Memo Outlining Evidence for Change for Gender Identity Disorder in the DSM-5

Abstract

IntroductionIn 2008, when the diagnostic Work Groups for the DSM-5 wereestablishedandformallyannouncedbytheAmericanPsychiatricAssociation,oneofthefirsttasks wastoreviewtheexistingdiag-nostic categories and to conduct literature reviews. The GenderIdentity Disorders (GID) subwor kgroup was one of three sub-workgroups of the Sexual and Ge nder Identity Disorders WorkGroup.Likeotherworkinggroups,itschargewastoevaluatewhatwas,ifanything,‘‘good’’abouttheexistingdiagnosisofGIDintheDSM-IV-TR and what, if anything, required changes. The sub-workgrouppublishedfourliteraturereviewsinwhichsomeinitialproposals and recommendations were made (Cohen-Kettenis PDrescher,2010; Meyer-Bahlburg, 2010; Zucker,2010). The subworkgroup had feedback from its advisors, fromother professionals, and from the public, including three periodsof APA-sponsored feedback on the DSM-5 website.Around mid-way during the DSM-5 preparation period,which ended on 1 December 2012, the Task Force added to thereview phase two additional committees. One was a ScientificReview Committee (SRC) and the second was a Clinical andPublic Health Committee (CPHC).The SRC was charged with providing feedback on all pro-posed changes to the diagnos tic criteria that were based onempirical evidence. The CPHC was charged with providingfeedback with regard to additional parameters, such as clinicalutility and public health concerns.EachWorkGrouporsubworkgroupoftheDSM-5TaskForcejustifiedtheproposedchangesofdiagnosticcategoriesinareportentitled Memo Outlining Evidence for Change (MOEC). Withthe permission of the American Psychiatric Association, wereproduce here the final version of the MOEC prepared by theGIDsubworkgroup(‘‘inpress’’referenceshavebeenupdatedandtypographical errors corrected). Publication of the MOEC thusmakestransparenttheargumen tationadvancedbythesubwork-group for interested readers. Comments on the proposal arewelcomeintheformofaLettertotheEditorofthisJournal.