified

Correlation does not prove causation.
Most studies used to support the suicide claim fail basic scientific standards.
Other causes of suicidality are often ignored or unaddressed.
Transition does not eliminate suicide risk—and may worsen it.
The narrative teaches kids to see themselves as hopeless unless they are affirmed.

The suicide claim is not scientific. It is ideological and manipulative. It is time we abandon this myth and return to a thoughtful, evidence-based approach that seeks to understand—not exploit—the pain of children in distress.

The Biology of Sex Cannot Be Changed – Why Transition is a Misnomer

In order to believe that “gender-affirming care” is a life-saving medical necessity, one must accept the claim that children can actually “transition” from one sex to another. But this is biologically impossible. The language of “transitioning” is a rhetorical and ideological sleight of hand—not a scientific description of what occurs.

The truth is stark and inescapable: no one has ever changed from male to female or female to male. Biological sex is determined at conception and encoded into every cell of the body. What “transitioning” accomplishes is the creation of a simulacrum—a cosmetic imitation of the opposite sex built on hormones, surgery, and often, self-deception.

Chromosomes Do Not Change

Every human being is born with either an XX (female) or XY (male) chromosomal structure in every cell of their body. This fundamental genetic blueprint controls:

Hormone levels
Internal reproductive organs
Secondary sex characteristics
Brain structure and function
Bone density and muscle mass

No hormone regimen, surgery, or psychological affirmation can alter chromosomes. A male who undergoes a full transition remains genetically male. The same applies to females. Transition is biologically superficial, not structural.

What Actually Happens in a “Gender Transition”?

The term “transition” suggests a process of natural transformation, but what it really involves is a series of medical interventions that mimic some secondary sex characteristics of the opposite sex. These include:

Cross-sex hormones (testosterone for females; estrogen for males)
Puberty blockers (in children, to halt normal development)
Double mastectomies (in healthy adolescent girls)
Orchiectomies (removal of testicles in males)
Neovaginas (in males, using inverted scrotal or penile tissue)
Phalloplasties (in females, using forearm or thigh tissue to create a pseudo-penis)

These are not sex changes. They are medical simulations of male or female characteristics. They do not result in a functioning reproductive system of the opposite sex, and in most cases, infertility is a permanent outcome.

“Gender” vs. “Sex”: An Ideological Divide

Much of the confusion in this debate stems from the distinction made between “sex” and “gender.” This distinction originated in feminist theory and queer theory, which hold that:

Sex is biological (male or female)
Gender is a social construct (masculine, feminine, nonbinary, etc.)

Under this view, gender is not rooted in biology but in feelings, roles, and expression. Thus, someone may be “assigned male at birth” but “identify as a woman.”

But this framework rests on an unproven philosophical assumption: that the self—the inner psychological identity—is more real and authoritative than the body. This is modern Gnosticism: the idea that the material body is secondary to the inner spirit or identity.

By contrast, a biblical and biological view holds that our bodies are not accidents. They are an essential part of who we are—created by God, and bearing the marks of His design. To rebel against the body is to rebel against the self—and ultimately against the Creator.

The Impossibility of Becoming the Other Sex

A few sobering biological truths:

Males cannot ovulate, conceive, or carry a child.
Females cannot produce sperm or impregnate.
Male skeletal structure, lung capacity, and brain morphology differ from females—even under hormone therapy.
There is no such thing as a “female penis” or a “male vagina.” These are ideological inventions, not scientific realities.

Even in the best-case scenarios, transition surgeries do not recreate real sex organs. They create cosmetic imitations—often with severe complications (as we will cover later in the article).

Transition Is an Ideological Fiction

Sex is encoded in every cell and cannot be changed.
“Transition” does not make a person the opposite sex—it creates a facsimile.
The claim that one can be “born in the wrong body” presupposes a disembodied self that conflicts with the body—a philosophical claim, not a scientific one.
To build medical policy on such assumptions is both reckless and dehumanizing.

