There's plenty wrong w/ this article, including the claim that "watchful waiting” (i.e. supporting a child yet not endorsing opposite-sex identity) has been "deemed outdated by American Academy of Pediatrics."
Did the @AmerAcadPeds say that? Yes and no.
washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/10…
Did the @AmerAcadPeds say that? Yes and no.
washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/10…
2. Shortly after @AmerAcadPeds released its new guidelines last year, @JamesCantorPhD wrote a detailed critique, which exposed an inconvenient truth: While the people who wrote the guidelines DID claim watchful waiting was outdated, the very research evidence they cited...
3. ....Actually supports watchful waiting as the best, evidence-based approach: @JamesCantorPhD : "AAP told neither the truth nor the whole truth, committing sins both of commission & of omission, asserting claims easily falsified by anyone caring to do any fact-checking at all."
4. "It was not clear on what basis AAP could say watchful waiting withholds support—AAP cited no support for its claim. The people in such programs often receive substantial support during this period." @JamesCantorPhD
There's much more. Read it here:
sexologytoday.org/2018/10/americ…
There's much more. Read it here:
sexologytoday.org/2018/10/americ…
