gender reassignment surgery questions

• BOOK CONSULTATION
• The Surgical Journey
• Where do I start?
• Am I eligible for surgery?
• Preparing for Surgery
• General Recovery Info
• Risks & Safety
• Top Surgery
• Top Surgery Techniques
• Techniques Beyond the Binary
• Top Surgery Videos
• Breast Augmentation
• Facial Surgery
• Techniques & Incisions
• Body Contouring
• Body Feminization
• Body Masculinization
• Non-Binary Body Contouring
• Bottom Surgery
• “Feminizing” Techniques & Recovery
• “Masculinizing” Techniques & Recovery
• Our Services
• Currently Offered
• Outside Services
• Transition 101
• Introduction to Transitioning
• Support Services: Helpful Links
• Transitioning Later In Life
• Legal Name & Gender Change
• Transmasculine & Pregnancy
• Transgender Healthcare
• Mental Health
• Hormone Therapy

Trans Youth & Adolescents

• Mental Health Support
• Common Questions About Your Child’s Transition
• For Caregivers
• Explaining Your Child’s Identity
• Talking With Schools About Your Child
• Puberty Blockers
• Challenging Topics
• Detransition
• Adolescents
• Gatekeeping vs Empowerment
• Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria
• Double Incision
• Periareolar
• Inverted T / Aggressive Breast Reduction
• Gynecomastia
• Facial Feminization
• Facial Masculinization
• Labiaplasty
• Vaginoplasty
• Fees & Financing
• Insurance Approval
• Insurance Denial
• Insurance Accepted
• Referral Letters
• Advocacy Team
• Make a Payment Now
• Our Philosophy
• Meet Our Team
• Office & Facilities
• Testimonials
• Get in Touch
• For Current Patients
• For Providers

Consultation request

• Interpretation Services
• Privacy Policy

slide toggle Demystifying and Navigating Your Options: Gender Reassignment Surgery

Do you have any questions? Check our F.A.Q. section or contact us directly!

Demystifying and Navigating Your Options: Gender Reassignment Surgery

Medically reviewed by Paul Gonzales on March 25, 2024.

Previously, the term gender reassignment surgery (GRS) referred to genital reconstruction bottom surgeries like vaginoplasty, vulvoplasty, phalloplasty, or metoidioplasty. Individuals who look up this term on a search engine do so looking for information on gender-affirming procedures generally for transgender, non-binary and gender non-conforming people. This detailed guide breaks down everything you need to know about these procedures, their costs, their eligibility requirements, the potential benefits and risks and more. If you are interested in undergoing any gender-affirming or “gender reassignment” surgery, you can schedule a free, virtual consultation with one of our surgeons.

At the Gender Confirmation Center (GCC), we generally avoid using terminology like GRS in a clinical setting out of the recognition that for the vast majority of our patients, surgeries do not “reassign” anyone’s gender. Rather, surgery can help individuals experience greater alignment with their bodies and greater gender euphoria as a result.

Types of Gender “Reassignment” Surgeries: “Female to Male (FTM)”

Female to Male (FTM) is outdated terminology that the GCC does not use in our clinical practice. This abbreviation leaves out the experiences of many trans masculine and non-binary patients who do not identify with being labeled as a “woman becoming a man.” 

In the past, “FTM gender confirmation surgery” was used to describe surgical procedures that reverse the effects of an initial estrogenic puberty or procedures that reconstruct a patient’s genitals. We still receive various inquiries about which “FTM” procedures we offer, so below you can find a list of surgeries that have typically been placed under this label. 

Please note that patients can seek out any of these procedures regardless of their gender identity. The goal of our practice is not to make our patients “into men,” but to help them feel more comfortable, affirmed, and/or aligned with their bodies.

Chest Surgery or Top Surgery

“FTM” top surgery is an antiquated term that refers to gender-affirming chest reconstruction and/or breast reduction. Practices who use this acronym sometimes have limited experience meeting the unique needs of non-binary patients seeking top surgery . Patients who would like to remove their chest tissue to have a flatter chest can choose from a variety of incision options to reach their desired results around chest tightness, contour and/or scar shape. 

Not all patients who pursue top surgery want flat chests. Whether you would like to opt for a breast reduction or a chest reconstruction with some volume left behind, the button buttonhole incision is the most commonly pursued type.

Top surgery patients who would like to maintain an erotic or a high level of sensation in their nipples can ask their surgeon about nerve-preservation techniques . Inversely, many patients who get top surgery choose to have their nipples removed .

Genital Reconstruction or Bottom Surgery

While the following bottom surgery procedures are traditionally put under the “FTM” category, we recognize that not all patients who pursue these procedures identify as men nor are they looking to “masculinize” their genitals.

Two procedures can be used to reconstruct a penis or “neophallus”: metoidioplasty and phalloplasty. Metoidioplasty or “meta” releases the ligaments around the erectile tissue (called a clitoris or penis) to extend it to about 2-4 inches in length. A phalloplasty uses a donor flap (usually from the forearm or thigh) to construct a penis of 4 inches in length or more (depending on availability of tissue). Both procedures can be specialized to allow a patient to maintain erotic sensation in their genitals (nerve preservation) and/or urinate standing up (urethroplasty).

Associated procedures include the removal of the uterus (hysterectomy), the removal of the vaginal canal (vaginectomy), the construction of a scrotum (scrotoplasty), the insertion of penile/testicular implants, and more.

Body Masculinization Surgery (BMS)

Body Masculinization Surgery (BMS) refers to a series of body contouring procedures. Most often, BMS involves liposuction of one or more of the following areas: abdomen, flanks, hips, thighs, buttocks, or arms. BMS can also involve removing unwanted, excess skin from fat loss or liposuction. Occasionally, some patients may opt for silicone pectoral implants alongside or after their top surgery results.

Facial Masculinization Surgery (FMS)

Facial Masculinization Surgery (FMS) refers to a series of procedures that patients can choose from to give their face a more angular, conventionally masculine appearance. In the bottom third of the face, the chin, jaw, or laryngeal prominence (aka Adam’s apple) can be augmented or increased in size. In the middle third of the face, the appearance of the nose and/or cheeks can be altered. In the top third of the face, the hairline’s position can be changed and the forehead can be augmented.

Types of Gender “Reassignment” Surgeries: “Male to Female (MTF)”

Male to Female (MTF) is outdated terminology that we do not use in our clinical practice. This abbreviation leaves out the experiences of many trans feminine and non-binary patients who do not identify with being labeled as a “man becoming a woman.”

In the past, “MTF gender confirmation surgery” was used to describe surgical procedures that reverse the effects of an initial androgenic (testosterone-dominant) puberty and/or reconstruct a patient’s genitals. As a practice, we still get asked by prospective patients about the “MTF” procedures we offer, which is why we have compiled a guide of surgeries that have typically been placed under this category.

Please note that patients can seek out any of these procedures regardless of their gender identity. The goal of our practice is not to make our patients turn “into women,” but to help them feel greater gender congruence with their bodies.

Breast Augmentation or “MTF” Top Surgery

Typically, for trans feminine and non-binary patients who prefer to have more volume on their chest, breast augmentation with saline or silicone implants allows for greater success in their desired outcomes. Fat grafting procedures limit the amount of volume transferred to the chest based on available body fat that can be safely removed.

Genital Reconstruction or Bottom Surgeries

The most common surgeries that are placed under this category are vaginoplasty and vulvoplasty (also called zero-depth vaginoplasty) procedures. The most common vaginoplasty uses a penile-inversion technique to reconstruct a vaginal canal. However, a penile-preserving vaginoplasty is also another option for patients. Lifelong dilation after this procedure is necessary to maintain the depth of the canal so that it can be used for penetrative sex. Labiaplasty revisions are sometimes sought out by patients wishing to adjust the size, shape and symmetry of their labia and/or clitoral hood.

Before a vaginoplasty, patients may opt to remove the testicles ( orchiectomy ). Patients of varying gender identities undergo orchiectomies for many reasons, such as chronic pain or to simplify their hormone therapy.  For patients who plan to have a vaginoplasty in the future, it’s best to consider the timing of an orchiectomy procedure since scrotal tissue can be used to construct the labia.

Facial Feminization Surgery (FFS)

FFS refers to a series of procedures that a patient can choose from to give their face a softer, more conventionally feminine appearance. In the bottom third of the face, the laryngeal prominence (or Adam’s apple), chin, or jaw can be reduced in size. In the middle third of the face, the appearance of the nose and/or cheeks can be altered. In the top third of the face, the hairline’s position can be changed and the forehead can be reduced.

Body Feminization Surgery (BFS)

BFS encompasses a series of body contouring procedures. Most often, BFS involves removal of fat through liposuction of one or more of the following areas: the thighs, the abdomen/waist, or the arms. The fat removed from these areas of the body can be transferred to the buttocks and/or hip areas and is commonly referred to as a Brazilian butt lift (BBL). BFS can also involve removing unwanted excess skin from fat loss or liposuction, a procedure often referred to as a tummy tuck or abdominoplasty.

Evaluating Candidacy for Gender Affirmation Surgery

Strict guidelines evaluate patient readiness for life-altering GRS procedures.

Informed consent

The GCC follows an informed consent model for surgery because it gives patients autonomy over their health. Under this model, adults can consent to procedures if they have received adequate education about their risks, advantages, and potential effects on their health given their unique medical history. Historically, TGD people have had a difficult time accessing quality gender-affirming health care in part because of gatekeeping and discrimination based on requirements set by insurance companies. For example, letters from medical and mental health providers are a part of these requirements. We recognize that therapists and other healthcare providers are invaluable sources of support for patients undergoing a medical gender transition. 

Health factors

We recommend our patients get medical clearance from their primary care provider (PCP) before surgery. If you have medical conditions that may affect your surgery, we can work with your PCP or specialist to ensure a safe recovery. Patients should inform their surgeons of any cardiovascular or respiratory issues, history of anorexia, diabetes, or use of immunosuppressant medications.

Different surgeons may consider a patient’s Body Mass Index (BMI) as part of their eligibility for surgery. You can read more about our requirements and recommendations around BMI here .

We require all our patients to stop smoking or consuming any form of nicotine for at least 3 weeks before and 3 weeks after surgery, as this can lead to significant problems with delayed wound healing. Please do not drink alcohol for at least 1 week before and 1 week after surgery or until prescription pain medications are discontinued.

Insurance requirements

Patients who wish to have their insurance cover their gender affirming surgery need to fulfill certain requirements. You will need to get a letter of support from a mental health professional to confirm that the procedure is medically necessary. If the surgeon is outside of your insurance’s in-network providers, you will need to get a referral letter from your primary care provider (PCP). Additionally, some insurance companies may require that a patient undergo gender-affirming hormone therapy to cover surgery.

Hormone Therapy Considerations

At GCC, we do not require our patients to undergo hormone therapy to access medically necessary, gender-affirming surgeries. That said, undergoing hormones before surgery can help some patients improve the appearance of post-op results.

• Facial surgery: It may take up to 1.5 years on hormone therapy before soft tissue changes can appear on the face so patients should consider waiting to undergo facial surgery until these changes have settled.
• Bottom surgery: Maximal bottom growth may take up to 2 years for patients on a standard dose of testosterone so patients should consider undergoing metoidioplasty until maximal growth is achieved for optimal outcomes.
• Breast augmentation: Maximal breast growth may take up to 1.5 to 2 years for patients on a standard dose of estrogen so patients should consider undergoing breast augmentation until maximal growth is achieved.
• Body contouring: It may take up to 1.5 years on hormone therapy before the fat redistribution process settles so patients should consider waiting until then before undergoing liposuction or fat grafting procedures.

When it comes to age and eligibility for surgery, we are typically asked about 2 populations: adolescents and seniors. The World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) has outlined in their Standards of Care (SOC), Version 8 , the need for the involvement of caregivers/parents and mental health professionals in the informed consent process for adolescents. If these protocols are followed, the only type of gender-affirming surgery that an adolescent can undergo is top surgery.

As long they are in good health and cleared for surgery, senior patients are eligible for surgery regardless of their age and can achieve good aesthetic outcomes. It’s important to consider what accommodations are necessary to support post-op recovery. You can read more about our eligibility standards here .

Weighing GRS Benefits Against Complications

The decision to undergo “gender reassignment surgery” is a highly personal one. Understanding both the pros and cons provides critical insight.

How GRS Can Transform Lives

The WPATH’s SOC 8 reviews the medical research literature around the long-term effects of gender-affirming surgery on trans and non-binary patients. Gender-affirming procedures report greater satisfaction and lower regret rates compared to similar cosmetic and reconstructive procedures performed in cisgender patients.

