a sister gone off the deep end

[Nigella]

Based upon the OP, I mirror the shock of others, however, as someone else has pointed out, with a few sentences we are judging a person to be in the wrong for doing something.

I will not condem the person who has done what appears to be a selfish act because I have 0.001% of the facts.

We all ask for tolerence and acceptance, but are quick to condem on the basis of what is in effect for us third hand information.

Ever played the game of chinese whispers? The story changes from one person to the next. Whilst I do not in any way wish to presume anything from this post, I will reserve judgement.

[trisha59]

It really defies all logical reasoning, therefore could there be a mental health thing going on? I hope that this person seeks out a complete physical with a doctor trained in mental disorders

[kym]

thanks MJ

how is her wife coping Kym?

shes still in shock and denial, but she is getting counseling to help her deal with this. now her "husband" is having a real rough time of it and no one is willing to be supportive of the person. I know that stories get twisted as they get passed around and such, however this is first hand info from the wife and i spoke to the sister about it and she/he confirmed the details. the statement that was made that struck me the most was" i did this for me, to feel like i was finally the correct gender." when i inquired about the wifes feelings i was told that since they were apart at the time it wasn't her choice and her feelings played NO PART in the decision. I am ending the friendship because of the circumstances and a few other things that have happened along those lines. I'm just dumbfounded at how someone can make such a drastic decision with out consulting their partner or considering anyone elses feelings on the matter. I for one have no problem with any person having srs if its right for them and its done in the right way(meaning thoughtful of others feelings that may be involved and thoughtful of what kind of image it sends to the world about us)but this was done in the wrong way in so many ways. for those who don't understand the proces: in the US it can literally take years of living as the opposite gender and hormone therapy before the doctors even consider you as a possible canidate for srs. In taiwan and other places overseas all it takes is the right amount of cash to get it done and it doesn't take much at that, the procedure supposedly cost him/her around $2500 US dollars. very sad and scary indeed.

[carolinoakland]

Well the selfishness goes way beyond the need to be selfish about one's needs to be female. I have discussed my options with the only person that matters to me.... my daughter. And i can't imagine ever being in a place where I would just go and have the surgery with out at least telling her. Not that she could change my mind, which she wouldn't she's my biggest cheering section, but to make that big a change without preparing her eeeeee. I agree with others that there must have been a reason that will only be known to the only two people it matters too. The sister and her so. The rest of us can speculate until the cow's jump over the blue moon...... but only they will live with the consequence's. carol.

[Karen564]

Obviously she felt strongly about getting SRS, and there's nothing wrong with that, But not including the supportive wive in that decision process was Totally Wrong and Deceitful, so I feel so bad for the wife, she deserved much better than that.

Karen

[Tamara Croft]

now her "husband" is having a real rough time of it and no one is willing to be supportive of the person.

Why not?

when i inquired about the wifes feelings i was told that since they were apart at the time it wasn't her choice and her feelings played NO PART in the decision.

Are you saying they were split up and living apart or just that he was away?

I am ending the friendship because of the circumstances and a few other things that have happened along those lines.

Why? you've already said he has no one to support him/her, it doesn't matter whether you believe what he/she did was right or wrong, everyone needs support. I think you're wrong ending the friendship, a good friend supports friends through thick and thin and it sounds like he/she needs a friend right now. How would you feel if it was you?

I'm just dumbfounded at how someone can make such a drastic decision with out consulting their partner or considering anyone else's feelings on the matter.

People make mistakes all the time, they don't think, but you've said they were apart, so what reason did he/she have for consulting anyone? Isn't it his/her life?

I for one have no problem with any person having srs if its right for them and its done in the right way(meaning thoughtful of others feelings that may be involved and thoughtful of what kind of image it sends to the world about us)but this was done in the wrong way in so many ways.

You obviously do have a problem with it, there is no right and wrong way to do something, he/she obviously felt this was the right thing to do, and often it hurts others in the process, but you of all people should know that often a TS cannot live their life in the wrong body and will go to hell and back to make it right.