The body is not a canvas for self-expression. It is the good creation of a wise God. Real healing must begin with accepting truth—not affirming a false identity.

What Gender-Affirming Care Actually Involves—Procedures, Outcomes, and the Truth About Pseudo-Sex Organs

The term “gender-affirming care” sounds benign—almost gentle. It conjures images of supportive counseling or compassionate medical help for struggling youth. But this euphemism masks a deeply invasive, irreversible, and experimental set of procedures that fundamentally alter the healthy bodies of minors.

Activists often claim that such care is life-saving and essential. But what does it actually entail? What are the consequences? And are these procedures truly helping, or simply compounding suffering?

This section will strip away the euphemisms and detail what “gender-affirming care” actually means.

Puberty Blockers: A Gateway to Irreversibility

What they are: Puberty blockers (typically Lupron or similar GnRH agonists) are drugs that suppress the natural production of sex hormones. They pause puberty to prevent the development of secondary sex characteristics (like breast growth in girls or deepening voices in boys).

Claimed benefit: Give children “time to think” before going through unwanted puberty.

Reality:

Almost all children who start blockers go on to cross-sex hormones. The “pause button” is functionally a fast track to full medical transition.
Bone density loss: These drugs halt normal bone development, increasing risk of osteoporosis and fractures.
Unknown effects on brain development: Puberty is critical for neural maturation, particularly in the prefrontal cortex, which governs impulse control and decision-making.
Off-label use: These drugs were designed for short-term use in children with precocious puberty—not for healthy minors experiencing gender dysphoria.

A 2022 study in Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy found that puberty blockers have not been adequately tested for long-term safety in gender dysphoric youth, especially when used for more than a year.

Cross-Sex Hormones: Irreversible Changes

What they are:

Estrogen for males attempting to transition to female.
Testosterone for females attempting to transition to male.

Effects include:

Permanent voice changes
Breast growth (in males)
Facial/body hair growth (in females)
Deepening of the voice (in females)
Sterility (often irreversible)
Increased risk of blood clots, strokes, and cancer
Mood swings, aggression, and severe psychological volatility

Fertility Loss: Many patients, especially minors, are not fully informed that they may never have biological children after hormone use. Some are told this only after the fact—or not at all.

Sexual dysfunction: Hormones disrupt natural libido and often lead to either permanent erectile dysfunction (in males) or an inability to orgasm or enjoy sexual intimacy (in females).

Top Surgery: Double Mastectomies in Teen Girls

What it is: The surgical removal of healthy breast tissue in females who identify as male or nonbinary. Sometimes includes nipple resection or reshaping.

Age range: Performed on girls as young as 13 in the U.S., with some clinics not requiring parental consent.

Consequences:

Permanent loss of the ability to breastfeed.
Nerve damage, scarring, and loss of sexual sensation.
Psychological regret, especially when identity changes later.

Many detransitioned women report that they were rushed into this surgery without adequate psychological evaluation or warnings of long-term consequences.

Bottom Surgeries: Creating Pseudo-Sex Organs

These are among the most radical procedures and are almost always irreversible.

Phalloplasty (female-to-male):

What it is: Surgical construction of a pseudo-penis using tissue grafts from the forearm, thigh, or back.
Involves: Dozens of procedures, including the creation of a urethra, removal of healthy genital tissue, and often insertion of prosthetics.
Complications: High rates of infection, tissue necrosis, fistulas, nerve damage, and surgical failure.
Sexual function: Rarely allows for orgasm. Most constructed phalluses have no sensation or limited function. Sexual pleasure is dramatically reduced or eliminated.

