Reflections, Reconciliation & Repsychopathologization | Beyond Gender 2025 Year in Review

Stella O'Malley, Mia Hughes, and Dr Bret Alderman open 2026 with a clear-eyed look back at the year that was. Three hosts who have spent 2025 following the evidence wherever it leads now sit down to make sense of what actually happened: Trump's executive orders, the HHS report, the For Women Scotland ruling, the UK puberty blockers trial, and why Canada keeps moving in the opposite direction. It is a candid, searching conversation that reflects on progress, acknowledges what remains broken, and considers what 'repsychopathologization' might mean for the road ahead.

There is something genuinely useful about sitting with three people who have spent a year thinking seriously about gender medicine and asking them to make sense of it all at once. That is what Stella O'Malley, Mia Hughes, and Dr Bret Alderman do in this first episode of 2026 — a reflective, unhurried look back at a year that, by any measure, moved fast. The conversation has the ease of people who have been in the trenches together, and it is sharper for it. Much of the episode is taken up with the United States, where the pace of change in 2025 was extraordinary. The hosts walk through the implications of Trump's executive orders and the HHS report, weighing what they mean in practice and what they leave unresolved. Bret, as the psychologist in the room, brings particular precision to the question of how clinical institutions respond — or fail to respond — when political and scientific pressure arrives at the same time. The UK occupies a significant stretch of the conversation too. The For Women Scotland ruling gave legal clarity to a definition of woman that many had long argued was simply common sense; the hosts consider what it signals and what it fails to settle. The UK puberty blockers trial is treated with the seriousness it deserves — not as a policy footnote but as a moment that will shape how gender medicine is practised and contested for years to come. Canada, as Stella, Mia, and Bret observe, is doing something different: doubling down. The contrast with the UK and the US makes for one of the most searching passages in the episode. The three hosts resist easy explanations and sit with the difficulty of the question — why some countries move toward caution while others entrench — and do not pretend to have a tidy answer. The title's third term — repsychopathologization — carries the analytical weight of the whole discussion. It names something the hosts have been circling for months: the question of whether gender dysphoria, after years of being removed from psychiatric frameworks, is beginning to be understood again as something that warrants psychological exploration rather than immediate medical affirmation. It is a charged word, and the three of them handle it carefully. This is the kind of episode that rewards returning listeners most, because the context is everything. But it also works as an entry point: a map of the arguments, the evidence, and the shifts that are quietly remaking the landscape. Stella's warmth, Mia's forensic attention to detail, and Bret's clinical grounding combine to make a conversation that is candid without being polemical — and honest about what is still broken even while acknowledging what has genuinely changed.

More recent episodes

REPATH LAUNCH

REPATH LAUNCH

Where Did Psychotherapy Go Wrong? | Ian Cox