I really cannot understand how people on this forum can judge a person without knowing ALL the facts, we don't even know this person, yet you've already judged her for doing something she felt she needed to do. I thought this was a support forum, where's the support? I just hope when any of you up, you will think twice about what you've said here, about this TS who obviously needs support, who is probably scared shitless right now and is going to lose everything, all because she wanted to live the life she feels is right for her. Don't condemn a person without knowing all the facts, it's not cool at all

[kym]

ok, let me clarify a few things here(or at least try) when i say they were apart it was merely geographical according to the sister and the wife, they were still married and did not consider themselves seperated in any way except by the miles in between them. i know a few that have gone through with srs, however the ones that had partners included their partners in the decision beyond just taking hormones and livng as a preop 24/7, this person did not include the so at any level or at any time, it was literally like leaving the country a man and coming back a woman with out any one knowing that it was going to happen, it was even admitted to me that the sister went overseas for the sole reason to have the surgery but used teaching as a cover story so no one would be the wiser until there was no turning back. no consideration was given of anyone except for the one having the surgery, and fittingly enough when they started on hormones several years ago, the wife was not consulted at all. Now having said all of that, I do realize it was a personal decision that one can only make for ones self, but the least someone could do is let their partner in life(especially a wife of many years) know of the decision whether their feelings were taken into account. To give you all a real life example: me and my so are in a continuing discussion over whether i should start hormones, the current concensus is not to start but the door is always left open for discussion in the future and revisited often. i want to start hormones and start the path to transitioning but she has said that even though its my decision she would prefer me not to until a later date so we can have children of our own. and she has also made it well known to me and the world that she is with me for life no matter what i decide and she is very supportive of me and my choices and will always be that way. Now the sister i posted about had that kind of support from the wife, even to the point or srs but choose to turn her back on it and go off on her own and get the procedure done in secret. Being from a rural part of the state i can understand the need for very few, if any, outside of the family knowing about the srs, but at the very least the wife should have been included on this very private decision from the start if for nothing more than moral support and she was not. Am I offended that i was not included in the decision? not in the least, but i am embarrassed that a friend would take on a drastic and important decision on their own when there almost has to be some kind of outside input into it whether its the input of the wife, or a gender therapist, there was no outside input at all. then to find out that the wife had no idea until after the surgery is done makes a tragic story that much more so in many different ways. I was a support system when the hormones were started because i was one of the few friends that understood the feelings involved , and i do understand the feelings involved in wanting the srs, however i can not even start to understand why someone would want to cut out the best support system they have by not telling the supposedly most important person in your life. when i inquired as to why it happened that way i was told that it was a personal decision and to butt out in no uncertain terms,hence the ending of the friendship.

[Tamara Croft]

I was a support system when the hormones were started because i was one of the few friends that understood the feelings involved , and i do understand the feelings involved in wanting the srs, however i can not even start to understand why someone would want to cut out the best support system they have by not telling the supposedly most important person in your life.

So let me get this straight, when she went on hormones without consulting the wife, you were supportive of that, but now she's had SRS, you're embarrassed? you won't support her? I can understand why she cut out her support system, because she probably didn't want to be talked out of it, she wanted to do this so badly, she had to lie, which is a sad thing to do, but a hell of a lot of TS's do the same thing. It's a sad fact, but cutting out someone because you're embarrassed, because you don't agree with what they did etc, is lousy, I'm sorry, but what kind of friend does that to a person? Do you have any idea what it feels like to be alone? lose everything? She probably told you to butt out because you're taking sides, is that fair?

[kym]

i became a support system after the wife found out about the hormones, both of them thought enough of me to include me as a support system and i was honored. I can understand lying about the hormones and the srs to a certain extent if the wife was not supportive or on the fence(been there with with my ex-wife to a certain degree) however the wife was very supportive. and still would be if there was honesty in the relationship, which there clearly is not. There are other factors that play into ending the friendship which i will not get into on the forum due to the fact that they are non-tg related. Tamera let me ask you this: if you were married(not trying to imply that you may or may not be) and decided to adopt would you not include your partner in the decision? To me its along the same lines. SRS is a life altering procedure, i feel its only right to include a life partner in that type of decision.

[Di]

Two sides of every story and usually the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
She was a friend of yours and you bash her to strangers:Angry3:
We do not know the facts just this malicious gossip.
And even if a part of this is true......she needs support not back stabbing.

[CD Susan]

I think there is more to this story than what we are being told. One does not just get SRS (actually GRS is a more accurate term) on such a short notice as this seems. It is a long and defined process and a wife would certainly be aware that this process had been initiated. I doubt the validity of this post and wish I had never been duped into reading it.

