A Critique of the Cass Review and the Implications of "Gender Restrictive Care"
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 10, 2026

Using Visual and Narrative Methods to Achieve Fair Process in Clinical Care
Published on: February 16, 2011
1Diverse Sexualities Research and Education Institute, 4304-18th Street, #14752, San Francisco, CA, 94114, USA. docx2@ix.netcom.com.
Abstract:
A University of York review of research supporting gender affirming care (GAC) of gender dysphoric children and adolescents suggested that the research was of such poor quality that it could endanger the health of these patients. Cass used that finding to argue for restrictions on access to GAC. Without commenting on the University of York's review or the quality of research underlying GAC, I analyze Cass' recommendations for the quality of the research supporting restrictions on GAC and whether those restrictions endanger the health of children and adolescents. The current Commentary will show that Cass' recommendations are not supported by research and it is her recommendations that may present a danger to the health of gender dysphoric children and adolescents. Further analysis will show that such restrictions are ethically problematic and could worsen both the short- and long-term outcomes for gender dysphoric children, adolescents, and adults.
Related Concept Videos
Criticisms of the Evolutionary Perspective
Evolutionary psychology provides one explanation for these findings, suggesting...
Obedience
Stereotype Content Model
Methods of Documentation VI: Case Management Model
For example, a patient with a chronic...
Socioemotional Experience and Gender Development
Restorative Care