• Improved mental health
• Improved body-image, etc.
• Enhanced quality of life

Rates of anxiety, depression, and suicide risk all tend to decrease substantially following surgery for those who need it, which is why these procedures are considered medically necessary for many patients.

Risk Factors and Long-Term Effects

All surgeries carry risks of complications. Generally speaking, patients who optimize their health prior to surgery (e.g., do not smoke tobacco) and manage any pre-existing medical conditions can greatly reduce their risk for complications. Undergoing surgery with a board-certified surgeon who has hospital access privileges can help ensure the integrity of your surgical process. If you have specific questions about surgical complications and how to prevent them, you can consult our content library on this question.

Navigating Emotions

Surgery not only takes a physical, but also an emotional toll on the body. Experiencing pain, inflammation, discomfort and limitations on physical activity occasionally mat result in temporary postoperative depression. Likewise, having to wait weeks or months to have a sense of what your final results from surgery will look like can give some patients temporary feelings of regret during recovery. For this reason, we highly encourage patients to tap into their support networks of friends, (chosen) family and/or mental health professionals during this time. To learn more about the emotional recovery process, click here .

Conclusion: Is Gender Reassignment Surgery the Right Choice?

While gender-affirming surgery has been proven to be positively life-changing for many trans and non-binary individuals. Whether you seek surgery or not, we remain dedicated to your health, empowerment, and right to be your authentic self.

More Articles

Understanding the cost of double incision top surgery: a comprehensive guide, gatekeeping vs. empowerment: accessing gender affirming care, treating gender dysphoria in adolescents, sign up for instructions to get a virtual consultation.

The virtual consultation will be billed to your insurance company. We will accept the insurance reimbursement as payment in full.

Dr. Scott Mosser Suite 1010, 450 Sutter St San Francisco, CA 94108 Phone: (415) 780-1515 Fax: ( 628) 867-6510

Gender Journey Resources

• Trans Youth & Adolescents

Before & After

• Top surgery
• Virtual Consultations

Board Certification & Memberships

• Terms of Use

Copyright © 2023 Gender Confirmation Center. All Rights Reserved.

View by Category

• Explore Henryford.com

Sign Up for Newsletter

Health and wellness tips delivered right to your inbox

All fields are required

Considering Gender-Affirming Surgery? Here’s What To Know

For those who identify as transgender , the journey of transitioning is deeply personal—and varied. Transitioning could mean coming out to your friends and family. It could mean legally changing your gender identity. It could mean transitioning socially, or dressing in a way that society views as masculine or feminine. It could also mean transitioning medically, or using hormones and gender-affirming surgery to help you feel more confident in your skin. 

Whatever you decide, there is no right or wrong way to transition—and your path may or may not involve surgery, depending upon what you feel comfortable with. For most people who get gender-affirming surgery, it is usually the last step in their transition.

Here, common questions people ask before deciding upon surgery.

1. How should you prepare for gender-affirming surgery?

 It’s generally recommended to be on hormone therapy for at least a year before getting surgery. This allows you to see what features can be changed with hormones alone.

“If you’re transitioning from male to female, for example, estrogen replacement therapy could give you feminine soft-tissue features,” says Laura Garcia-Rodriguez, M.D. , a facial plastic surgeon who specializes in facial feminization surgery at Henry Ford Health. “Your cheeks could get fuller, your skin texture can change, you can have less body hair. Sometimes male pattern baldness can improve as well.”

Some insurance companies cover gender-affirming surgery, but they also require you be on hormones for a year beforehand, says Dr. Garcia-Rodriguez. They also require a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, or an intense feeling that your biological sex and gender identity  are mismatched. A behavioral health specialist can give you this diagnosis.

It’s also important to note that most surgeons require you to be at least 18 years old to undergo surgery. When you’re younger than that, your body is still growing and your features may change. 

2. Could hormone therapy negate the need for gender-affirming surgery altogether?

The younger you start hormone therapy, the greater impact it can have. “If you’re a young transgender person and you’re on hormones, some of those secondary male or female characteristics won’t develop,” says Dr. Garcia-Rodriguez. “Some males take up to their early 20s to complete facial growth—their jawline and forehead get bigger, for example—but if you’re on hormones before that age, you likely won’t complete that transition.

“If you look up Jazz Jennings—she is a trans woman who started puberty blockers very early in life—you can see that she really has no male features whatsoever. There are few lucky people who have transitioned just socially and with hormone management. That said, if you start hormone therapy as an adult, you may decide you also want surgery.”

3. What types of gender-affirming operations are there?

Gender-affirming surgeries can be split into a few overarching categories: top surgeries and bottom surgeries, feminization and masculinization.

If you are transitioning from male to female, surgeries include:

• Facial feminization surgery , such as forehead and browbone reduction, jaw and neck feminization, rhinoplasty and Adam’s apple reduction. “About 75% of my patients come to me with a plan. Most commonly they want their forehead, nose, jaw and Adam’s apple done,” says Dr. Garcia-Rodriguez. “Biological males have foreheads, browbones and jawlines that are more pronounced, and their noses tend to droop more than women. So lifting the nose a little and having these surgeries can really give you a more feminine appearance.”
• Breast augmentation. “There are a variety of approaches we can take so that transgender females can have the shape and volume they desire, with realistic expectations,” says Donna Tepper, M.D. , a plastic surgeon who specializes in gender-affirming top surgery at Henry Ford Health. “If someone has fat stores, sometimes I can use fat instead of implants, so you don’t have the risks that come with implants—such as worrying about longevity.”
• Vaginoplasty , a procedure that creates a vagina and vaginal canal from existing genital tissue. Alternatively, you could get a vulvoplasty, which creates a vagina but not a vaginal canal. “Before getting either of these procedures, it’s important to talk to your doctor about fertility preservation, since the testicles will be removed,” says Dr. Tepper. “You’ll also have physical therapy before surgery—pelvic floor exercises that will guide you to a successful outcome.”

If you are transitioning from female to male, surgeries include:  

• Facial masculinization surgeries , such as forehead lengthening, chin and jaw contouring, Adam’s apple surgery and rhinoplasty.
• Mastectomy , which removes breast tissue. “We can create an incision that follows the contour of someone’s chest muscles so that as they work out or grow hair, those incisions can be more camouflaged,” says Dr. Tepper. “The mastectomies we perform for transgender men are not the same as the mastectomies we perform for people who have breast cancer. A transgender man who has received a mastectomy still requires breast cancer surveillance. This can be a discussion before surgery, so if you are at high risk for breast cancer, the surgery can be geared toward cancer prevention.”
• Metoidioplasty , a lower-body surgery where surgeons create a penis from genital tissue. Doctors usually recommend being on testosterone for at least two years before getting a metoidioplasty, as testosterone can improve clitoris growth and aid in the creation of a neophallus, or new penis.

4. How should you prepare for surgery?

Your doctor will give you specific instructions, but Dr. Tepper says hair removal is necessary prior to bottom surgeries, which can take up to a year to fully complete.  

It’s also important not to vape or smoke at least a month before surgery, as it impairs wound healing and alters pain management after surgery, she adds. You should also stay away from second-hand smoke and refrain from smoking for at least six weeks until after you’re fully recovered. (Although that’s a good time to give up smoking altogether.) 

5. What is the recovery time for gender-affirming surgeries?

Recovery is highly dependent upon the surgery. “For Adam’s apple surgery, it takes about 40 minutes to an hour. If it's your only surgery, you can be out and about in a day and a half,” says Dr. Garcia-Rodriguez. “For forehead surgery, it can be about three or four weeks of recovery; you may have eyelid swelling for a week after surgery. For jaw surgery, I compare it to getting six wisdom teeth removed—you can get really puffy and it may take six to 12 weeks for the swelling to go completely down.”

For mastectomies, patients typically wear a foam binder for about seven to 10 days, says Dr. Tepper. You can be back to work in about two or three weeks. With a breast augmentation, you can go back to work within a week.

Bottom surgeries like vaginoplasties are more involved—they require about five days in the hospital and typically six weeks off work, says Dr. Tepper.   

6. In your experience, how do people feel after receiving gender-affirming surgery?

“I have so many patients ghost me after surgery because they’re so happy. I saw a patient a few months ago for suture and staple removal, and she’s been so happy that I haven’t gotten her in for post-op pictures,” says Dr. Garcia-Rodriguez. “It’s amazing to see how they feel afterward. The inside now matches the outside.”

Adds Dr. Tepper: “The majority of people who come to me for a surgery consultation know they want this. And afterward, they express to me how pleased they are that they moved forward with it. Whatever we can do to help someone feel more comfortable in their skin—that’s the goal.”

Learn more about our transgender health services and resources for our LGTBQ+ community .

Laura Garcia-Rodriguez, M.D. , is a facial plastic surgeon who specializes in facial feminization surgery at Henry Ford Health. She sees patients at Henry Ford Medical Center—Fairlane and Henry Ford West Bloomfield Hospital.

Donna Tepper, M.D. , is a plastic surgeon who specializes in gender-affirming top surgery at Henry Ford Health. She sees patients at Henry Ford Hospital, Henry Ford Medical Center—Cottage, Henry Ford Medical Center—Fairlane and Henry Ford Wyandotte Hospital. 

Cookie Consent

We use cookies to improve your web experience. By using this site, you agree to our  Terms of Use . Read our  Internet Privacy Statement  to learn what information we collect and how we use it.

• Type 2 Diabetes
• Heart Disease
• Digestive Health
• Multiple Sclerosis
• COVID-19 Vaccines
• Occupational Therapy
• Healthy Aging
• Health Insurance
• Public Health
• Patient Rights
• Caregivers & Loved Ones
• End of Life Concerns
• Health News
• Thyroid Test Analyzer
• Doctor Discussion Guides
• Hemoglobin A1c Test Analyzer
• Lipid Test Analyzer
• Complete Blood Count (CBC) Analyzer
• What to Buy
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Medical Expert Board

Gender Confirmation Surgery (GCS)

What is Gender Confirmation Surgery?

• Transfeminine Tr

Transmasculine Transition

• Traveling Abroad

Choosing a Surgeon

Gender confirmation surgery (GCS), known clinically as genitoplasty, are procedures that surgically confirm a person's gender by altering the genitalia and other physical features to align with their desired physical characteristics. Gender confirmation surgeries are also called gender affirmation procedures. These are both respectful terms.

Gender dysphoria , an experience of misalignment between gender and sex, is becoming more widely diagnosed.  People diagnosed with gender dysphoria are often referred to as "transgender," though one does not necessarily need to experience gender dysphoria to be a member of the transgender community. It is important to note there is controversy around the gender dysphoria diagnosis. Many disapprove of it, noting that the diagnosis suggests that being transgender is an illness.

Ellen Lindner / Verywell

Transfeminine Transition

Transfeminine is a term inclusive of trans women and non-binary trans people assigned male at birth.

Gender confirmation procedures that a transfeminine person may undergo include:

• Penectomy is the surgical removal of external male genitalia.
• Orchiectomy is the surgical removal of the testes.
• Vaginoplasty is the surgical creation of a vagina.
• Feminizing genitoplasty creates internal female genitalia.
• Breast implants create breasts.
• Gluteoplasty increases buttock volume.
• Chondrolaryngoplasty is a procedure on the throat that can minimize the appearance of Adam's apple .

Feminizing hormones are commonly used for at least 12 months prior to breast augmentation to maximize breast growth and achieve a better surgical outcome. They are also often used for approximately 12 months prior to feminizing genital surgeries.

Facial feminization surgery (FFS) is often done to soften the lines of the face. FFS can include softening the brow line, rhinoplasty (nose job), smoothing the jaw and forehead, and altering the cheekbones. Each person is unique and the procedures that are done are based on the individual's need and budget,

Transmasculine is a term inclusive of trans men and non-binary trans people assigned female at birth.

Gender confirmation procedures that a transmasculine person may undergo include:

• Masculinizing genitoplasty is the surgical creation of external genitalia. This procedure uses the tissue of the labia to create a penis.
• Phalloplasty is the surgical construction of a penis using a skin graft from the forearm, thigh, or upper back.
• Metoidioplasty is the creation of a penis from the hormonally enlarged clitoris.
• Scrotoplasty is the creation of a scrotum.

Procedures that change the genitalia are performed with other procedures, which may be extensive.

The change to a masculine appearance may also include hormone therapy with testosterone, a mastectomy (surgical removal of the breasts), hysterectomy (surgical removal of the uterus), and perhaps additional cosmetic procedures intended to masculinize the appearance.

Paying For Gender Confirmation Surgery

Medicare and some health insurance providers in the United States may cover a portion of the cost of gender confirmation surgery.

It is unlawful to discriminate or withhold healthcare based on sex or gender. However, many plans do have exclusions.

For most transgender individuals, the burden of financing the procedure(s) is the main difficulty in obtaining treatment. The cost of transitioning can often exceed $100,000 in the United States, depending upon the procedures needed.

A typical genitoplasty alone averages about $18,000. Rhinoplasty, or a nose job, averaged $5,409 in 2019.  

Traveling Abroad for GCS

Some patients seek gender confirmation surgery overseas, as the procedures can be less expensive in some other countries. It is important to remember that traveling to a foreign country for surgery, also known as surgery tourism, can be very risky.

Regardless of where the surgery will be performed, it is essential that your surgeon is skilled in the procedure being performed and that your surgery will be performed in a reputable facility that offers high-quality care.

When choosing a surgeon , it is important to do your research, whether the surgery is performed in the U.S. or elsewhere. Talk to people who have already had the procedure and ask about their experience and their surgeon.

Before and after photos don't tell the whole story, and can easily be altered, so consider asking for a patient reference with whom you can speak.

It is important to remember that surgeons have specialties and to stick with your surgeon's specialty. For example, you may choose to have one surgeon perform a genitoplasty, but another to perform facial surgeries. This may result in more expenses, but it can result in a better outcome.

A Word From Verywell

Gender confirmation surgery is very complex, and the procedures that one person needs to achieve their desired result can be very different from what another person wants.

Each individual's goals for their appearance will be different. For example, one individual may feel strongly that breast implants are essential to having a desirable and feminine appearance, while a different person may not feel that breast size is a concern. A personalized approach is essential to satisfaction because personal appearance is so highly individualized.

Davy Z, Toze M. What is gender dysphoria? A critical systematic narrative review . Transgend Health . 2018;3(1):159-169. doi:10.1089/trgh.2018.0014

Morrison SD, Vyas KS, Motakef S, et al. Facial Feminization: Systematic Review of the Literature . Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;137(6):1759-70. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000002171

Hadj-moussa M, Agarwal S, Ohl DA, Kuzon WM. Masculinizing Genital Gender Confirmation Surgery . Sex Med Rev . 2019;7(1):141-155. doi:10.1016/j.sxmr.2018.06.004

Dowshen NL, Christensen J, Gruschow SM. Health Insurance Coverage of Recommended Gender-Affirming Health Care Services for Transgender Youth: Shopping Online for Coverage Information . Transgend Health . 2019;4(1):131-135. doi:10.1089/trgh.2018.0055

American Society of Plastic Surgeons. Rhinoplasty nose surgery .

Rights Group: More U.S. Companies Covering Cost of Gender Reassignment Surgery. CNS News. http://cnsnews.com/news/article/rights-group-more-us-companies-covering-cost-gender-reassignment-surgery

The Sex Change Capital of the US. CBS News. http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-3445_162-4423154.html

By Jennifer Whitlock, RN, MSN, FN Jennifer Whitlock, RN, MSN, FNP-C, is a board-certified family nurse practitioner. She has experience in primary care and hospital medicine.

Taking Care of Ourselves & Each Other

Health & Well-Being

Gender Affirming Surgery Process and Information

Main navigation.

Many folx choose to pursue gender confirming surgery as a part of their gender journey. One does not have to identify along the gender binary (e.g. trans woman, trans man) or have taken hormones in order to pursue this step. 

The overall process typically involves:

Meeting with a qualified mental health care provider, which can be a CAPS or Weiland clinician, for an assessment and discussion about the process of preparing for surgery, plus to get a letter of support. This is likely to take more than one session. We suggest you request a clinician who is a gender specialist/Weiland clinician. To schedule an appointment, visit  VadenPatientPortal .

Determine your insurance coverage and  research surgeons  to decide which surgeon you would like to use (your CAPS/Weiland provider may be able to help you with this)

Obtain a medical referral to a surgeon, which can be done by your Vaden Medical provider once you have your letter of support. You will need one letter for top surgeries and two letters (from two different providers) for bottom surgeries. You can use the “preauthorization appointment” option in VadenPatient. 

Hold a consultation session with your surgeon.  Here is some information to guide your consultation . 

Schedule surgery date (make sure you’ve built in plenty time to recover).

The surgery/surgeries themselves, and follow-up medical and as-needed additional care.

• Healthcare Services
• Find a Doctor
• Patient Portal
• Research and Education

Your recent searches

• Find a Location
• Nursing Careers
• Physical Therapy Careers
• Medical Education
• Research & Innovation
• Pay My Bill
• Billing & Insurance Questions
• For Healthcare Professionals
• News & Publications
• Classes & Events
• Philanthropy

Gender Affirmation Surgery

Browse this page

If you’re transgender, you may pursue hormone therapy or gender reassignment surgery to help align your body with your gender identity. Some transgender individuals also choose to pursue surgery to help reduce or enhance secondary sexual characteristics. For transgender men, this may include surgery to reduce breast size or remove the ovaries. Transgender women may elect for breast augmentation or facial feminization surgery to meet their needs. At MedStar Health, we offer the following procedures to help you be comfortable in your own skin. Types of gender reassignment surgery:

Feminizing vaginoplasty : Reconstructive surgery procedure that alters the structure of the genitals to create a vagina using penile or colon tissue. Dr. Del Corral uses a one-stage procedure, revisions can be necessary to enhance the final surgical result

Revision vaginoplasty (after loss of depth) : A secondary procedure allowing for revisions to the urethra, neovaginal canal, labia minora, and majora addressing asymmetries within the vagina, and scar revisions to help functionality. MedStar Center for Gender Affirmation specializes in revisional procedures after complications from primary vaginoplasty

Colon vaginoplasty : A different approach to an original vaginoplasty. The colon or small bowel can be used to line the vaginal wall to create depth, dilation, and providing a natural source of lubrication. At the MedStar Center for Gender Affirmation, we use a robotic-assisted approach to minimize incisions in the abdomen, and faster recovery while providing better access for the revision

Masculinizing phalloplasty/scrotoplasty : Reconstructive surgery that creates a penis using a free flap or pedicled flap of skin. These sections of the skin can be taken from the arm (radial forearm free-flap, RFF) or thigh (anterior lateral thigh pedicled flap phalloplasty, ALT).  These procedures are performed in a combined team that include a reconstructive urologist and plastic surgeons

Metoidioplasty : The use of local tissue to create an enlargement to the penile area (clitoral release/enlargement, may include urethral lengthening)

Masculinizing chest surgery (“top” surgery) : Breast tissue is removed and the nipples and areolae are altered to help masculinize the chest

Facial feminization : Reconstructive surgery procedures that alters the shape and size of facial features to make them closer to typical female facial features — this may include a brow lift, forehead re-contouring, hairline correction, and rhinoplasty (nose reshaping)

Facial masculinization : Reconstructive surgery that alters the shape and size of facial features to make them more masculine — this may include forehead lengthening and augmentation, cheek augmentation, chin re-contouring, jaw contouring, thyroid cartilage enhancement (Adam’s apple surgery), and rhinoplasty (nose reshaping)

Reduction thyrochondroplasty (thyroid cartilage shave) : Reconstructive surgery that reduces the size of the thyroid cartilage, also known as the “Adam’s apple.” It is shaved down to create a more feminine appearance

Breast augmentation mammoplasty : Surgery to reshape, enlarge, and modify the breasts and achieve a more desired shape and look to the chest

Hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy : Surgical removal of the uterus, cervix, ovaries, fallopian tubes, and surrounding structures

Orchiectomy : Reconstructive surgery to remove the testicles

Vaginectomy : Reconstructive surgery to remove all parts of the vagina

Gender surgery planning and recovery

What to expect.

You may need to meet a few requirements before qualifying for certain gender affirming procedure(s) at MedStar Health. The exact requirements will depend on your insurance coverage and may include one or more letters of referral from qualified mental health professionals, well-documented gender dysphoria, and/or one year of continuous hormone therapy. Procedures that are considered strictly cosmetic by your insurance plan will have fewer requirements.

After properly qualifying for surgery, you’ll meet with one of our surgeons. They will examine you and ask questions to determine if you physically qualify for surgery. If you qualify, you’ll discuss any risks and potential complications and walk through the steps involved. You’ll be given specific instructions to follow prior to your surgery.

On the day of surgery, your surgeon may use a variety of leading-edge techniques to achieve the best results, such as minimally invasive surgery to significantly reduce scarring.

Recovery from surgery

It’s important to follow your surgeon’s instructions for proper care of your body after surgery. You may have specific directions about taking medications and how to clean and care for the surgical site. Healing may take several weeks as swelling decreases.

Why choose us?

MedStar Health is the largest health care system in Maryland and the Washington, D.C., region. When you choose us for care, you’ll have access to our network of 10 hospitals and a team of more than 3,000 physicians and specialists.

If you choose MedStar Health for a breast augmentation or reduction procedure, you’ll be choosing to work with a nationally recognized leader in breast surgeries. Our breast surgeons have years of experience working exclusively in breast procedures and have developed their own techniques to help patients recover faster and have better results.

Our providers

Location: Change location Enter your location

Gabriel Alfonso Del Corral, MD

Microvascular Plastic Surgery, Gender Surgery, Reconstructive Plastic Surgery & Plastic Surgery

Laura Kate Tom, MD

Microvascular Plastic Surgery, Breast Surgery & Plastic Surgery

Our locations

Distance from Change location Enter your location

MedStar Health: Plastic Surgery at MedStar Washington Hospital Center

106 Irving St. NW POB North Ste. 3400 Washington, D.C., 20010

MedStar Franklin Square Medical Center

9000 Franklin Square Dr. Baltimore, MD 21237

Frequently asked questions

Do I need a referral?

If you’re exploring options for insurance coverage, you may need to request a referral from your primary care doctor, depending on your health insurance plan. Check with your carrier to see if medical coverage is an option for you and, if so, whether a referral is required.

How should I prepare?

Before surgery, you may be asked to get blood tests and take or adjust medications — this may include temporarily stopping hormone therapy. If you smoke, quitting will help you heal faster and avoid possible complications. You’ll also need to arrange for transportation to and from the hospital and for someone to stay with you the night after the surgery.

For more information visit Patient Resources  or Preparing for Surgery

Dr. Gabriel Del Corral's Philosophy of Care

MedStar Center for Gender Affirmation: Vaginoplasty

Related services

Do I need a referral to see a specialist?  Learn more here . Explore the  Department Directory Learn more about  Telehealth Appointments Protect Yourself from West Nile Virus

How to schedule your APPOINTMENT at Denver Health: CURRENT PATIENTS: Login to MyChart  to schedule appointments or call  303-436-4949 . NEW PATIENTS: Schedule an appointment online or call   303-436-4949 . NEED CARE? Schedule a Virtual Urgent Care appointment  or click here to find an Urgent Care clinic .

MyChart Login

Login to MyChart

MyChart for Mobile

Download the MyChart mobile app for access to your healthcare information. Managing your healthcare has never been more simple. Download for  iPhone  and  Android .

MyChart Sign Up

Learn about MyChart features , and sign up for an account .

Virtual Urgent Care Now Available for Denver Health MyChart Users

Denver Health MyChart users can now have a virtual urgent care visit with one of our expert providers. It’s easy and convenient to get the urgent care you need from the comfort of your home, using your smartphone, tablet or computer.

Click here for more details

• Departments & Services
• Conditions & Treatments
• Our Locations
• Find a Provider
• Pharmacy / Prescriptions
• Pay my bill
• Main Campus (303) 436-6000
• Appointments (303) 436-4949
• Lean Academy 855-888-5326
• Nurseline (303) 739-1211
• Pharmacy (303) 389-1390
• Telehealth (303) 436-4949

Make an Appointment

Hours of operation, gender affirming surgery (sex reassignment surgery).

Thank you for your interest in gender affirming surgery at Denver Health. There is no one-size-fits-all approach for the gender affirmation process and we are here to support you in your journey. We are proud to offer surgeries with a truly talented multi-disciplinary team of surgeons. Our services are growing as the unique needs of each individual evolve. Currently we offer the following gender affirming surgeries: MTF Top Surgery , FTM Top Surgery , Orchiectomy ,  FTM Hysterectomy , and  Vaginoplasty  surgeries.

What is Gender Affirming Surgery?

Gender affirming surgery, also known as sex reassignment surgery (SRS) or confirmation surgery, is the surgical procedure(s) by which a transgender or non-binary person’s physical appearance and functional abilities are changed to align with the gender they know themselves to be.

Complete Our Surgical Interest Form

If you are interested in a gender affirmation surgery at Denver Health, please complete one of the following forms.

Top Surgery and Hysterectomy

For vaginoplasty, breast augmentation and orchiectomy, our approach to surgical assessment.

Denver Health adheres to the guidelines for surgical assessment as described in the World Professional Association for Transgender Health Standards of Care, 8th Version . The standards were created by international agreement using the latest scientific research on transgender health so that doctors can best meet the unique health care needs of transgender and gender-nonconforming people. Most insurance companies also adhere to these guidelines.