[sharynPA]

Just horrible! Cruel actually,very cruel.

[Wendy me]

before i can say any thing all party's involved need to voice what happened .... i am sorry with out the outer two party's no one can say for sure what went on ..... might i even stretch this a bit with out the out two party's we don't even know this took place.... hell it makes a good read and a thread that will get opions..........

[MarcieM]

I think there is more to this story than what we are being told. One does not just get SRS (actually GRS is a more accurate term) on such a short notice as this seems. It is a long and defined process and a wife would certainly be aware that this process had been initiated. I doubt the validity of this post and wish I had never been duped into reading it.

I agree. This story is fishy.

[battybattybats]

Firstly people, remember that GID can be extremely severe! That if this person was having an extreme GID crisis then SRS ASAP may have been the only way to prevent a mental breakdown or suicide.

When it comes to consulting family...

The decision is not and cannot be anyones but the TSs! The Family hane no say in it ever! For them to be expected to have a say in that choice goes against the human rights of the TS and the legal principles of personal autonomy.

But it would be very reasonable for the SO to be expected to be informed that it was going to take place, so as to be prepared for it, so as to have the opportunity to deal with it. Even to have the opportunity to help support them through the process.

But an SO has no veto or a right to interfere in the decision just as a husband cannot do so in the wives medical decisions. That is only legal and ethical if the partner has no capacity to choose at the time (is in a coma etc) and has not made other legal arrangements. Otherwise each person legally and ethically is the only person with any say in what they do with their own body.

[Tamara Croft]

This is going to be an absolute first, but I completely agree with Batty.

[Lora Olivia]

I have to believe we are hearing less than the whole story here. Regardless of that I have to say that if that was my friend I would try to work through it with both of them. "Judge not, lest ye be judged" This thread also has to be terribly frightening to the newer GG SO's here, I hope that they take it all with a grain of salt. Not saying it hasn't or can't happen, just that it isn't the norm. :2c:

[~Kelly~]

One does not just get SRS (actually GRS is a more accurate term)

I don't mean to hijack this thread but SRS is the more accurate term. GRS is implying that your gender is changing which is impossible. Gender is 100% rooted in your brain. No amount of surgery or hormones can EVER change it. However, outward physical sex CAN be changed. I realize both terms have been used interchangeably, but on an accuracy scale, SRS wins.

Now on to the thread itself. I am leaning towards the "something sounds fishy" side myself. However, I am also disinclined to pass any kind of judgment without hearing both sides of the story. I am VERY hesitant to believe everything is quite as "simplistic" as it is coming across as. I could be 100% absolutely wrong on this though. Without hearing both sides I guess I will never know.

[Sandra]

Without hearing from the two people involved in this how can anyone judge?

[victoriamwilliams1]

sorry Kym but your friend f***** up... This woman was supporting and... WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT???:Angry3:

Now thats what I was thinking.

It was like hi honey I'm home, she ask what gift did you get me? Let see I got you this wonderful teddy bear and I got me SRS.

That is not cool at all.

[Senban]

BattyBattyBats said - "The decision is not and cannot be anyones but the TSs! The Family hane no say in it ever! For them to be expected to have a say in that choice goes against the human rights of the TS and the legal principles of personal autonomy."

Ultimately I agree that it's only one person's decision. But I'd also say that if that person is in a relationship with someone and they want that relationship to continue then they need to involve and inform the other person. As time goes on, it's possible that a fork in the road will appear and the SO may feel they're unable to continue further down the same path. Because they've been fully involved and informed, then everything will more likely remain amicable. But to arbitrarily take a decision and then thrust the result in the SO's face is not really likely to allow the SO to gradually accept the situation and decide if they want to continue to be part of it.

Regardless of how this story may or may not appear to us, it certainly got me thinking and made me realise just how vitally important it is to keep our SO's in the loop regarding such things. They're not just people we know - they're our partners and that means that they're part of the process, even if ultimately the decision rests with us. But while the decisions rest with us, so too do the outcomes and consequences of those decisions.

I'd also agree with whoever it was above that said that it's possible that this person acted out of sheer desperation. But sheer desperation to me is a fairly spur of the moment decision. It's not sheer desperation if someone plans a trip to teach abroad as a cover for their actual plans.

[Sheila]

Firstly people, remember that GID can be extremely severe! That if this person was having an extreme GID crisis then SRS ASAP may have been the only way to prevent a mental breakdown or suicide.

