United States Citizens should not be allowed to undergo gender-transformation surgery

I greatly appreciate you being a true debater with vivid arguments which allows for a greater debate altogether. Please note the underlined, bolded, and italicized words as major points. My constructive consists of rebuttals to con’s points and new points which further my cause. Thank you everyone who is taking the time to read this debate and please, vote fairly. That being said, let’s get on with the debate! Rebuttals:“There were two main points in his argument: that transgenderism does not exist, and that the “victims” of medical interventions used to change people’s bodies to fit their minds are harmed by the therapies they receive. ”My opponent appears to be mistaken with my original argument. I never claimed that transgenderism does not exist. In my last sentence of round one, I sympathized with people who struggle with gender-identity issues. Transgenderism does exist and it is a serious mental condition that must be treated. I did claim that the surgery to “swap sexes” is not genuine and is a lie, however I am not claiming that transgenderism does not exist. I also never stated that the victims of medical interventions did so to fit their minds. I took no stance as to why they did so and I have no interest in saying specifics as to why they do so, only in proving that surgery is not the answer to their problem. “As such, if I demonstrated that the therapy was effective in making patients feel better about themselves without too much harm, I would demonstrate that the therapy ought to be permitted. “…Through a study from Sweden, we can see that gender reassignment procedures improve the lives of those receiving them”I would like to stress my opponent’s words; “Without too much harm”. In certain cases, yes, transgender reassignment does improve the lives of the afflicted. However, a long term study of 324 sex-reassigned persons in 2003 in Sweden concluded: “Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behavior, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population. The findings suggest that sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism”. It is clearly demonstrated that this form of “therapy” is not always successful and it causes harm, enough harm that it cannot be classified as “not much harm”. Therefore, the con’s rebuttal is null and void. “In the status quo, patients seeking the therapy are able to go to regulated practitioners and receive it in a system that is under governmental scrutiny; this significantly reduces any risks that may be incurred from it. ”Just because it is overseen by the government does not mean that the risk goes down. The Government cannot protect from conditions that may result because of the surgery. If a person sues for malpractice, he or she sues the doctor who did the surgery primarily, and if they can, they want to include the hospital. Since the doctor is not an employee of the government, you cannot say that the government will protect you and the risk will go down. It is the doctor’s fault for the surgery, not the government. Because of this, the government will not play such an adamant role in ensuring the patient’s long-term quality of living“Under pro’s proposal, the therapy would be banned, but there would still be demand for it; patients may choose to receive the therapy overseas or in shady back-alleys, without any governmental scrutiny over safety, entailing all kinds of risks. ”On the contrary, I am arguing that the only therapy to be banned is the actual surgery, and not other forms of therapy. I am actually arguing that counseling is a much better alternative than a surgery. It is stated in the topic headline that I am arguing against SURGERY, not other forms of therapy. Also, why would people go to “shady back-alleys” for a surgery that you claim they know the risks for? I know I would not go to a back ally, and pay a person to cut my genetalia off and trust him not to do anything else with my body. I don’t care how desperate you are, people nowadays have a little common sense. CONSTRUCTIVES:1. Therapy is a better option, not sex-changeCounseling and other forms of treatment are less expensive than surgery and in some cases, can be more effective than a sex-change because it is responding to the mental issue. Getting a surgery to cover it up treats this as a physical disability that can be fixed with a few knife cuts. Also,Gender-changing surgery can cost 5,000-15,000$. This is all out-of-pocket money, since most insurances don’t cover such a dramatic surgery. The parents should not have to pay for the mutilation of their child. Many Catholic institutions claim that this surgery is a form of mutilation because it does not offer a complete gender change. Let me remind the audience that this surgery does NOT change the sex of an individual biologically, if it did, there wouldn’t be an issue. Instead, the surgeons remove parts of the body unique to one sex and make replacements to put back. The doctors cannot however, make fully functioning genetalia or switch male hormones with female hormones, making one truly male or female. 2. Switching one’s gender is a mistake You may be allowed to alter a piece of paper (birth certificate) as a result of it, but people cannot legally become the opposite sex for all purposes. Also, the person cannot become biologically the other sex, so what is the point? Even if it is therapeutical, I have proven that there are better forms of therapy and coping mechanisms. Genital restructure will not change identity much. People can change almost every document to their chosen identity, which includes gender-identity, without having to have any medical alterations. Some people want genital restructure because they thought it would make them more of a women or male, however “identity is who we think we are, how we interact with other people, and what they think of us as a result of this interaction. Most of the time during social interaction, you will not involve what's between your legs. " [1] Transgender people can and usually do live normal lives without this type of surgery, and have lasting relationships because of it, and their quality of life is usually better than people who underwent this type of surgery. Final Words:I have demonstrated that gender-reassignment surgery is a false hope for all of those who struggle with gender-identity crises. The Con’s main point was that it acts as a sort of therapy or coping mechanism, however, spending 5,000-15,000$ on a coping mechanism is not a good way to rid one of a condition. It may work some of the time, but unless it is 100% safe, 100% effective, and achieves the goal of the patient, we can look to better alternatives, such as counseling. Surgery does not change the sex of a person, it is not entirely safe, and it does not change the fundamental, mental, problem, it is only a physical cover-up for a mental disability. Counseling would be much more effective since it is a form of mental help for a mental problem. Direct note to competitor: “I have clearly on the high ground in terms of accuracy and logic. ” Leave the gloating until the end please! (and if you really have the high ground, then consider your sentence structure. You can’t “have clearly on the high ground”) Sources: . http://www.lambdalegal.org...http://commonhealth.wbur.org...http://www.sexchangeregret.com...[1] . http://www.gendercentre.org.au...