Vaginoplasty (male-to-female):

What it is: Surgical inversion of the penis to create a pseudo-vaginal canal.
Requires: Penile inversion or use of colon tissue to construct the cavity.
Complications: Infection, stenosis (narrowing or collapse of the canal), need for lifelong dilation, and necrosis of tissue.
Sexual function: True vaginal lubrication is not possible. Sensation is sometimes present but not comparable to biological female anatomy. Orgasmic potential is reduced or eliminated.
Urinary issues: Many suffer from incontinence, urinary tract infections, or misdirected urine flow.

Are These Structures Functional?

The answer is emphatically no—not in the way that natural sex organs are. These procedures do not replicate real reproductive function. They do not allow for:

Natural conception or childbirth
Menstruation
Ejaculation or erection (in biologically female individuals)
Vaginal self-lubrication or elasticity

They are cosmetic and symbolic, not functional.

Moreover, patients are rarely told the truth up front. Many detransitioners report being led to believe they would be “complete” or “normal” after surgery—only to discover years later that the reality is far more painful and limiting.

Long-Term Mental Health Outcomes

The idea that “affirmation” leads to mental wellness is unsupported by long-term data. As mentioned earlier:

Swedish study (2011): Suicide rate remained 19x higher after full transition.
UK Cass Review (2022): Found the evidence base for youth transition to be “built on sand.”

Many patients describe experiencing a honeymoon period after surgery, followed by a return of dysphoria, depression, and suicidal ideation—now compounded by irreversible bodily damage.

“Gender-Affirming Care” Is a Euphemism for Medical Harm

Puberty blockers interfere with natural development.
Cross-sex hormones cause sterility, sexual dysfunction, and long-term health problems.
“Top” and “bottom” surgeries are radical, risky, and often leave patients disfigured and disabled.
These procedures do not produce functioning sex organs.
The promised mental health benefits are not backed by reliable science.

This is not care. It is mutilation under the banner of compassion.

“It’s Society’s Fault”—The Claim That Post-Transition Suicide Is Due to Lack of Acceptance

When studies or stories arise showing that transgender individuals continue to experience mental health struggles—even after full transition—activists often pivot to a new explanation: “It’s because society doesn’t accept them.” In this telling, transgender suicidality is not due to the inadequacy of medical interventions, but to external hostility, discrimination, and rejection.

This argument is emotionally powerful—but scientifically and logically flawed. Let’s examine why.

The Logic Behind the Claim

The activist narrative proceeds as follows:

Trans people are at high risk for suicide.
Transition reduces that risk.
If suicide still occurs post-transition, it must be due to societal stigma or “transphobia.”

This framing allows any negative outcome to be blamed not on the treatment, but on external forces. It’s a form of non-falsifiable reasoning: no amount of data can disprove it, because the conclusion is built to withstand contradiction.

The Data Doesn’t Support It

Sweden, which has some of the most pro-transgender laws and social acceptance in the world, still reports high suicide rates among transitioned individuals. The 2011 Dhejne study shows that even with a tolerant culture and state-funded transition care, post-operative trans individuals still experience suicide at rates 19 times higher than the general population.

If acceptance were the key variable, we would expect suicide rates to be far lower in these countries. But that is not what the evidence shows.

Similarly, Canada, the Netherlands, and other European nations with widespread trans affirmation still face rising rates of transgender youth presenting with mental health crises—despite broad cultural support.

A Shield for Failed Medicine

The “blame society” argument functions as a shield against accountability. If a medical intervention fails to deliver promised benefits, doctors, therapists, and policymakers should reevaluate the practice. But in the case of transgender medicine, the failure is never attributed to the method—it’s always someone else’s fault.

This is deeply unscientific. In every other branch of medicine, negative outcomes force a reassessment of the treatment. But gender medicine, propped up by ideology, permits no self-critique.

The Hidden Harm of the “Blame Society” Narrative

This narrative harms patients in multiple ways:

It prevents honest reflection on whether transition actually met the person’s needs.
It isolates individuals by convincing them that everyone who disagrees is an enemy.
It inhibits therapeutic exploration of trauma, self-image, or unresolved pain.
It burdens youth with the belief that they can only be safe if the entire culture changes.

Instead of helping patients live in the real world, it teaches them to interpret every challenge as proof of hatred—and every disappointment as someone else’s fault.

This is not empowerment. It’s victimhood training.

Compassion Without Compromise

True compassion listens carefully, refuses cruelty, and seeks healing. But it also tells the truth. It does not affirm falsehood to avoid discomfort. The body is not bigoted. The truth is not hateful. Love does not lie.

We must care deeply for those who suffer—but care grounded in reality, not ideology.

Toxic Empathy—How Compassion Can Be Weaponized to Affirm a False Reality

Modern culture has exalted empathy as an unquestioned virtue. To be empathetic is to be morally upright. To challenge someone’s identity claims—or even question their interpretation of their own distress—is seen as cruel, oppressive, or bigoted.

But empathy, like any human virtue, can be distorted. When empathy demands that we affirm falsehoods, it ceases to be compassionate. It becomes dangerous. This distorted empathy—toxic empathy—now undergirds much of the gender ideology movement, especially as it applies to children.

What Is Toxic Empathy?

Toxic empathy is:

Uncritical: It refuses to ask if someone’s self-perception is accurate.
Affirmation-focused: It values feeling good over being well.
Emotionally manipulated: It gives the reins of decision-making to feelings, regardless of consequences.
Deceptively kind: It uses softness as a shield against accountability and truth.

In the context of gender dysphoria, toxic empathy means affirming a child’s belief that they were “born in the wrong body”—not because it’s medically sound, but because to do otherwise would supposedly hurt their feelings or increase their risk of suicide.

How Toxic Empathy Plays Out in the Gender Debate

Parents are told:

“Would you rather have a living daughter or a dead son?”
“Your child knows who they are better than you ever will.”
“Not affirming is abuse.”

Doctors are trained to validate feelings first and treat second—a reversal of good clinical practice. Therapists fear professional repercussions if they explore rather than affirm a child’s identity. Teachers and counselors are encouraged to facilitate social transition behind parents’ backs.

In each case, the demand is the same: Affirm, or be held morally responsible for harm.

Compassion vs. Collusion

Real compassion walks with the suffering, but it does not encourage delusion. It names what is true and helps people live in the real world—not retreat from it.

If a girl with anorexia says, “I’m fat,” true empathy says, “You’re not. Your mind is lying to you. Let’s find out why.”
But if that same girl says, “I’m a boy,” toxic empathy says, “You are. Let’s remove your breasts.”

One distortion is challenged. The other is celebrated. This is not progress. It is hypocrisy rooted in ideology.

When the Church Imitates the World

Tragically, even some Christian leaders and churches have embraced toxic empathy. In the name of “love,” they affirm identities rooted in brokenness, sin, or confusion. They avoid hard truths about God’s design, human nature, and sin—thinking kindness requires silence.

But biblical love is not sentimental. It is anchored in truth. Jesus never affirmed false identities—He called people to repentance, faith, and new life.

Empathy Must Be Guided by Truth

Empathy is good. But empathy without truth is not love—it’s emotional manipulation.
Affirming lies in the name of kindness only deepens suffering. Real healing begins when we stop fearing discomfort and start facing the truth—even when it’s painful.

Silencing the Detransitioners—Voices That Disrupt the Narrative

If “gender-affirming care” were as safe, effective, and lifesaving as activists claim, then one would expect almost no one to regret transition—especially if they had received proper evaluation, counseling, and informed consent.

But a growing number of individuals—many of them very young—are now coming forward with devastating stories of regret. They were affirmed, transitioned, medically altered, and surgically disfigured—all before reaching full adulthood. Now they are trying to speak up.

And the transgender movement is trying to silence them.

Who Are the Detransitioners?

Detransitioners are individuals who once identified as transgender and undertook medical steps to change their bodies—only to later realize that their dysphoria had deeper roots, and that transition did not bring peace.