When it comes to consulting family...

The decision is not and cannot be anyones but the TSs! The Family hane no say in it ever! For them to be expected to have a say in that choice goes against the human rights of the TS and the legal principles of personal autonomy.

But it would be very reasonable for the SO to be expected to be informed that it was going to take place, so as to be prepared for it, so as to have the opportunity to deal with it. Even to have the opportunity to help support them through the process.

But an SO has no veto or a right to interfere in the decision just as a husband cannot do so in the wives medical decisions. That is only legal and ethical if the partner has no capacity to choose at the time (is in a coma etc) and has not made other legal arrangements. Otherwise each person legally and ethically is the only person with any say in what they do with their own body.

This is going to be an absolute first, but I completely agree with Batty.

eth·ics [ éthiks ]

Definition:

study of morality's effect on conduct: the study of moral standards and how they affect conduct



eth·i·cal [ éthik'l ]
Definition:

1. conforming to accepted standards: consistent with agreed principles of correct moral conduct
While such activities are not strictly illegal, they are certainly not ethical.

2. of ethics: relating to or involving ethics

mor·al [ máwrəl ]
definition

1. involving right and wrong: relating to issues of right and wrong and to how individual people should behave

2. derived from personal conscience: based on what somebody's conscience suggests is right or wrong, rather than on what rules or the law says should be done

3. according to common standard of justice: regarded in terms of what is known to be right or just, as opposed to what is officially or outwardly declared to be right or just

had batty added morality to his statement then yup iI may well have agreed Tamara ................. there is a difference between ethics and morality

[MarcieM]

The decision is not and cannot be anyones but the TSs! The Family hane no say in it ever! For them to be expected to have a say in that choice goes against the human rights of the TS and the legal principles of personal autonomy.

I have to disagree. A person doesn't just go away somewhere and claim to be working and come back and say..."Oh, by the way, I now have a vagina..."
sorry, that's just not the way it works.

[battybattybats]

This is a big (and important) reply to multiple posts so apologies for it's neccessary length.

I don't mean to hijack this thread but SRS is the more accurate term. GRS is implying that your gender is changing which is impossible.

Many use the G in GRS not to stand for Gender which some doctors once called it but instead as Genital. So that 'top surgery' is still considered SRS and not only 'bottom surgery'. Because the emphasis only on genitals defining ones legal sex catagory is discriminatory towards FtM blokes who less often than MtF choose the current surgical options for a variety of reasons.

Ultimately I agree that it's only one person's decision. But I'd also say that if that person is in a relationship with someone and they want that relationship to continue then they need to involve and inform the other person.

Reasonable to Inform of the choice and maybe even the contemplation of the choice yes, I already said as much myself but Need to Involve in the making of the choice? No. Discuss with? Sure thats an option. Even ask the opinions of. But allow the other to have a say in the decison? To have a veto? To require negotiation about? No. Not with cancer treatment nor with dental work nor with a haircut. The principle is clear and unchanged from the minutia to the ultimate life and death decisions. This is a legal point, its a human rights point, its a philosophical point.

had batty added morality to his statement then yup iI may well have agreed Tamara ................. there is a difference between ethics and morality

Absolutely! It's a common missunderstanding that the two words mean the same thing. Trouble is many dictionaries and many public commentators are rather behind the field of philosophy from where the terms come. Many philosophers for a significant amount of time (lets see... I attended my first lecture on Philosophy between the ages of 3 and 4 and I just turned 33 so it's at least 30 years) do not use the terms moral and ethical as interchangeable.

They make a distinction between morality as subjective, based on personal precepts reliant on a specific feelling, faith, belief or groups rules and ethics as more objective and thus true across different moral fields. Not every philosopher uses that definition of course and there are a few different schools of thought on what precepts define Ethics but I use the term in what is generslly the main usage which is relating to the simple philosophical principles from the Enlightenment of Equality and Liberty from which all Human Rights Philosophy (and modern western civilisation and modern democracy) descends.

Example:
For some Christians working on a Sunday is immoral, in that it goes against proscribed religious rules apllicable to those who hold that faith. But for a Wiccan to work on a Sunday the Christian morals do not and can not apply to them as they do not hold that faith. Instead they have a seperate subjective morality based on the rules of their seperate faith!

