For years, a single statistic has been used to argue against gender-affirming care for children: that between 60 and 90 per cent of trans young people will eventually identify as cisgender by adulthood. New research from Virginia Commonwealth University has examined the studies behind that claim and found it to be statistically unsupportable.
Where the claim came from
The figure originates from a 2016 blog post, not a peer-reviewed study, which cited a collection of earlier research as its basis. That post was widely circulated and has since been used in policy arguments and legislative debates in multiple countries, including as part of the reasoning behind restrictions on gender-affirming care in the United States. The VCU researchers set out to examine the underlying data directly.
What the new study found
The research team reviewed 11 studies referenced in the original blog post, alongside five more recently published studies. Published in the journal Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, the analysis found that desistance rates could be estimated anywhere from zero per cent to 100 per cent, depending entirely on how the data were interpreted. Persistence rates, meaning young people who continued to identify as transgender into adulthood, fell within exactly the same range under different interpretations. The figure of 60 to 90 per cent was not a finding. It was a choice about how to read inconclusive data.
The quality of the original studies
Several of the studies underpinning the original claim were conducted before 1990 and involved small sample sizes. They also used older diagnostic frameworks and did not always distinguish clearly between children with gender dysphoria and those with broader gender-nonconforming behaviour. These methodological problems mean the studies were not a sound basis for the sweeping statistical claim that was later built on them.
Why this matters for policy
Lead author Catherine Wall, assistant professor of psychology at VCU, noted that the desistance figure had been used to shape legislation and to justify restricting access to best-practice gender-affirming care across 26 US states. Her view, expressed in response to the findings, was straightforward: legislation should be guided by accurate science. When the underlying data do not support a specific number, that number should not be treated as established fact in public or political debate.
The broader picture
The desistance argument has appeared not only in American policy debates but in discussions in the UK, including in material associated with the Cass Review, which has itself been subject to significant international criticism for the quality of its evidence review. This new research adds to a growing body of work challenging the evidentiary foundations of restrictions on gender-affirming care for young people. Understanding where these figures come from, and what they actually show, is part of making sense of a debate that has too often relied on contested statistics presented as certainties.
If this is useful to you, please share it. Every share helps more people find accurate information about gender diversity.
Dr Helen Webberley, Gender Specialist and Medical Educator.
helenwebberley.com