Many were teenagers. Some were autistic. Many had a history of trauma, sexual abuse, depression, or family dysfunction. A shocking number are young women who internalized discomfort with puberty and sexuality and came to believe that being male would free them from that pain.

Their Stories

Chloe Cole, a former trans-identifying girl, underwent puberty blockers, testosterone, and a double mastectomy—all before she was 18. Now, she speaks publicly about her regret. “I was 15 when I had my breasts removed,” she says. “No one stopped me.”
Helena Kerschner began testosterone in her teens and later realized her dysphoria stemmed from depression, bullying, and internalized misogyny. “The internet told me I was trans,” she says. “The medical system agreed without question.”
Walt Heyer, an adult detransitioner, has spent years counseling those who regret transition. “No one is born in the wrong body,” he says. “We were lied to.”

These voices are powerful because they shatter the central dogma of transgender ideology: that affirmation leads to wholeness. These individuals were affirmed—and they were broken further.

Silencing the Truth

Detransitioners are often met with:

Mockery: Called “liars,” “traitors,” or “right-wing puppets.”
Deplatforming: Social media accounts are banned or throttled.
Medical neglect: Doctors who performed their transitions often refuse to help reverse procedures or treat complications.
Media blackout: Mainstream outlets rarely report their stories, or frame them as “rare” anomalies.

Trans activists treat detransitioners like apostates. Their existence undermines the narrative—and so they are erased.

What Detransitioners Reveal About the System

These testimonies reveal systemic failures:

Inadequate psychological screening
Lack of full informed consent
Rushed decision-making encouraged by activists and clinicians
Profound medical harms treated as necessary sacrifices

They also reveal that gender dysphoria is often a symptom, not a root cause—and that addressing deeper wounds would have been a more compassionate and effective path.

Detransitioners Deserve to Be Heard

The transgender movement claims to speak for the marginalized. But its loudest advocates fall silent—or hostile—when confronted with those who transitioned and now regret it. These voices don’t fit the narrative. So they are hidden.

But they matter. Their pain is real. And the medical system, media, and society have a moral obligation to listen.

The Hidden Side Effects of Transition—Medical Harms That May Contribute to Suicidality

One of the most egregious failures in the discussion around so-called “gender-affirming care” is the widespread suppression of information about the serious, long-term side effects and complications that follow from medical and surgical transition.

Advocates often describe the process as “life-saving” and “reversible”—especially in the early stages. But in reality, many of these interventions carry irreversible consequences, intense pain, and debilitating physical dysfunction. These side effects are rarely mentioned in public discourse, let alone fully explained to vulnerable children and their families.

Worse still, many of these complications may themselves contribute to increased depression, regret, and suicidality—the very outcomes that transition was supposed to prevent.

Tissue Necrosis and Surgical Failure

One of the most devastating complications is tissue necrosis—the death of tissue due to poor blood supply. This is especially common in neovaginas and phalloplasties:

Vaginoplasty (for males): Skin used to form the pseudo-vaginal cavity can become necrotic, requiring emergency removal. In some cases, the tissue used collapses or becomes infected, rendering the new cavity nonfunctional.
Phalloplasty (for females): Constructed phalluses often suffer from poor vascularization. Tissue death, infection, and graft rejection are common. Some require multiple follow-up surgeries just to repair damage from the initial operation.

These complications are not rare—they’re alarmingly frequent. Yet patients often report being told that the risks were “minimal.”

Chronic Pain and Nerve Damage

Surgeries involve significant cutting, stretching, and re-routing of nerves. The result?

Permanent loss of sensation
Ongoing nerve pain
Incontinence
Difficulty with mobility (especially with donor site wounds from phalloplasty)

For those who hoped transition would bring comfort and peace, this ongoing physical suffering often results in deep despair.