However were either to comit murder even when that murder is religiously moral (for example if the Christian murders the wican because of the religious moral rule 'thou shalt not suffer a witch to live') they have acted Unethically because they have imposed their subjective rule over the Wiccan and the Wiccans rights!

Now as the Christian would themselves object if the Wiccan imposed their religious rules over them or if a worshipper of the Vampire Bat God Camasotz were to tear the Christians heart out on a stone altar as a blessed sacrifice then this forms a neat understanding of how an objective system based on equality can arise. One which relegates personal morality only to the self and which requires an unbiased set of principles when dealing with others.

As every single persons morality may vary then even between two Christians one cannot assert their morality over the other.

Example: One may say that the Old Testament rules about food must be obeyed while another may say they do not but that people should go to confession. Neither can apply their personal morality to the other.

I've used religious morality for my examples because they are generaly easier for most people to recognise the differences involved, but even when it comes down to 'conscience' each person has a unique conscience not a single standard universal one so then how can anyone judge others by the standards of their own conscience when those others may well have been following their consciences too?

This is true at every level. So it's even true in a relationship! Even a marriage!

Morality is always under every conceivable circumstance inferior lesser and overridden by Ethical principles.

Morality applies only to the self, Ethics applies to all actions between any two or more sentient beings. Only Ethical judgements are valid over others choices relating to others, peoples choices relating only to themselves are intrinsicly ethical and cannot be judged by others at all!. All decisions relating to others that are Moral but Unethical are Wrong! All actions relating to others that are Ethical but Immoral to one of the parties involved are Right!

Hence the example: A Wiccan working on Sundays no matter how Immoral to some Christians is Ethical and therfore Right and Acceptable but Christians Murdering Witches despite it being Moral is Unethical and therefore Wrong and Inexcusable!

Now Kelly, if you wish I can list a host of Moral arguments to back up the point that the decision always belongs solely to the person whose body it is. But being dependant on precepts that are founded on particular faiths or cultures they will be subjective and therefore useless outside of the self. Whereas the Ethical arguments supercede all Moral ones because thay apply to all people especially when those people may come from varying faiths or cultures with different moral precepts.

Originally Posted by battybattybats
The decision is not and cannot be anyones but the TSs! The Family hane no say in it ever! For them to be expected to have a say in that choice goes against the human rights of the TS and the legal principles of personal autonomy.

I have to disagree. A person doesn't just go away somewhere and claim to be working and come back and say..."Oh, by the way, I now have a vagina..."
sorry, that's just not the way it works.

I sure didn't say the person was wise doing it the way they did without informing their wife. But when it comes to all decisions about ones own body and medical are a good eample the only person with a say in the choice is the person whose body it is. This is an established Legal and Ethical (and yes folks moral too depending on moral system) principle!

The only exceptions are where the person is considered mentally incapable of making the choice for themselves! Such as if they are in a coma or are very young children or are insane!

And even under that exception the choices made on their behalf are limited by very strict rules!

Example: A sane awake sober adult can consent to anything, from surgery to sex. While a small child cannot consent to many things including surgery and no child can consent to sex. This does not mean that their parents can make any choice they feel like just because they make the choice on the childs behalf! Life-saving surgery is valid for example but cosmetic surgery to give them pointed elf ears is not. Hence an adult cant choose for the child of any age that the child have sex!

A husband for example has no say over a wifes consent to sex. Nor the wife over the husband. And if they are passed out from alcohol the other cannot choose on the behalf of the unconcious spouse to have sex. It's still rape Ethically and Legally and by much morality.

So i'm afraid that utter personal autonomy under every possible circumstance where a person is capable of making choices is the case no matter what. And when they are incapable of making choices there are strict principles on the kind of choices others can make on their behalf!

[PatyR]

But an SO has no veto or a right to interfere in the decision just as a husband cannot do so in the wives medical decisions.

Although I agree totally with this idea and also I agree that he/she had the right to make her own decision, I still think that s/he should have told the wife beforehand. Not because s/he was looking for approval, but for the simple fact that a relationship should be built on communication and trust. If none of these exist then the relation is meant no to exist, as well.

Proof of this is that they are getting divorced not because of the surgery, but because the wife was not even told until after the fact.

I'm not who to approve or disapprove the action, s/he had his/her reasons and I respect that, but I think s/he should have let the wife know at least to know whether the relation was meant to exist or not.:2c: