This republished article first appeared in the National Review.

A new medical study out of Finland has found that gender-dysphoric adolescents and young adults who were subjected to gender reassignment interventions had worse mental health outcomes than a control group that did not receive such bodily alterations.

The study tracked 2,083 people who had sought medical services for gender confusion between 1996 and 2019. The findings are quite specific. From, “Psychiatric Morbidity Among Adolescents and Young Adults Who Contacted Specialised Gender Identity Services in Finland in 1996–2019,” just published in Acta Paediatrica (my emphases, citations omitted):

Gender-referred adolescents showed significantly higher psychiatric morbidity than controls both before (45.7% vs. 15.0%) and ≥ 2 years after referral (61.7% vs. 14.6%). Those referred after 2010 had greater psychiatric needs than earlier cohorts, both before (47.9% vs. 15.3%) and ≥ 2 years after (61.3% vs. 14.2%) referral. Among adolescents who underwent medical gender reassignment, psychiatric morbidity increased markedly during follow-up — rising from 9.8% to 60.7% in feminising gender reassignment and from 21.6% to 54.5% in masculinising gender reassignment. After adjusting for prior psychiatric treatment, all gender-referred adolescents had similarly elevated risks of psychiatric morbidity, with hazard ratios approximately three times higher than female controls and five times higher than male controls.

But what about previous studies that gender ideologues often cite to justify puberty blockers and mastectomies for underage patients? They were inadequate to the task at hand:

Many of the studies in this field are cross-sectional and unsuitable for assessing developments. The few longitudinal studies have been of low quality and provided inconsistent results. The sample sizes have been small; there usually has been no control group, follow-up periods have been short, and the measures of assessing changes in mental health have varied. Loss to follow-up has often been substantial.

Gender reassignment interventions seem to have worsened many of the patients’ mental health:

Considerable increases in need for psychiatric treatment were seen among those adolescents who had undergone medical GR, particularly among those seeking change toward female. Oestrogen has been found to potentially cause depressive symptoms in both cisgender women and transwomen, which may partly explain the increases in psychiatric needs among those who underwent feminising GR. Masculinising hormones may temporarily improve mood, and testosterone-related bodily changes — typically emerging within a few months — could be expected to alleviate GD and subsequently psychiatric treatment needs. However, psychiatric treatment needs were also markedly increased among those who obtained masculinising GR. Subsequent morbidity burden may also arise from treatments not meeting the expectations placed on them.

Here are the “clinical implications”:

Regardless of gender, adolescents suffering from GD present with excessive psychiatric morbidity. Subsequent to medical GR, psychiatric treatment needs appear to increase. It should be noted that in some individuals, medical GR appears to be linked to deterioration in mental health. . . . The effects of medical GR and the expectations of the patient must be addressed before commencing the treatment. The considerable severe psychiatric morbidity prior to contacting the GIS, and its increase over time, suggest that for some of these adolescents, GD may be secondary to other mental health challenges. This underscores the need to thoroughly assess and appropriately treat mental disorders among those seeking GR before and after undergoing irreversible medical treatments. Psychiatric needs must be adequately met.

This study’s results are no surprise as they are consistent with other recent similar work. What should be a surprise — but, alas, isn’t — is much (not all) of the American medical establishment’s refusal to “follow the science” and choosing still to embrace gender ideology. Ditto, progressive lawmakers and officials who continue to propose and enforce laws essentially mandating so-called gender-affirming care.

Hopefully, this study will aid the many lawsuits being filed by childhood victims (detransitioners) that offer the best chance of bringing this scandalous episode in medical ethics and political ideological malpractice to a much-desired end.