Sexual Dysfunction and the Loss of Intimacy

Despite claims that transition improves sexual health, many patients report the opposite:

Females on testosterone often experience vaginal atrophy and dryness, making intimacy painful.
Males who have undergone orchiectomy and vaginoplasty often lose the ability to orgasm and suffer from significant sexual dysfunction.
Phalloplasty recipients report difficulty achieving any form of arousal or sensation.

This aspect of loss is rarely discussed—but it cuts to the core of human experience. Patients enter transition believing it will align their body with their mind. Instead, they often lose the ability to experience physical connection and pleasure.

Sterility and Reproductive Loss

Nearly every form of gender medical intervention leads to permanent infertility:

Puberty blockers, when followed by cross-sex hormones, prevent full development of reproductive organs.
Hysterectomies, oophorectomies (removal of ovaries), orchiectomies (removal of testicles), and mastectomies all permanently sever biological parenthood.
Very few young people are adequately informed of these realities in time to reconsider.

Some patients only discover their sterility after it’s too late. The psychological toll can be enormous—especially for those who later abandon a transgender identity and desire a family.

Psychological Consequences of Bodily Harm

These physical outcomes have mental health implications:

Chronic pain is strongly correlated with depression.
Loss of sexual function can cause identity collapse.
Physical disfigurement can provoke self-loathing or social isolation.
Failed expectations of happiness post-transition often lead to deep regret.

Many detransitioners report that their psychological distress worsened after they transitioned—not because society was unkind, but because their own bodies had been harmed, and their dysphoria had not been resolved.

Side Effects Are Not “Minor Inconveniences”

The physical harms of gender medicine are not cosmetic quirks—they are severe, painful, and often permanent. They destroy healthy tissue, remove the possibility of reproduction, and rob many patients of the very intimacy and wholeness they were seeking.

For a medical establishment to hide these facts from patients—especially minors—is unconscionable.

What Really Drives Transgender Identity? Social Influence, Trauma, and Body Image Distress

To understand the rise of transgender identification—especially among children and adolescents—we must look beneath the surface. While activists often attribute gender dysphoria to an innate, fixed identity that simply needs to be “affirmed,” growing evidence points to a wide array of external and internal factors that influence young people to adopt a transgender identity.

These factors include:

Peer pressure and social contagion
Online communities and influencers
Sexual trauma or abuse
Autism spectrum conditions
Body image struggles
Family dysfunction or parental neglect

Far from being an organic and stable identity, transgenderism often functions as a coping mechanism—a way for troubled youth to make sense of their emotional and psychological distress in a culture that offers quick labels and instant affirmation.

Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria (ROGD)

Coined by Dr. Lisa Littman in 2018, ROGD refers to cases where adolescents—especially girls—suddenly begin identifying as transgender without any prior history of gender dysphoria. This often occurs after heavy social media use or exposure to peer groups where trans identity is encouraged.

Littman’s study found that:

86% of the teens’ friends also identified as LGBTQ+.
63% of parents reported that their child had increased internet/social media use prior to declaring a trans identity.
Most teens had a history of mental health issues before identifying as trans.

Although heavily criticized by activists, follow-up studies in other countries (such as the UK’s Cass Review) have confirmed similar patterns.

Online Influence and Peer Contagion

Platforms like TikTok, Reddit, Discord, and Tumblr host countless trans-identifying influencers who coach youth on:

How to hide dysphoria from parents
What language to use in therapy to get approved for hormones
How to self-diagnose using checklists
How to interpret anxiety or sadness as signs of being trans

This is not organic discovery—it is social engineering. Vulnerable teens, often looking for meaning or belonging, are pulled into ideological rabbit holes with serious consequences.

Autism and Neurodivergence

Studies show that up to 40% of gender-dysphoric youth are on the autism spectrum, far above the rate in the general population.

Autistic teens often:

Struggle with body awareness
Experience heightened discomfort with puberty
Fixate intensely on identity questions
Prefer rigid categories of self-understanding

Rather than helping these teens work through their difficulties, the system often funnels them into transition pathways—despite their neurodivergence making true informed consent difficult or impossible.