Patients may provide referral letters from their own outside mental health providers, or the assessment process via our Behavioral Health team. Patients seeking to undergo the assessment at Denver Health should make an appointment with our Behavioral Health Team .

Read more about common frequently asked general surgery questions:

How long will my hospital stay be.

Hospital stays will vary based on specific patient response. 

MTF top surgery, FTM chest surgery, FTM Hysterectomy, and orchiectomy surgery patients are usually released from the hospital the same day of surgery. Vaginoplasty patients typically spend 3 days in the hospital during recovery. 

What medications will I be prescribed after surgery?

You will likely receive painkillers and antibiotics to reduce the chance of infection.

• 0 && newsLoaded" class="" data-id="{044698B9-FA04-4636-994D-47662155601F}" ref="news"> News
• 0 && blogLoaded" class="" data-id="{9AB9C6CB-06BD-4D71-867F-FAB69D88F93C}" ref="blog"> Blog Articles
• 0 && storiesLoaded" class="" data-id="{71E64EA2-1956-4F7C-A67D-579E0BB54378}" ref="stories"> Patient Stories
• Apr 27 Boot Camp for New Dads ®
• May 1 Labor and Delivery Tour for Expectant Families
• May 8 Labor and Delivery Tour for Expectant Families
• May 11 Labor and Delivery Tour for Expectant Families

• Patient Care & Health Information
• Diseases & Conditions
• Gender dysphoria

Your health care provider might make a diagnosis of gender dysphoria based on:

• Behavioral health evaluation. Your provider will evaluate you to confirm the presence of gender dysphoria and document how prejudice and discrimination due to your gender identity (minority stress factors) impact your mental health. Your provider will also ask about the degree of support you have from family, chosen family and peers.
• DSM-5. Your mental health professional may use the criteria for gender dysphoria listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), published by the American Psychiatric Association.

Gender dysphoria is different from simply not conforming to stereotypical gender role behavior. It involves feelings of distress due to a strong, pervasive desire to be another gender.

Some adolescents might express their feelings of gender dysphoria to their parents or a health care provider. Others might instead show symptoms of a mood disorder, anxiety or depression. Or they might experience social or academic problems.

• Care at Mayo Clinic

Our caring team of Mayo Clinic experts can help you with your gender dysphoria-related health concerns Start Here

Treatment can help people who have gender dysphoria explore their gender identity and find the gender role that feels comfortable for them, easing distress. However, treatment should be individualized. What might help one person might not help another.

Treatment options might include changes in gender expression and role, hormone therapy, surgery, and behavioral therapy.

If you have gender dysphoria, seek help from a doctor who has expertise in the care of gender-diverse people.

When coming up with a treatment plan, your provider will screen you for mental health concerns that might need to be addressed, such as depression or anxiety. Failing to treat these concerns can make it more difficult to explore your gender identity and ease gender dysphoria.

Changes in gender expression and role

This might involve living part time or full time in another gender role that is consistent with your gender identity.

Medical treatment

Medical treatment of gender dysphoria might include:

• Hormone therapy, such as feminizing hormone therapy or masculinizing hormone therapy
• Surgery, such as feminizing surgery or masculinizing surgery to change the chest, external genitalia, internal genitalia, facial features and body contour

Some people use hormone therapy to seek maximum feminization or masculinization. Others might find relief from gender dysphoria by using hormones to minimize secondary sex characteristics, such as breasts and facial hair.

Treatments are based on your goals and an evaluation of the risks and benefits of medication use. Treatments may also be based on the presence of any other conditions and consideration of your social and economic issues. Many people also find that surgery is necessary to relieve their gender dysphoria.

The World Professional Association for Transgender Health provides the following criteria for hormonal and surgical treatment of gender dysphoria:

• Persistent, well-documented gender dysphoria.
• Capacity to make a fully informed decision and consent to treatment.
• Legal age in a person's country or, if younger, following the standard of care for children and adolescents.
• If significant medical or mental concerns are present, they must be reasonably well controlled.

Additional criteria apply to some surgical procedures.

A pre-treatment medical evaluation is done by a doctor with experience and expertise in transgender care before hormonal and surgical treatment of gender dysphoria. This can help rule out or address medical conditions that might affect these treatments This evaluation may include:

• A personal and family medical history
• A physical exam
• Assessment of the need for age- and sex-appropriate screenings
• Identification and management of tobacco use and drug and alcohol misuse
• Testing for HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, along with treatment, if necessary
• Assessment of desire for fertility preservation and referral as needed for sperm, egg, embryo or ovarian tissue cryopreservation
• Documentation of history of potentially harmful treatment approaches, such as unprescribed hormone use, industrial-strength silicone injections or self-surgeries

Behavioral health treatment

This treatment aims to improve your psychological well-being, quality of life and self-fulfillment. Behavioral therapy isn't intended to alter your gender identity. Instead, therapy can help you explore gender concerns and find ways to lessen gender dysphoria.

The goal of behavioral health treatment is to help you feel comfortable with how you express your gender identity, enabling success in relationships, education and work. Therapy can also address any other mental health concerns.

Therapy might include individual, couples, family and group counseling to help you:

• Explore and integrate your gender identity
• Accept yourself
• Address the mental and emotional impacts of the stress that results from experiencing prejudice and discrimination because of your gender identity (minority stress)
• Build a support network
• Develop a plan to address social and legal issues related to your transition and coming out to loved ones, friends, colleagues and other close contacts
• Become comfortable expressing your gender identity
• Explore healthy sexuality in the context of gender transition
• Make decisions about your medical treatment options
• Increase your well-being and quality of life

Therapy might be helpful during many stages of your life.

A behavioral health evaluation may not be required before receiving hormonal and surgical treatment of gender dysphoria, but it can play an important role when making decisions about treatment options. This evaluation might assess:

• Gender identity and dysphoria
• Impact of gender identity in work, school, home and social environments, including issues related to discrimination, abuse and minority stress
• Mood or other mental health concerns
• Risk-taking behaviors and self-harm
• Substance misuse
• Sexual health concerns
• Social support from family, friends and peers — a protective factor against developing depression, suicidal thoughts, suicide attempts, anxiety or high-risk behaviors
• Goals, risks and expectations of treatment and trajectory of care

Other steps

Other ways to ease gender dysphoria might include use of:

• Peer support groups
• Voice and communication therapy to develop vocal characteristics matching your experienced or expressed gender
• Hair removal or transplantation
• Genital tucking
• Breast binding
• Breast padding
• Aesthetic services, such as makeup application or wardrobe consultation
• Legal services, such as advanced directives, living wills or legal documentation
• Social and community services to deal with workplace issues, minority stress or parenting issues

More Information

Gender dysphoria care at Mayo Clinic

• Pubertal blockers
• Feminizing hormone therapy
• Feminizing surgery
• Gender-affirming (transgender) voice therapy and surgery
• Masculinizing hormone therapy
• Masculinizing surgery

Clinical trials

Explore Mayo Clinic studies testing new treatments, interventions and tests as a means to prevent, detect, treat or manage this condition.

Coping and support

Gender dysphoria can be lessened by supportive environments and knowledge about treatment to reduce the difference between your inner gender identity and sex assigned at birth.

Social support from family, friends and peers can be a protective factor against developing depression, suicidal thoughts, suicide attempts, anxiety or high-risk behaviors.

Other options for support include:

• Mental health care. You might see a mental health professional to explore your gender, talk about relationship issues, or talk about any anxiety or depression you're experiencing.
• Support groups. Talking to other transgender or gender-diverse people can help you feel less alone. Some community or LGBTQ centers have support groups. Or you might look online.
• Prioritizing self-care. Get plenty of sleep. Eat well and exercise. Make time to relax and do the activities you enjoy.
• Meditation or prayer. You might find comfort and support in your spirituality or faith communities.
• Getting involved. Give back to your community by volunteering, including at LGBTQ organizations.

Preparing for your appointment

You may start by seeing your primary care provider. Or you may be referred to a behavioral health professional.

Here's some information to help you get ready for your appointment.

What you can do

Before your appointment, make a list of:

• Your symptoms , including any that seem unrelated to the reason for your appointment
• Key personal information , including major stresses, recent life changes and family medical history
• All medications, vitamins or other supplements you take, including the doses
• Questions to ask your health care provider
• Ferrando CA. Comprehensive Care of the Transgender Patient. Elsevier; 2020. https://www.clinicalkey.com. Accessed Nov. 8, 2021.
• Hana T, et al. Transgender health in medical education. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 2021; doi:10.2471/BLT.19.249086.
• Kliegman RM, et al. Gender and sexual identity. In: Nelson Textbook of Pediatrics. 21st ed. Elsevier; 2020. https://www.clinicalkey.com. Accessed Nov. 8, 2021.
• Ferri FF. Transgender and gender diverse patients, primary care. In: Ferri's Clinical Advisor 2022. Elsevier; 2022. https://www.clinicalkey.com. Accessed Nov. 8, 2021.
• Gender dysphoria. In: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders DSM-5. 5th ed. American Psychiatric Association; 2013. https://dsm.psychiatryonline.org. Accessed Nov. 8, 2021.
• Keuroghlian AS, et al., eds. Nonmedical, nonsurgical gender affirmation. In: Transgender and Gender Diverse Health Care: The Fenway Guide. McGraw Hill; 2022. https://accessmedicine.mhmedical.com. Accessed Nov. 8, 2021.
• Coleman E, et al. Surgery. In: Standards of Care for the Health of Transsexual, Transgender and Gender Nonconforming People. Version 7. World Professional Association for Transgender Health; 2012. https://www.wpath.org/publications/soc. Accessed Nov. 3, 2021.

Associated Procedures

Products & services.

• A Book: Mayo Clinic Family Health Book, 5th Edition
• Newsletter: Mayo Clinic Health Letter — Digital Edition
• Symptoms & causes
• Diagnosis & treatment
• Doctors & departments

Mayo Clinic does not endorse companies or products. Advertising revenue supports our not-for-profit mission.

• Opportunities

Mayo Clinic Press

Check out these best-sellers and special offers on books and newsletters from Mayo Clinic Press .

• Mayo Clinic on Incontinence - Mayo Clinic Press Mayo Clinic on Incontinence
• The Essential Diabetes Book - Mayo Clinic Press The Essential Diabetes Book
• Mayo Clinic on Hearing and Balance - Mayo Clinic Press Mayo Clinic on Hearing and Balance
• FREE Mayo Clinic Diet Assessment - Mayo Clinic Press FREE Mayo Clinic Diet Assessment
• Mayo Clinic Health Letter - FREE book - Mayo Clinic Press Mayo Clinic Health Letter - FREE book

Make twice the impact

Your gift can go twice as far to advance cancer research and care!

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychiatry

Readiness assessments for gender-affirming surgical treatments: A systematic scoping review of historical practices and changing ethical considerations

Travis amengual.

1 Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Northwestern Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States

Kaitlyn Kunstman

R. brett lloyd, aron janssen.

2 The Pritzker Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Health, Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States

Annie B. Wescott

3 Galter Health Science Library, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States

Associated Data

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article/ Supplementary material , further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Transgender and gender diverse (TGD) are terms that refer to individuals whose gender identity differs from sex assigned at birth. TGD individuals may choose any variety of modifications to their gender expression including, but not limited to changing their name, clothing, or hairstyle, starting hormones, or undergoing surgery. Starting in the 1950s, surgeons and endocrinologists began treating what was then known as transsexualism with cross sex hormones and a variety of surgical procedures collectively known as sex reassignment surgery (SRS). Soon after, Harry Benjamin began work to develop standards of care that could be applied to these patients with some uniformity. These guidelines, published by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), are in their 8th iteration. Through each iteration there has been a requirement that patients requesting gender-affirming hormones (GAH) or gender-affirming surgery (GAS) undergo one or more detailed evaluations by a mental health provider through which they must obtain a “letter of readiness,” placing mental health providers in the role of gatekeeper. WPATH specifies eligibility criteria for gender-affirming treatments and general guidelines for the content of letters, but does not include specific details about what must be included, leading to a lack of uniformity in how mental health providers approach performing evaluations and writing letters. This manuscript aims to review practices related to evaluations and letters of readiness for GAS in adults over time as the standards of care have evolved via a scoping review of the literature. We will place a particular emphasis on changing ethical considerations over time and the evolution of the model of care from gatekeeping to informed consent. To this end, we did an extensive review of the literature. We identified a trend across successive iterations of the guidelines in both reducing stigma against TGD individuals and shift in ethical considerations from “do no harm” to the core principle of patient autonomy. This has helped reduce barriers to care and connect more people who desire it to gender affirming care (GAC), but in these authors’ opinions does not go far enough in reducing barriers.

