Use of body mass index as a health care metric is controversial, especially in candidacy assessments for gender-affirming surgery.  

Physicians tend to rely on diagnostic criteria, including BMI, that can influence patients’ access to care, referrals, and insurance coverage for indicated interventions. 

While transgender health care has moved beyond “gender identity disorder” and “gender dysphoria” as mental illnesses, gender incongruence continues to be a source of oppression.

Despite common outcomes of GRS, decision making about surgical care differs among patients across the lifespan.

Success in uterus transplantation among ciswomen suggests that transwomen and some transmen will also likely have interest in this intervention.

Estelle v Gamble (1976) reiterates that the 8th Amendment to the US Constitution requires adequate care to be offered to all people who are incarcerated.

PROM data can contribute to evidence-based, shared decision making and just access to gender-affirming surgical care.

This commentary on a case considers a transgender patient’s mental health and risk for DVT in ethical decision making about feminizing gender-affirming hormone therapy.

This article shares one transgender person’s numerous health care encounters over 20 years, as both a patient and a professional.

Tension between realistic goals and unrealistic views about how to achieve them is compounded when patients are eager to revise a prior surgeon’s gender-affirming procedure.