Sexual Abuse and Trauma

A high percentage of detransitioners report past sexual abuse as a significant factor in their dysphoria. For some, rejecting their female bodies felt like a way to protect themselves from future harm. Others used transition as an escape from painful memories.

The current gender-affirming model almost never explores this. In fact, trauma-informed therapy is often skipped entirely in favor of fast-tracking medical intervention.

Body Image and Cultural Messages

Girls today are bombarded with hyper-sexualized beauty standards while boys are shamed for “toxic masculinity.” It’s no wonder so many feel alienated from their bodies.

Rather than helping youth embrace their developing selves, gender ideology offers a tempting alternative: “You’re uncomfortable? Maybe you’re really the other gender.” For some, this provides temporary relief. But it ultimately deepens confusion.

Dysphoria Is a Symptom, Not a Root

The rise in transgender identity is not a sign of improved awareness. It is a symptom of deeper cultural and psychological unrest. When clinicians treat symptoms instead of causes, they fail their patients.

Children need exploration, not affirmation. They need compassion, not ideology. And they need time, not hormones.

The Christian Response—True Identity, God’s Design, and the Need for Spiritual Rebirth

Behind the medical procedures, the flawed studies, the cultural pressure, and the emotional manipulation lies a deeper issue—a theological one. The modern transgender movement is not merely a confusion of biology; it is a spiritual rebellion against created order, against the body as God made it, and ultimately against God Himself.

At its heart, gender ideology is not about compassion—it is about autonomy. It is about rejecting external authority, especially the authority of the Creator, in favor of self-identification as the highest truth. But the biblical worldview offers something far better: not the right to recreate ourselves, but the invitation to be re-created by God through Christ.

We Are Not Our Own

From the first chapter of Scripture, the human body is presented not as a blank canvas, but as an intentional, divine masterpiece:

“So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. And God blessed them. And God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth…’” (Genesis 1:27–28)

To be male or female is not incidental—it is essential. It is part of how we image God. It is part of our calling in the world. Our bodies are not mistakes—they are revelations of God’s will and design.

The transgender movement rejects this. It says, “My body means nothing. My feelings are ultimate.” This is not just psychological confusion—it is a quest for sovereignty, an attempt to dethrone the Creator in favor of the self.

The Lie of Radical Autonomy

In Scripture, sin is often described as man’s refusal to submit to God’s rule. At the root of Eve’s temptation in the garden was the promise: “You will be like God” (Genesis 3:5). That temptation has echoed ever since.

Today, it sounds like this:

“You are whoever you say you are.”
“Your body doesn’t define you.”
“No one—especially not God—can tell you what you are.”

But this is not freedom. It is slavery to the self. It promises liberation, but delivers loneliness, sterility, mutilation, and despair.

Real freedom is found in submission—not to the flesh, but to the Lordship of Christ.

The True Transition: Regeneration

The Bible does speak of transition—not from one sex to another, but from death to life. From sin to righteousness. From rebellion to reconciliation.

“Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.” (2 Corinthians 5:17)

This is what every heart truly longs for—not cross-sex hormones or surgery, but spiritual rebirth. We don’t need to change our bodies to match our desires. We need our desires to be changed to match God’s will.

This is the true transformation:

From lies to truth.
From chaos to order.
From autonomy to obedience.
From despair to joy.

And it comes not through affirmation, but through repentance and faith in the One who made us and redeems us.

The Church’s Role

The Church must stand firmly in truth—while extending open arms to the broken. We cannot lie and call it love. But we also cannot shun those ensnared by falsehood. We must be communities of:

Truth without compromise
Grace without cowardice
Compassion without capitulation

There is hope for the gender-confused. But it does not come through surgery. It comes through the gospel.