Introduction

Transgender and gender diverse (TGD) are terms that refer to any individual whose gender identity is different from their sex assigned at birth. Gender identity can be expressed through any combination of name, pronouns, hairstyle, clothing, and social role. Some TGD individuals wish to transition medically by taking gender-affirming hormones (GAH) and/or pursuing gender-affirming surgery (GAS) ( 1 ). 1 The medical community’s comfort level with TGD individuals and, consequently, their willingness to provide a broad range of gender affirming care (GAC) 2 has changed significantly over time alongside an increasing understanding of what it means to be TGD and increasing cultural acceptance of LGBTQI people.

Historically physicians have placed significant barriers in the way of TGD people accessing the care that we now know to be lifesaving. Even today, patients wishing to receive GAC must navigate a system that sometimes requires multiple mental health evaluations for procedures, that is not required of cisgender individuals.

The medical and psychiatric communities have used a variety of terms over time to refer to TGD individuals. The first and second editions of DSM described TGD individuals using terms such as transvestism (TV) and transsexualism (TS), and often conflated gender identity with sexuality, by including them alongside diagnoses such as homosexuality and paraphilias. Both the DSM and the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) have continuously changed diagnostic terminology and criteria involving TGD individuals over time, from Gender Identity Disorder in DSM-IV to Gender Dysphoria in DSM-5 to Gender Incongruence in ICD-11.

In 1979, the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association 3 , renamed the World Profession Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) in 2006, was the first to publish international guidelines for providing GAC to TGD individuals. The WPATH Standards of Care (SOC) are used by many insurance companies and surgeons to determine an individual’s eligibility for GAC. Throughout each iteration, mental health providers are placed in the role of gatekeeper and tasked with conducting mental health evaluations and providing required letters of readiness for TGD individuals who request GAC ( 1 ). As part of this review, we will summarize the available literature examining the practical and ethical changes in conducting mental health readiness assessments and writing the associated letters.

While the WPATH guidelines specify eligibility criteria for GAC and a general guide for what information to include in a letter of readiness, there are no widely agreed upon standardized letter templates or semi-structured interviews, leading to a variety of practices in evaluation and letter writing for GAC ( 2 ). To our knowledge, this is the first scoping review to summarize the available research to date regarding the evolution of the mental health evaluation and process of writing letters of readiness for GAS. By summarizing trends in these evaluations over time, we aim to identify best practices and help further guide mental health professionals working in this field.

The review authors conducted a comprehensive search of the literature in collaboration with a research librarian (ABW) according to PRISMA guidelines. The search was comprised of database-specific controlled vocabulary and keyword terms for (1) mental health and (2) TGD-related surgeries. Searches were conducted on December 2, 2020 in MEDLINE (PubMed), the Cochrane Library Databases (Wiley), PsychINFO (EBSCOhost), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Scopus (Elsevier), and Dissertations and Theses Global (ProQuest). All databases were searched from inception to present without the use of limits or filters. In total, 8,197 results underwent multi-pass deduplication in a citation management system (EndNote), and 4,411 unique entries were uploaded to an online screening software (Rayyan) for title/abstract screening by two independent reviewers. In total, 303 articles were included for full text screening ( Figure 1 ), however, 69 of those articles were excluded as they were unable to be obtained online or through interlibrary loan. Both review authors conducted a full text screen of the remaining 234 articles. Articles were included in the final review if they specified criteria used for mental health screening/evaluation and/or letter writing for GAS, focused on TGD adults, were written in English, and were peer-reviewed publications. Any discrepancies were discussed between the two review authors TA and KK and a consensus was reached. A total of 86 articles met full inclusion criteria. Full documentation of all searches can be found in the Supplementary material .

PRISMA flow diagram demonstrating article review process.

In total, 86 articles were included for review. Eleven articles were focused on ethical considerations while the remaining 75 articles focused on the mental health evaluation and process of writing letters of readiness for GAS. Version 8 of the SOC was published in September of 2022 during the review process of this manuscript and is also included as a reference and point of discussion.

Prior to the publication of the standards of care

Fourteen articles were identified in the literature search as published prior to the development of the WPATH SOC version 1 in 1979. Prominent themes included classification, categorization, and diagnosis of TS. Few publications described the components of a mental health evaluation, and inclusion and exclusion criteria, for GAS. Many publications focused exclusively on transgender females, with a paucity of literature examining the experiences of transgender males during this timeframe.

Authors emphasized accurate diagnosis of TS, highlighting elements of the psychosocial history including early life cross-dressing, preference for play with the opposite gender toys and friends, and social estrangement around puberty ( 3 ). One author proposed the term gender dysphoria syndrome, which included the following criteria: a sense of inappropriateness in one’s anatomically congruent sex role, that role reversal would lead to improvement in discomfort, homoerotic interest and heterosexual inhibition, an active desire for surgical intervention, and the patient taking on an active role in exploring their interest in sex reassignment ( 4 ). Many authors attempted to differentiate between the “true transsexual” and other diagnoses, including idiopathic TS; idiopathic, essential, or obligatory homosexuality; neuroticism; TV; schizophrenia; and intersex individuals ( 5 , 6 ).

Money argued that the selection criteria for patients requesting GAS include a psychiatric evaluation to obtain collateral information to confirm the accuracy of the interview, work with the family to foster support of the individual, and proper management of any psychiatric comorbidities ( 5 ). Authors began to assemble a list of possible exclusion criteria for receiving GAS such as psychosis, unstable mental health, ambivalence, and secondary gain (e.g., getting out of the military), lack of triggering major life events or crises, lack of sufficient distress in therapy, presence of marital bonds (given the illegality of same-sex marriage during this period), and if natal genitals were used for pleasure ( 3 – 5 , 7 – 13 ).

Others focused the role of the psychiatric evaluation on the social lives and roles of the patient. They believed the evaluation should include exploring the patient’s motivation for change for at least 6–12 months ( 8 ), facilitating realistic expectations of treatment, managing family issues, providing support during social transition and post-operatively ( 13 ), and encouraging GAH and the “real-life test” (RLT). The RLT is a period in which a person must fully live in their affirmed gender identity, “testing” if it is right for them. In 1970, Green recommended that a primary goal of treatment was that, “the male patient must be able to pass in society as a socially acceptable woman in appearance and to conduct the normal affairs of the day without arousing undue suspicion” ( 14 ). Benjamin also noted concern that “too masculine” features may be a contraindication to surgery so as to not make an “acceptable woman” ( 7 ). Some publications recommended at least 1–2 years of a RLT ( 3 , 7 , 11 , 15 ), while others recommended at least 5 years of RLT prior to considering GAS ( 12 ). Emphasis was placed on verifying the accuracy of reported information from family or friends to ensure “authentic” motivation for GAS and rule out ambivalence or secondary gain (e.g., getting out of the military) ( 10 ).

Ell recommended evaluation to ensure the patient has “adequate intelligence” to understand realistic expectations of surgery and attempted to highlight the patient’s autonomy in the decision to undergo GAS. He wrote, “That is your decision [to undergo surgery]. It’s up to you to prove that you are a suitable candidate for surgery. It’s not for me to offer it to you. If you decide to go ahead with your plans to pass in the opposite gender role, you do it on your own responsibility” ( 8 ). Notably, many authors conceptualized gender transition along a binary, with individuals transitioning from one end to the other.

In these earliest publications, one can start to see the beginning framework of modern-day requirements for accessing GAS, including ensuring an accurate diagnosis of gender incongruence; ruling out other possible causes of presentation such as psychosis; ensuring general mental stability; making sure that the patient has undergone at least some time of living in their affirmed gender; and that they are able to understand the consequences of the procedure.

Standards of care version 1 and 2

Changes to the standards of care.

The first two versions of the WPATH SOC were written in 1979 and 1980, respectively and are substantially similar to one another. SOC version three was the first to be published in an academic journal in 1985 and changes from the first two versions were documented within this publication. The first two versions required that all recommendations for GAC be completed by licensed psychologists or psychiatrists. The first version recommended that patients requesting GAH and non-genital GAS, spend 3 and 6 months, respectively, living full time in their affirmed gender. These recommendations were rescinded in subsequent versions ( 16 ). Figure 2 reviews changes to the recommendations for GAC within the WPATH SOC over time.

Changes to the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) standards of care around gender affirming medical and surgical treatments over time.

Results review

Five articles published between 1979 and 1980 were included in this review. Again, emphasis was placed on proper diagnosis, classification and consistency of gender identity over time ( 17 , 18 ).

Wise and Meyer explored the concept of a continuum between TV and TS, describing that those who experienced gender dysphoria often requested GAS, displayed evidence of strong cross-dressing desires with arousal, history of cross-gender roles, and absence of manic-depressive or psychotic illnesses ( 19 ). Requirements for GAS at the Johns Hopkins Gender Clinic included at least 2 years of cross-dressing, working in the opposite gender role, and undergoing treatment with GAH and psychotherapy ( 19 ). Bernstein identified factors correlated with negative GAS outcomes including presence of psychosis, drug abuse, frequent suicide attempts, criminality, unstable relationships, and low intelligence level ( 18 ). Lothstein stressed the importance of correct diagnosis, “since life stressors may lead some transvestites to clinically present as transsexuals desiring SRS” ( 20 ). Levine reviewed the diagnostic process employed by Case Western Reserve University Gender Identity Clinic which involved initial interview by a social worker to collect psychometric testing, followed by two independent psychiatric interviews to obtain the developmental gender history, understand treatment goals, and evaluate for underlying co-morbid mental health diagnoses, with a final multidisciplinary conference to integrate the various evaluations and develop a treatment plan ( 21 ).

Standards of care version 3

Version 3 broadened the definition of the clinician thereby broadening the scope of providers who could write recommendation letters for GAC. Whereas prior SOC required letters from licensed psychologists or psychiatrists, version 3 allowed initial evaluations from providers with at least a Master’s degree in behavioral science, and when required, a second evaluation from any licensed provider with at least a doctoral degree. Version 3 recommended that all evaluators demonstrate competence in “gender identity matters” and must know the patient, “in a psychotherapeutic relationship,” for at least 6 months ( 16 ). Version 3 relied on the definition of TS in DSM-III, which specified the sense of discomfort with one’s anatomic sex be “continuous (not limited to a period of stress) for at least 2 years” and be independently verified by a source other than the patient through collateral or through a longitudinal relationship with the mental health provider ( 16 ). Recommendation of GAS specifically required at least 6–12 months of RLT, for non-genital and genital GAS, respectively ( 16 ).”

Nine articles were published during the timeframe that the SOC version 3 were active (1981–1990). Themes in these publications included increasing focus on selection criteria for GAS and emphasis on the RLT, which was used to ensure proper diagnosis of gender dysphoria. Recommendations for the duration of the RLT ranged anywhere between 1 and 3 years ( 22 , 23 ).

Proposed components of the mental health evaluation for GAS included a detailed assessment of the duration, intensity, and stability of the gender dysphoria, identification of underlying psychiatric diagnoses and suicidal ideation, a mental status examination to rule out psychosis, and an assessment of intelligence (e.g., IQ) to comment on the individual’s “capacity and competence” to consent to GAC. The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), Weschler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS), and Lindgren-Pauly Body Image Scale were also used during assessments ( 24 ).

Authors developed more specific inclusion and exclusion criteria for undergoing GAS with inclusion criteria including age 21 or older, not legally married, no pending litigation, evidence of gender dysphoria, completion of 1 year of psychotherapy, between 1 and 2 years RLT with ability to “pass convincingly” and “perform successfully” in the opposite gender role, at least 6 months on GAH (if medically tolerable), reasonably stable mental health (including absence of psychosis, depression, alcoholism and intellectual disability), good financial standing with psychotherapy fees ( 25 ), and a prediction that GAS would improve personal and social functioning ( 26 – 29 ). A 1987 survey of European psychiatrists identified their most common requirements as completion of a RLT of 1–2 years, psychiatric observation, mental stability, no psychosis, and 1 year of GAH ( 27 ).

Standards of care version 4

World Professional Association for Transgender Health SOC version four was published in 1990. Between version three and version four, DSM-III-R was published in 1987. Version four relied on the DSM-III-R diagnostic criteria for TS as opposed to the DSM-III criteria in version three. The DSM-III-R criteria for TS included a “persistent discomfort and sense of inappropriateness about one’s assigned sex,” “persistent preoccupation for at least 2 years with getting rid of one’s primary and secondary sex characteristics and acquiring the sex characteristics of the other sex,” and that the individual had reached puberty ( 30 ). Notable changes from the DSM-III criteria include specifying a time duration for the discomfort (2 years) and designating that individuals must have reached puberty.

