Evidence regarding cosmetic and medically unnecessary surgery on infants

The Journal of Pediatric Urology has recently published several articles from the Annecy (France) Working Party on DSD. We question several of the presented findings and recommendations. In two key articles summarizing their review, the authors concluded that identified studies are not representative and suffer from methodological weaknesses, such that they “lack the necessary detail to base further recommendations”. In a third article, the Working Party reported that the science supporting early surgery is “scanty”, and that “no studies” support the belief that gender variant children require early genital surgery. Nevertheless, the Working Party warned that without long-term research, “if no effort is made, we will be left, in the next generation, to continue making the same judgment, based on ‘experience’ and ‘expert opinion’”. None of the studies cited in the articles support such assertions as we read them. We maintain that reviewed evidence suggests a moratorium on early surgical intervention is imperative for children with differences in sex development, and that the best ethical and scientific considerations require that gender surgery should be delayed until the child can consent. We further present evidence that UN and case law presently under way in the USA support such a moratorium.