The Only Identity That Saves

We are not defined by feelings, surgeries, or self-perceptions. We are defined by our Creator, who made us male and female, and who calls us into fellowship with Him through Christ.

The deepest identity crisis is not about gender—it’s about sin. And the only solution is not affirmation—but salvation.

Conclusion — Why the Suicide Narrative Must Be Rejected, and What We Owe Our Children

The claim that children with gender dysphoria will commit suicide if they are not “affirmed” in their chosen identity has been the single most emotionally powerful argument in support of pediatric transition. But we have seen that this claim—so often repeated in media, medicine, and law—is not grounded in sound science, moral reasoning, or biblical truth.

It is a narrative built on:

Flawed, biased, and manipulated studies
A deliberate confusion of correlation with causation
A denial of the biological reality of sex
A set of medical interventions that do not change sex, but simulate it
A false dichotomy between affirmation and death
The silencing of dissenting voices, especially from detransitioners
A refusal to address the root causes of psychological distress
A culture that worships autonomy and weaponizes empathy

This suicide narrative has been used to silence parents, intimidate doctors, rewrite school policies, and erode parental rights. It has justified irreversible surgeries, sterilizing hormones, and emotional manipulation—all under the guise of “care.” But it is not care. It is coercion cloaked in compassion.

The Truth Is Clear

Children are not being saved by transition—they are being sacrificed to an ideology.
Most children (about 70%) with gender dysphoria will naturally outgrow it by adulthood if allowed to pass through puberty without interference.
Transitioning does not eliminate suicide risk; in many cases, it deepens it.
The long-term effects of “gender-affirming care” include sterility, sexual dysfunction, chronic pain, loss of sensation, and profound regret.
The movement suppresses real stories of regret and detransition, preferring a sanitized fiction to inconvenient truth.
The deep causes of dysphoria—trauma, abuse, social contagion, body shame—are being ignored in favor of affirmation-as-policy.

What We Owe Our Children

We owe them truth, not ideology.
We owe them time, not fast-tracked surgery.
We owe them loving boundaries, not hormonal alteration.
We owe them therapy, not amputation.
We owe them a vision of wholeness, rooted in their God-given identity—not a false promise of self-made salvation.

And above all, we owe them the gospel.

A Final Word: From Lies to Life

The real “transition” that every human being needs is not from one gender to another. It is the transition from sin to grace, from self-rule to God’s rule, from broken identity to Christ’s identity.

This is the hope the church must hold out:

“But to all who did receive Him, who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God.” (John 1:12)

We are not our own. All humans belong to Christ. He owns all of creation.

Believers were bought with a price. And in Christ, we find not affirmation of our fallen desires, but redemption, transformation, and eternal joy.

To rescue potential children of God from lies is not hatred. It is love.
To say “no” to the flesh and “yes” to truth is not cruelty. It is mercy.

Let us reject the suicide myth, expose the harm of false compassion, and walk down the only path that leads to life: the truth, the body, and the gospel.

S.D.G.,

Robert Sparkman

MMXXV

christiannewsjunkie@gmail.com

RELATED CONTENT

Concerning the Related Content section, I encourage everyone to evaluate the content carefully.

If I have listed the content, I think it is worthwhile viewing to educate yourself on the topic, but it may contain coarse language or some opinions I don’t agree with.

Realize that I sometimes use phrases like “trans man”, “trans woman”, “transgender” , “transition” or similar language for ease of communication. Obviously, as a conservative Christian, I don’t believe anyone has ever become the opposite sex. Unfortunately, we are forced to adopt the language of the left to discuss some topics without engaging in lengthy qualifying statements that make conversations awkward.

Feel free to offer your comments below. Respectful comments without expletives and personal attacks will be posted and I will respond to them.

Comments are closed after sixty days due to spamming issues from internet bots. You can always send me an email at christiannewsjunkie@gmail.com if you want to comment on something afterwards, though.

I will continue to add videos and other items to the Related Content section as opportunities present themselves.