Six articles were published between 1990 and 1998 while version four was active. Earlier trends continued including emphasizing proper diagnosis of gender dysphoria ( 31 , 32 ), however, a new trend emerged toward implementing more comprehensive evaluations, with an emphasis on decision making, a key element of informed consent.

Bockting and Coleman, in a move representative of other publications of this era, advocated for a more comprehensive approach to the mental health evaluation and treatment of gender dysphoria. Their treatment model was comprised of five main components: a mental health assessment consisting of psychological testing and clinical interviews with the individual, couple, and/or family; a physical examination; management of comorbid disorders with pharmacotherapy and/or psychotherapy; facilitation of identity formation and sexual identity management through individual and group therapy; and aftercare consisting of individual, couple, and/or family therapy with the option of a gender identity consolidation support group. Psychoeducation was a main thread throughout the treatment model and a variety of treatment “subtasks” such as understanding decision making, sexual functioning and sexual identity exploration, social support, and family of origin intimacy were identified as important. The authors advocated for “a clear separation of gender identity, social sex role, and sexual orientation which allows a wide spectrum of sexual identities and prevents limiting access to GAS to those who conform to a heterosexist paradigm of mental health” ( 33 ).

This process can be compared with the Italian SOC for GAS which recommend a multidisciplinary assessment consisting of a psychosocial evaluation and informed consent discussion around treatment options, procedures, and risks. Requirements included 6 months of psychotherapy prior to initiating GAH, 1 year of a RLT prior to GAS, and provision of a court order approving GAS, which could not be granted any sooner than 2 years after starting the process of gender transition. Follow-up was recommended at 6, 12, and 24 months post-GAS to ensure psychosocial adjustment to the affirmed gender role ( 34 ).

Other authors continued to refine inclusion and exclusion criteria for GAS by surveying the actual practices of health centers. Inclusion criteria included those who had life-long cross gender identification with inability to live in their sex assigned at birth; a 1–2 years RLT (a nearly universal requirement in the survey); and ability to pass “effortlessly and convincingly in society”; completed 1 year of GAH; maintained a stable job; were unmarried or divorced; demonstrated good coping skills and social-emotional stability; had a good support system; and were able to maintain a relationship with a psychotherapist. Exclusion criteria included age under 21 years old, recent death of a parent ( 35 ), unstable gender identity, unstable psychosocial circumstances, unstable psychiatric illness (such as schizophrenia, suicide attempts, substance abuse, intellectual disability, organic brain disorder, AIDS), incompatible marital status, criminal history/activity or physical/medical disability ( 36 ).

The survey indicated some programs were more lenient around considering individuals with bipolar affective disorder, the ability to pass successfully, and issues around family support. Only three clinics used sexual orientation as a factor in decision for GAS, marking a significant change in the literature from prior decades. Overall, the authors found that 74% of the clinics surveyed did not adhere to WPATH SOC, instead adopting more conservative policies ( 36 ).

Standards of care version 5

Published in 1998, version five defined the responsibilities of the mental health professional which included diagnosing the gender disorder, diagnosing and treating co-morbid psychiatric conditions, counseling around GAC, providing psychotherapy, evaluating eligibility and readiness criteria for GAC, and collaborating with medical and surgical colleagues by writing letters of recommendation for GAC ( Figure 3 ). Eligibility and readiness criteria were more explicitly described in this version to refer to the specific objective and subjective criteria, respectively, that the patient must meet before proceeding to the next step of their gender transition. The seven elements to include in a letter of readiness were more explicitly listed within this version as well including: the patient’s identifying characteristics, gender, sexual orientation, any other psychological diagnoses, duration and nature of the treatment with the letter writer, whether the author is part of a gender team, whether eligibility criteria have been met, the patient’s ability to follow the SOC and an offer of collaboration. Version five removes the requirement that patients undertake psychotherapy to be eligible for GAC ( 37 ).

Changes to the ten tasks of the mental health provider within the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) standards of care over time.

Five articles were published between 1998 and 2001 while version five was active. Two of these articles were summaries of the SOC ( 37 , 38 ). Themes in these publications included continued attempts to develop comprehensive treatment models for GAS.

Ma reviewed the role of the social worker in a multidisciplinary gender clinic in Hong Kong. Psychosocial assessment for GAS included evaluation of performance in affirmed social roles, adaptation to the affirmed gender role during the 1-year RLT and understanding the patient’s identified gender role and the response to the new gender role culturally and interpersonally within the individual’s support network and family unit. She noted five contraindications to GAS: a history of psychosis, sociopathy, severe depression, organic brain dysfunction or “defective intelligence,” success in parental or marital roles, “successful functioning in heterosexual intercourse,” ability to function in the pretransition gender role, and homosexual or TV history with genital pleasure. She proposed a social work practice model for patients who apply for GAS with categorization of TGD individuals into “better-adjusted” and “poorly-adjusted” with different intervention goals and methods for each. For those who were “better-adjusted,” treatment focused on psychoeducation, building coping tools, and mobilization into a peer counselor role, while treatment goals for those who were “poorly-adjusted” focused on building support and resources ( 39 ).

Damodaran and Kennedy reviewed the assessment and treatment model used by the Monash gender dysphoria clinic in Melbourne, Australia for patients requesting GAS. All referrals for GAS were assessed independently by two psychiatrists to determine proper diagnosis of gender dysphoria, followed by endocrinology and psychology consultation to develop a comprehensive treatment plan. Requirements included RLT of minimum 18 months and GAH ( 40 ).

Miach reviewed the utility of using the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2), a revision of the MMPI which was standardized using a more heterogeneous population, in a gender clinic to assess stability of psychopathology prior to GAS, which was only performed on patients aged 21–55 years old. The authors concluded that while the TGD group had a significantly lower level of psychopathology than the control group, they believed that the MMPI-2 was a useful test in assessing readiness for GAC ( 41 ).

Standards of care version 6

Published in 2001, version six of the WPATH SOC did not include significant changes to the 10 tasks of the mental health professional ( Figure 3 ) or in the general recommendations for content of the letters of readiness. An important change in the eligibility criteria for GAH allowed providers to prescribe hormones even if patients had not undergone RLT or psychotherapy if it was for harm reduction purposes (i.e., to prevent patient from buying black market hormones). A notable change in version six separated the eligibility and readiness criteria for top (breast augmentation or mastectomy) and bottom (any gender-affirming surgical alteration of genitalia or reproductive organs) surgery allowing some patients, particularly individuals assigned female at birth (AFAB), to receive a mastectomy without having been on GAH or completing a 12 month RLT ( 42 , 43 ).

Thirteen articles were published between 2001 and 2012. One is a systematic review of evidence for factors that are associated with regret and suicide, and predictive factors of a good psychological and social functioning outcome after GAC. De Cuypere and Vercruysse note that less than one percent of patients regret having GAS or commit suicide, making detection of negative predictive factors in a study nearly impossible. They identified a wide array of positive predictive factors including age at time of request, sex of partner, premorbid social or psychiatric functioning, adequacy of social support system, level of satisfaction with secondary sexual characteristics, and surgical outcomes. Many of these predictive factors were later disproved. They also noted that there were not enough studies to determine whether following the WPATH guidelines was a positive predictive factor. In the end they noted that the evidence for all established evaluation regimens (i.e., RLT, age cut-off, psychotherapy, etc.) was at best indeterminate. They recommended that changes to WPATH criteria should redirect focus from gender identity to psychopathology, differential diagnosis, and psychotherapy for severe personality disorders ( 44 ).

The literature at this time supports two opposing approaches to requests for GAC, those advocating for a set of strictly enforced eligibility and readiness criteria associated with very thorough evaluations and those who advocate for a more flexible approach. Common approaches to the evaluation for GAC include: taking a detailed social history including current relationships, support systems, income, and social functioning; a sexual development history meant to understand when and how the patient began to identify as TGD and how their transition has affected their life; an evaluation of their coping skills, “psychic functions” and general mental well-being; and a focus on assessing the “correct diagnosis” of gender identity disorder ( 44 – 56 ). The use of a multidisciplinary team was also commonly recommended ( 44 , 47 , 48 , 51 , 54 – 56 ).

Those that advocated for a stricter interpretation of the eligibility and readiness criteria emphasized the importance of the RLT ( 45 , 49 , 51 , 53 , 55 , 56 ). One clinic in the UK required a RLT lasting 2 years prior to starting GAH, twice as long as recommended by the SOC ( 49 ). The prevailing view continued to approach gender as a binary phenomenon, rather than as a spectrum of experiences. As a result, treatment recommendations emphasized helping the patient to “pass” in their chosen gender role and did not endorse patients receiving less than the full spectrum of treatment to transition fully from one sex to the other. Several authors indicated that they required some amount of psychotherapy before recommending GAC ( 46 , 47 , 51 , 52 , 55 , 56 ). One author described requirements in Turkey, which unlike the US has the requirements enshrined in law and defines an important role for the courts in granting permission for GAC ( 51 ). In general, these authors supported the gatekeeping role of the mental health provider as a mechanism to prevent cases of regret.

Among groups supporting a flexible interpretation of the SOC, there was a much stronger emphasis on the supportive role of the mental health provider in the gender transition process ( 44 – 46 , 48 , 52 , 53 ). This role included creating a supportive environment for the patient, asking and using the correct pronouns, and helping to guide them through what may be a difficult transition both socially and physically. They emphasized the importance of the psychosocial evaluation including the patient’s connections to others in the TGD community, their social functioning, substance use, and psychiatric history/psychological functioning. While informed consent was mentioned as part of the evaluation, the process was not thoroughly explored and largely focused on patients’ awareness that GAS is an irreversible procedure which removes healthy tissue ( 53 ). One author suggested that a “consumer handbook outlining such rights and responsibilities” related to GAS be made available, but they made no further comment on the informed consent process ( 44 ). There was no further guidance as to the contents of letters of readiness for GAC.

The lack of emphasis on informed consent by both groups of authors mirrors the discussion of informed consent within the SOC, which up through version six, had a relatively narrow definition and role specifically related to risks and benefits of surgery. As far back as version one, the SOC states “hormonal and surgical sex reassignment are procedures which must be requested by, and performed only with the agreement of, the patient having informed consent…[these procedures] may be conducted or administered only after the patient applicant has received full and complete explanations, preferably in writing, in words understood by the patient applicant, of all risks inherent in the requested procedures ( 16 ). “This reflects the dominant concerns of surgeons at the time that they were removing or damaging healthy tissue, which was unethical, and as such wanted to make sure that patients understood the irreversibility of the procedures. It was not until version 7 that there is a change in the discussion of informed consent.

Standards of care version 7

Standards of care version seven was published in 2013. Publication of version seven coincided with the publication of DSM-5, in which the diagnosis required to receive GAC shifted from Gender Identity Disorder to Gender Dysphoria, in an effort to de-pathologize TGD patients. Version seven highlights that these are guidelines meant to be flexible to account for different practices in different places. Compared to version six, a significantly expanded section on the “Tasks of the Mental Health Provider” was added, offering some instructions on what to include in the assessment of the patient for GAS. For the first time the SOC expand on what it means to obtain informed consent and describe a process where the mental health provider is expected to guide a conversation around gender identity and how different treatments and procedures might affect TGD individuals psychologically, socially, and physically. Other recommendations include “at a minimum, assessment of gender identity and gender dysphoria, history and development of gender dysphoric feelings, the impact of stigma attached to gender non-conformity on mental health, and the availability of support from family, friends, and peers.” There is also a change to the recommended content of the letters: switching from “The initial and evolving gender, sexual, and other psychiatric diagnoses” to “Results of the client’s psychosocial assessment, including any diagnoses”, indicating a shift in the focus away from diagnosis toward the psychosocial assessment. Version 7 also adds two new tasks for the mental health provider including “Educate and advocate on behalf of clients within their community (schools, workplaces, other organizations) and assist clients with making changes in identity documents” and “Provide information and referral for peer support”( 2 ).

There were also significant changes to eligibility criteria for GAC. For GAH, version seven eliminates entirely the requirement for a RLT and psychotherapy and adds requirements for “persistent well documented gender dysphoria” and “reasonably well controlled” medical or mental health concerns. Notably, the SOC do not define the meaning of “reasonably well controlled,” leaving providers to interpret this on their own. Version seven delineates separate requirements for top and bottom surgeries. The criteria for both feminizing and masculinizing top surgeries are identical to each other and identical to those laid out for GAH. Version seven explicitly states that GAH is not required prior to top surgery, although GAH is still recommended prior to gender-affirming breast augmentation. Criteria for bottom surgery are more explicitly defined, namely internal (i.e., hysterectomy, orchiectomy) vs. external (i.e., metoidioplasty, phalloplasty, and vaginoplasty). For internal surgeries, criteria are the same as for top surgery with the addition of a required 12 months of GAH. For external surgeries the criteria are the same as for internal, with the addition of required 12 months of living in the patient’s affirmed gender identity ( 2 , 42 ).

