Re: Orchidectomy as a preliminary procedure prior to gender reassignment surgery.
Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 8:58 pm
Re: Orchidectomy as a preliminary procedure prior to gender reassignment surgery.
Quote:
Originally Posted by A-1
From the website...
The effects of bilateral orchidectomy need to be carefully explained to the patient. The obvious effects includes:
........
1. Obviously the patient needs to provide written consent for this procedure to be performed on him, with the likely effects, side-effects and long-term consequences explained carefully beforehand.
2. If married, the wife needs to consent in writing for her husband to undergo orchidectomy.
A-1
Why is this required? A married woman does not require her husband's concent for a hysterectomy, an abortion, or removal of her ovaries.
Question is from this (http://www.eunuch.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=9126) thread.
Mac,
It is because the procedure is elective, not a medical necessity or even a recommendation and it is sanctified by a mental examination. In a family situation the spouse would have a legal interest in the matter, regardless.
I hope that explains the rationale adequately. Comments? Anybody?
A-1
Quote:
Originally Posted by A-1
From the website...
The effects of bilateral orchidectomy need to be carefully explained to the patient. The obvious effects includes:
........
1. Obviously the patient needs to provide written consent for this procedure to be performed on him, with the likely effects, side-effects and long-term consequences explained carefully beforehand.
2. If married, the wife needs to consent in writing for her husband to undergo orchidectomy.
A-1
Why is this required? A married woman does not require her husband's concent for a hysterectomy, an abortion, or removal of her ovaries.
Question is from this (http://www.eunuch.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=9126) thread.
Mac,
It is because the procedure is elective, not a medical necessity or even a recommendation and it is sanctified by a mental examination. In a family situation the spouse would have a legal interest in the matter, regardless.
I hope that explains the rationale adequately. Comments? Anybody?
A-1