Twenty-three articles were published while version 7 of the SOC have been active. Themes include identifying the role of psychometric testing in GAC evaluations, expanding the discussion around informed consent for GAC, and revising the requirements for letter writers.

A systematic review evaluated the accuracy of psychometric tests in those requesting GAC, identifying only two published manuscripts that met their inclusion criteria, both of which were of poor quality; this led them to question the utility of psychometric tests in in TGD patients ( 57 ). Keo-Meir and Fitzgerald provided a detailed narrative review of psychometric and neurocognitive exams in the TGD population and concluded that psychometric testing should not be done unless there is a question about the capacity of the patient to provide informed consent ( 58 ). The only other manuscripts that include a mention of psychological testing describe processes in Iran and China, both of which require extensive psychological testing prior to approval for GAC ( 59 , 60 ). These two manuscripts, in addition to an ethnographic study of the evaluation process in Turkey ( 61 ), are also the only ones that indicate a requirement for psychotherapy prior to approval for treatment. The three international manuscripts described above plus three manuscripts from the US ( 62 – 64 ) are the only ones to include consideration of a RLT, with authors outside the US preferring a long RLT and US authors considering RLT as part of the informed consent process for GAS, and not required at all prior to the initiation of GAH.

Many authors describe the process of informed consent for GAC ( 1 , 58 , 60 , 62 – 76 ). In China, a signature indicating informed consent from the patient’s family is required in addition to that of the patient ( 60 ). Many authors emphasize evaluating for and addressing social determinants of health including housing status, income, transportation, trauma history, etc. ( 1 , 58 , 60 , 67 , 69 – 71 , 75 – 77 ). Deutsch advocated for the psychosocial evaluation being the most important aspect of the evaluation and suggests that one of the letters required for bottom surgery be replaced by a functional assessment (i.e., ADLs/iADLs), which could be repeated as needed or removed entirely for high functioning patients ( 69 ).

Practice patterns and opinions on who should write letters of readiness and how many letters should be required vary widely. Many letters that surgeons receive are cursory, and short and non-personal letters correlate with poor surgical outcomes ( 1 ). Several authors advocate for eliminating the second letter entirely, for at least some procedures, as it is a barrier to care ( 68 , 69 , 74 ). Some support removing the requirement that both letter writers be therapists or psychiatrists, and even suggesting the second letter be written by a urologist ( 72 ) or a social worker who has performed a detailed social assessment ( 69 , 75 ). The evaluation in Turkey requires a report written by an extensive multidisciplinary team and submitted to a court for approval ( 61 ). Surveys of providers indicate that the SOC are not uniformly implemented leading to huge disparities based on the providers knowledge level and personal beliefs ( 77 , 78 ). Additional recommendations include that providers spend significant time discussing the SOC and diagnosis of gender dysphoria with the patients prior to providing a letter to prepare them for the stigma such a diagnosis may confer ( 65 , 66 ), and dropping gender dysphoria entirely in favor the ICD-11 diagnosis of gender incongruence, as it may be less stigmatizing ( 71 ).

The Mount Sinai Gender Clinic describes an integrated multidisciplinary model where a patient will see a primary care doctor, endocrinologist, social worker, psychiatrist, and obtain any necessary lab work in a single visit, significantly reducing barriers to care. The criteria in this model focus on informed consent, the social determinants of health, being physically ready for surgery, and putting measurable goals on psychiatric stability, while deemphasizing the gender dysphoria diagnosis. Their study showed that people who received their evaluation over a 2-year period were more likely to meet their in-house criteria than they were to meet criteria as set forth in WPATH SOC. The Mount Sinai criteria allowed for significantly decreased barriers to care, allowing more people to progress through desired GAC in a timely fashion ( 75 ).

Standards of care version 8

Standards of care version 8, published in September 2022, includes major updates to the guidelines around GAS. This version explicitly highlights the importance of informed decision making, patient autonomy, and harm reduction models of care, as well as emphasizing the flexibility of the guidelines which the authors note can be modified by the healthcare provider in consultation with the TGD individual.

Version 8 lays out the roles of the assessor which are to identify the presence of gender incongruence and any co-existing mental health concerns, provide information on GAC, support the TGD individual in their decision-making, and to assess for capacity to consent to GAC. The authors emphasize the collaborative nature of this decision-making process between the assessor and the TGD individual, as well as recommending TGD care occur in a multidisciplinary team model when possible.

Version 8 recommends that providers who assess TGD individuals for GAC hold at least a Master’s level degree and have sufficient knowledge in diagnosing gender incongruence and distinguishing it from other diagnoses which may present similarly. These changes allow for non-mental health providers to be the main assessors for GAC.

Version 8 recommends reducing the number of evaluations prior to GAS to a single evaluation in an effort to reduce barriers to care for the TGD population. Notably, the authors have removed the recommendations around content of the letter of readiness for GAC. The guidelines note that the complexity of the assessment process may differ from patient to patient, based on the type of GAC requested and the specific characteristics of the patient. Version eight directly states that psychometric testing and psychotherapy are not requirements to pursue GAC. While evaluations should continue to identify co-existing mental health diagnoses, version 8 highlights that the presence of a mental health diagnosis should not prevent access to GAC unless the mental health symptoms directly interfere with capacity to provide informed consent for treatment or interfere with receiving treatment. Version 8 recommends that perioperative matters, such as travel requirements, presence of stable, safe housing, hygiene/healthy living, any activity restrictions, and aftercare optimization, be discussed by the surgeon prior to GAS. In terms of eligibility criteria, the authors recommend a reduced duration of GAH from 12 months (from version 7) to 6 months (in version 8) prior to pursuing GAS involving reproductive organs ( 79 ).

Ethical discussions

A total of eleven articles explored ethical considerations of conducting mental health evaluations and writing letters of readiness for GAS, including a comparison of the ethical principles prioritized within the “gatekeeping” model vs. the informed consent model for GAC and the differential treatment of TGD individuals compared to cisgender individuals seeking similar surgical procedures.

Many authors compare the informed consent model of care for TGD individuals to the WPATH SOC model. In the informed consent model, the role of the health practitioner is to provide TGD patients with information about risks, side effects, benefits, and possible consequences of undergoing GAC, and to obtain informed consent from the patient ( 80 ). Cavanaugh et al. argue that the informed consent model is more patient-centered and elevates the ethical principle of autonomy above non-maleficence, the principle often prioritized in the “gatekeeping” model ( 81 ). They write, “Through a discussion of risks and benefits of possible treatment options with the patient…clinicians work to assist patients in making decisions. This approach recognizes that patients are the only ones who are best positioned, in the context of their lived experience, to assess and judge beneficence (i.e., the potential improvement in their welfare that might be achieved), and it also affords prescribing clinicians a better and fuller sense of how a particular patient balances principles of non-maleficence and beneficence.” Authors note that mental health providers can be particularly helpful in situations where an individual desires additional mental health treatment, which some argue should remain optional, or when an individual’s capacity is in question ( 81 ). Additional ethical considerations include balancing the respect for the dignity of persons, responsible caring, integrity in relationships, and responsibility to society ( 82 ). Other authors argue for a more systematic approach to ethical issues, including consulting the literature and/or experts in the field of TGD mental health for support in making decisions around GAC ( 74 ).

Hale criticizes the WPATH SOC noting that these guidelines create a barrier between patient and mental health provider in establishing trust and a therapeutic relationship, overly pathologize TGD individuals, and unnecessarily impose financial costs to the TGD individual. As a “gatekeeper,” the mental health provider is placed in the position of either granting or denying GAC and must weigh the competing ethical principles of beneficence, non-maleficence, and autonomy. He argues that mental health providers are not surrogate decision makers and that framing requests for GAS as a “phenomenon of incapacity” is “reflective of the overall incapacitating effects of society at large toward the TGD community” ( 83 ). This reflects the broader approach to determining capacity utilized in other medical contexts, namely that patients have capacity until proven otherwise ( 84 ). Additionally, due to the gatekeeping dynamic between patient and clinician, many TGD patients may not mention concerns or fears surrounding GAS out of concern they will be denied services, thereby limiting the quality and utility of the informed consent discussion. Ashley proposes changes to the informed consent model, specifically that the informed consent process should include not only information about whether to go through with a procedure, but how to go through the procedure including relevant information about timeline, side effects, need for perioperative support, and treatment plan ( 85 ). Gruenweld argues for a bottom-up, TGD-led provision of GAC instead of focusing solely on alleviating gender dysphoria through a top-down, medical expert approach via such systems like the WPATH SOC ( 86 ).

MacKinnon et al. conducted an institutional ethnographic study of both TGD individuals undergoing mental health evaluations for GAC and mental health providers to better understand the process of conducting such evaluations ( 87 ). They found that providers cited three concerns with the evaluation: determining the authenticity of an individual’s TGD identity, determining if the individual has the capacity to consent to treatment, and determining the readiness of the individual to undergo treatment. TGD individuals cited concerns around presenting enough distress to be diagnosed with gender dysphoria (a SOC requirement) versus too much distress, and risk being diagnosed with an uncontrolled mental health condition therefore being ineligible for GAC. The authors conclude, “although they are designed to optimize and universalize care… psychosocial readiness assessments actually create a medically risky and arguably unethical situation in which trans people experiencing mental health issues have to decide what is more important – transitioning at the potential expense of care for their mental health or disclosing significant mental health issues at the expense of being rendered not ready to transition (which in turn may produce or exacerbate mental distress)” ( 87 ).

With regards to writing letters of readiness for GAS, authors comment on the differential treatment of TGD compared to cisgender individuals. Bouman argues that requiring two letters for gender-affirming orchiectomy or hysterectomy is unethical given that orchiectomy and hysterectomy for chronic scrotal pain and dysfunctional uterine bleeding, respectively, do not require any mental health evaluation. Requiring a second letter may cause delays in treatment, increase financial costs, and may be invasive to the patient who must undergo two detailed evaluations, while allowing for diffusion of responsibility for the mental health provider ( 88 ).

Changing standards

Starting in the 1950’s with the first successful gender affirming procedure in the US on Christine Jorgenson, TGD people in the US started seeking surgical treatment of what was then called TS. The medical community’s understanding of TGD people, their mental health, and the role of the mental health provider in their medical and surgical transition has progressed and evolved since this time. Prior to the first iteration of what would later be known as WPATH’s SOC, patients were mostly evaluated within a system that viewed gender and sexual minorities as deviants and thereby largely limited access to GAC. We can also see this reflected in the changes to DSM and ICD diagnostic criteria between 1980 and today which demonstrates a trend from pathologizing identity and conflating sexual and gender identity toward pathologizing the distress experienced due to the discordant identity, and finally removing the relevant diagnosis from the chapter of Mental and Behavioral Disorders altogether in the ICD and instead into a new chapter titled “conditions related to sexual health ( 89 ).” These changes have clearly yielded positive benefits for TGD individuals by reducing stigma and improving access to care, but significant problems remain. Requiring TGD people to have a diagnosis at all to obtain care, no matter the terminology used, is pathologizing. The practice of requiring a diagnosis continues to put mental health and other medical providers in the position of gatekeeping, continuing the vestigial historical focus on “confirming” a person’s gender identity, rather than trusting that TGD people understand their identities better than providers do. Version 8 of the SOC put a much heavier emphasis on shared decision making and informed consent, but continue to maintain the requirement of a diagnosis ( 79 ). Many insurance companies and other health care payers require the diagnosis to justify paying for GAC, but providers should continue to advocate for removing such labels as a gatekeeping mechanism for GAC.

With each version of the SOC, guidelines for GAC become more specific, with more explanation of the reasoning behind each recommendation; more flexible requirements, a broadening of the definition of mental health provider, and elimination of the requirement that at least one letter be written by a doctoral level provider. There has been a notable shift in the conceptualization of gender identity, away from a strict gender binary, with individuals transitioning fully from one end to the other, to gender identity and transition as a spectrum of experiences. Over time the SOC became more flexible by removing requirements for psychotherapy, narrowing requirement for the RLT to only those pursuing bottom surgery, eliminating requirements for a mental health evaluation prior to initiating GAH, and eliminating requirements for GAH prior to top surgery. Version 8 of the SOC was even more explicit about removing requirements for psychotherapy and psychometric testing prior to receiving GAC ( 79 ).

Despite these positive changes, those wishing to access GAC still face significant challenges. Access to providers knowledgeable about GAC remains limited, especially in more rural areas, therefore requiring evaluations and letters of readiness for GAC continues to significantly limit access to treatment. By requiring letters of readiness for GAC, adult TGD individuals are not afforded the same level of autonomy present in almost any other medical context, where capacity to provide informed consent is automatically established ( 84 ). The WPATH SOC continue to perpetuate differential treatment of TGD individuals by requiring extensive, and often invasive, evaluations for procedures that their cisgender peers are able to access without such evaluations ( 88 ). The WPATH guidelines apply a one-size-fits-all approach to an extremely heterogeneous community who have varying levels of needs based on a variety of factors including but not limited to age, socioeconomic status, race, natal sex, and geographic location ( 90 ). It should be noted, however, that the version 8 of the SOC does acknowledge that different patients may require evaluations of varying complexity based on the procedure they are requesting as well as a variety of psychosocial factors, although it remains vague about exactly what those different evaluations should entail ( 79 ). We propose that future work be directed toward three primary goals: conducting research to determine the utility of letters of readiness; to better understand factors that impact GAS outcomes; and to develop easily accessible and understandable guides to conducting readiness evaluations and writing letters. These aims will help to further our goals of advocating for this vastly underserved population by further removing barriers to life-saving GAC.

Changing ethics

Early iterations of the SOC were strict, placing the mental health provider within a gatekeeper role, tasked with distinguishing the “true transsexual” that would benefit from GAS from those who would not, which in effect elevated the ethical principal of non-maleficence above autonomy. This created a barrier to forming a therapeutic alliance between the patient and mental health provider as there was little motivation for patients to give any information outside of the expected gender narrative ( 50 , 65 ). Mistrust flowed both ways leading to longer and more involved evaluations then than what is required today, with many providers requiring patients to undergo extensive psychological testing and psychotherapy, provide extensive collateral, and undergo lengthy RLTs, with some focusing on a patient’s ability to “pass” within the desire gender role, before agreeing to write a letter ( 11 , 15 , 19 , 49 , 57 , 58 ).

As understanding around the experiences of TGD individuals has evolved over time, the emphasis has shifted from the reliance on non-maleficence toward elevating patient autonomy as the guiding principle of care. Evaluations within this informed consent model focus much more on the patient’s ability to understand the treatment, its aftercare, and its potential effect on their lives. Informed consent evaluations also shift focus toward other psychosocial factors that will contribute to successful surgical outcomes, for example, housing, transportation, a support system, and treatment of any underlying mental health symptoms. While there is still a lack of consistency in current evaluations and the SOC are enforced unevenly ( 77 ), the use of the informed consent model by some providers has reduced barriers for some patients. Many authors now agree that psychological or neuropsychological testing should not be used when evaluating for surgical readiness unless there is a concern about the patient’s ability to provide informed consent such as in the case of a neurocognitive or developmental disorder ( 58 ). Also important to note here is that while there is a general shift in the focus of the literature from that of gatekeeping toward one of informed consent, neither the informed consent model nor the WPATH SOC more broadly are evenly applied by providers, leading to continued barriers for many patients ( 77 , 78 ).

Within the literature, there is support for further reducing barriers to care by widening the definition of who can conduct evaluations, write letters, or facilitate the informed consent discussion for GAC. Recommending that the physician providing the GAC be the one to conduct the informed consent evaluation would bring GAC practices more in line with practices in place within the broader medical community. It is very rare for mental health providers to be the gatekeepers for medical or surgical procedures, except for transplant surgery, where mental health providers may have a clearer role given the prominence of substance use disorders and the very limited resource of organs. However, even within transplant psychiatry, a negative psychiatric evaluation would not necessarily preclude the patient from receiving the transplant, but instead may be used to guide a treatment plan to improve chances of a successful recovery post-operatively. We then should consider what it means to embrace patient autonomy as our guiding principle, especially with more than 40 years of evidence of the positive effects around GAC behind us. Future guidelines should focus on making sure that TGD individuals are good surgical candidates, not based on their gender identity, but instead on a more holistic understanding of the factors that lead to good and bad gender-affirming surgical outcomes, along the lines of those proposed by Mt. Sinai’s gender clinic for vaginoplasty ( 75 ). Additionally, the physicians providing the GAC should in most cases be the ones to obtain informed consent, while retaining the ability to request a mental health evaluation if specific concerns related to mental health arise. This would both allow mental health providers to adopt a supportive consultant role rather than that of gatekeeper, as well as provide more individualized rather than one-size-fits-all care to patients.

Version 8 of the SOC go a long way toward changing the ethical focus of evaluations toward one of shared decision making and informed consent by removing the requirement of a second letter and the requirement that the letter be written by a mental health provider. This will, in theory, lower barriers to care by allowing other providers (as long as they have at least a master’s degree) to write letters for surgery ( 79 ). In practice, however, this change is likely to only affect a small portion of the patient population. This is because, as noted in the section below in more detail, insurance companies already do not adhere closely to the SOC ( 91 ) and are unlikely to quickly adopt the new guidelines if at all. Further, it is possible that many surgeons will require that the letter of readiness be written by a mental health provider, especially if the patient has any previous mental health problems. While changes to SOC 8 are a step in the direction we propose in this manuscript, it is important to remember that the primary decision makers of who can access GAC in the US are insurance companies with surgeons, primary care providers, and mental health providers as secondary decision makers; this leaves patients with much less real-world autonomy than the SOC state they should have in the process. While insurance companies hold this effective decision-making power in all of US healthcare, it could be at least partially addressed by developing clear, evidence based guidelines for which patients might require a more in-depth evaluation in the first place. Screening out patients that have little or no mental health or social barriers to care would directly reduce those patients’ barriers to receiving GAC, while freeing up mental health and other providers to provide evaluation, resources, and support to those patients who will actually benefit from these services.

Letter writing

There are few published guides for writing letters of readiness for GAC. The WPATH SOC provide vague guidelines as to the information to include within the letter itself, which, in addition to a lack of consistency in implementation of the SOC, lead to a huge variety in current practices around letter writing and limit their usefulness to surgical providers ( 1 ). There is much debate within the literature about how many letters should be required and who should be able to write them. Guidelines from China, Turkey, and Iran recommend much stricter processes requiring input from a wider variety of specialists to comment on a patient’s readiness ( 59 – 61 ). Within the US, the few recent recommendations include having a frank discussion with patients about the gender dysphoria diagnosis and allowing them to have input into the content of the letter itself ( 65 , 66 , 70 , 71 , 75 ). The heterogeneity of current practices around letter writing demonstrates a reality in which many providers do not uniformly operate within the informed consent model, and do not even uniformly adhere to the SOC as written. This heterogeneity in practice by providers also extends to requirements by insurance companies in the US. The lack of clear guidelines about what should go into a letter, especially across different insurance providers, can lead to increased barriers to care due to insurance denials for incorrectly written letters. While direct data examining insurance denials for incorrectly written letters is not available, we can see this indirect effects in the fact that while 90% of insurance providers in the US provide coverage for GAC, only 5–10% of TGD patients had received bottom surgery even though about 50% of TGD patients have reported wanting it ( 91 ). Version 8 of the SOC reduce some of the letter writing requirements as discussed above, but they still do not give clear instructions on exactly how to write a letter of readiness or perform an evaluation ( 79 ). Given the lack of uniformity and limited benefit of such letters to surgical providers, these authors propose that future research be conducted into the need for letters of readiness for GAC, ways to ensure the content of such letters are evidence-based to improve outcomes of GAC, and improve education to providers by creating an easily accessible and free semi-structured interview with letter template.

Limitations

The reviewed articles included opinion manuscripts, published SOC, and proposed models for how to design and operate GAC clinics, however, this narrative review is limited by a lack of peer reviewed clinical trials that assess the evidence for the GAC practices described here. As a result, it is challenging to comment on the effectiveness of various interventions over time.

The WPATH SOC have evolved significantly over time with regards to their treatment of TGD individuals. Review of the literature shows a clear progression of practices from paternalistic gatekeeping toward increasing emphasis on patient autonomy and informed consent. Mental health evaluations, still required by SOC version eight are almost entirely unique as a requirement for GAS, apart from some bariatric and transplant surgeries. Individuals who wish to pursue GAC are required to get approval for treatments that their cisgender peers may pursue without such evaluations. While there may be some benefits from these evaluations in helping to optimize a patient socially, emotionally, and psychologically for GAC, the increased stigma and burden placed on patients by having a blanket requirement for such evaluations leads us to seriously question the readiness evaluation requirements in SOC version 8, despite a reduction in the requirements compared to previous SOC. This burden is made worse by limited access to providers knowledgeable and competent in conducting GAC evaluations, writing letters of readiness, and a lack of consistency in the application and interpretations of the SOC by both providers and insurance companies. Other barriers to care created by multiple letter requirements include the often-prohibitive cost of getting multiple evaluations and the delay in receiving their medical or surgical treatments due to extensive wait times to see a mental health provider. This barrier will in theory be ameliorated by updates to SOC in version 8, but multiple letters are likely to at least be required by insurance companies for some time. Overall, the shift from gate keeping to informed consent has been a net positive for patients by reducing barriers to care and improving patient autonomy, but the mental health evaluation is still an unnecessary barrier for many people. Further research is necessary to develop a standardized evaluation and letter template for providers to access, as well as further study into who can most benefit from an evaluation in the first place.

Data availability statement

Author contributions.

TA and KK contributed to the conception and design of the study under the guidance of RL and AJ, reviewed and analyzed the literature, and wrote the manuscript. AW organized the literature search and wrote the “Methods” section. RL and AJ assisted in review and revision of the completed manuscript. All authors approved of the submitted version.

Abbreviations

1 Gender affirming surgery has historically been referred to as sexual reassignment surgery (SRS).

2 Gender affirming care is an umbrella term referring to any medical care a TGD individual might pursue that affirms their gender identity, including primary care, mental health care, GAH or GAS.

3 The organization will be referred to as WPATH moving forward, even when referring to time periods before the name change.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.1006024/full#supplementary-material

How Gender Reassignment Surgery Works (Infographic)

Bradley Manning, the U.S. Army private who was sentenced Aug. 21 to 35 years in a military prison for releasing highly sensitive U.S. military secrets, is seeking gender reassignment. Here’s how gender reassignment works:

Converting male anatomy to female anatomy requires removing the penis, reshaping genital tissue to appear more female and constructing a vagina.

An incision is made into the scrotum, and the flap of skin is pulled back. The testes are removed.

A shorter urethra is cut. The penis is removed, and the excess skin is used to create the labia and vagina.

People who have male-to-female gender-reassignment surgery retain a prostate. Following surgery, estrogen (a female hormone) will stimulate breast development, widen the hips, inhibit the growth of facial hair and slightly increase voice pitch.

Female-to-male surgery has achieved lesser success due to the difficulty of creating a functioning penis from the much smaller clitoral tissue available in the female genitals.

The uterus and the ovaries are removed. Genital reconstructive procedures (GRT) use either the clitoris, which is enlarged by hormones, or rely on free tissue grafts from the arm, the thigh or belly and an erectile prosthetic (phalloplasty).

Breasts need to be surgically altered if they are to look less feminine. This process involves removing breast tissue and excess skin, and reducing and properly positioning the nipples and areolae. Androgens (male hormones) will stimulate the development of facial and chest hair, and cause the voice to deepen.

Reliable statistics are extremely difficult to obtain. Many sexual-reassignment procedures are conducted in private facilities that are not subject to reporting requirements.

The cost for female-to-male reassignment can be more than $50,000. The cost for male-to-female reassignment can be $7,000 to $24,000.

Between 100 to 500 gender-reassignment procedures are conducted in the United States each year.

Sign up for the Live Science daily newsletter now

Get the world’s most fascinating discoveries delivered straight to your inbox.

Man's years of premature ejaculation had a rare cause

Viagra alternatives? Study of mouse erections hints at new ways to treat erectile dysfunction

Chemo side effect caused man's eyelash growth to go haywire

Most Popular

• 2 Giant, 82-foot lizard fish discovered on UK beach could be largest marine reptile ever found
• 3 Global 'time signals' subtly shifted as the total solar eclipse reshaped Earth's upper atmosphere, new data shows
• 4 Rare 'porcelain gallbladder' found in 100-year-old unmarked grave at Mississippi mental asylum cemetery
• 5 'I nearly fell out of my chair': 1,800-year-old mini portrait of Alexander the Great found in a field in Denmark
• 2 'We were in disbelief': Antarctica is behaving in a way we've never seen before. Can it recover?
• 3 George Washington's stash of centuries-old cherries found hidden under Mount Vernon floor
• 4 Scientists create 'toxic AI' that is rewarded for thinking up the worst possible questions we could imagine
• 5 5 catastrophic megathrust earthquakes led to the demise of the pre-Aztec city of Teotihuacan, new study suggests