Michael Biggs paper on the Tavistock

We don't test on animals so why are we allowed to do this to children?

Thanks Red for this thread, chilling stuff but great to see it all laid out so clearly.

What happened to your other thread today reporting on the EHRC? Has it been delegated? It was so important, surely it hasn't fallen down the site so far yet? Thanks!

Thanks all. The physical health effects have objectively been the worst part, but the loss of sex drive and the impact on my marriage has probably been the hardest thing to cope with. Then again, I lost my career, my energy, my ability to function like a normal person, constant pain, weight gain... it all sucks. And the worst part is that doctors don’t know why it’s happening, and nor do they care. There’s almost no research into how these drugs impact people longterm, and why.

I try and pop up to share my experiences on threads about this topic. For anything outing on MN I use other usernames, since I’ve had quite a lot of abuse and threats when speaking on this topic elsewhere. There are lots of people who really don’t want people like me speaking out.

Re:parent involvement- this is a bad idea. If you need input as to whether the technical information is comprehensible by lay people, get it reviewed by a neutral, independent panel.
Parents should emphatically not have been involved in review of this material. They had no value to add.

Tammy

There’s a lot of money to be made also. Have a look at ‘top surgery’ on Instagram if you have a strong stomach. It’s a business.

Yes the one thing drs are meant to be is honest. Drs are meant to show you away from the internet exaggerations. the horror stories. The lies.

They arent meant to indulge them. So many children spend their days in and out of hospitals. Have their lives limited by courses of treatments. Why anyone would allow a perfectly healthy child to enter an delusional pathway and make them.a lifelong medical patient I dont know.

Maybe this particular field attracts people with dubious motives.
Personal prejudices - 'transing the gay away'
God complex or something more sinister (what kind of person salivates at the thought of puberty blockers?)
Lack of moral and ethical standards. Some plastic surgeons will do anything.

Tammy I've been around for a long time under various names and I always appreciate when you give the time to share your own personal experience of this drug on a relevant thread and the long term horrible outcomes you've suffered as a result. It's such important information and something as many people as possible need to know about.

That’s so sad tammy

What lots of people fail to realise is that a prolonged course of this medication can remove your sex drive completely, permanently. It’s what happened to me - a two year course and I couldn’t stand to be touched for close to a decade.

It did eventually improve somewhat until pregnancy and breastfeeding happened - now it’s like a light switch, on or off, mostly off.

And that’s just one of the many ways this fucking drug ruined my life. The thought of giving it to children shatters my heart.

After 16 they don’t need parental consent.

Just to agree with all of the PPs who've drawn attention to the failure by the ethics committee who approved the study, in addition to the participating clinicians and the parents who gave their consent.

I'm aghast at the sheer scale of these ethical failures.

Sorry angry
My stepdaughter is fully believing all the mermaids bullshit. Her father is not seeing her currently because he’s so upset and she does not understand why that would be.
Her grandparents and wider family is also bemused and sad.
Her mother has also totally been taken on my Mermaids etc. It’s a very bad situation.

You can't medicalise your way into a different sexed body
You just cant

Yes the one thing drs are meant to be is honest. Drs are meant to show you away from the internet exaggerations. the horror stories. The lies.

They arent meant to indulge them. So many children spend their days in and out of hospitals. Have their lives limited by courses of treatments. Why anyone would allow a perfectly healthy child to enter an delusional pathway and make them.a lifelong medical patient I dont know.

And they do so seemingly safe in the knowledge that if anything and happens its not them that's responsible. It's the bigots and the bullies fault.

Sarah
There is a lot of insight in your post, regarding children being switched on about their condition.

They don't like being fobbed off.
They know this will hurt.

Life is a struggle for them and most likely will continue to be so.
Many develop a strength of character that is indeed maturity.

So with children being encouraged to see their biological sex as some kind of choice,
then they are being lied to.

Immature but healthy children being lied to

You can't medicalise your way into a different sexed body.
You just can't.

Yet this is what they're being told.

Quote from the "I am Leo" link ^^

"Good to be me: I accept myself for who and what I am"

Why are people not doing that then? Why are they insisting on focusng on the opposite "you've got the wrong body, don't accept yourself as you are, it's not good to be you in that body so change it....."

I think also that alot of children who have disabilities or conditions and who potentially need these operations/treatments , in many cases are alot nore switched on. they have lived with it their whole lives. Have had to adapt to their limitations . Some, not all obviously, have maturity well beyond their years. They have had no choice but to grow up and face things. Learn sign language. Learn to push themselves around or get around .

Puberty blockers and the trans pathway ensures the opposite. Far from facing reality everyone around them has to play along. Puberty blockers limit their brain development and put them on a path theres no turning back from without some remaining alterations. Really I dont think they are comparable.in that sense . If that makes any sense at all .in a way it's the complete opposite of other conditions.

To be fair I'm not just talking about incidents but specifically the question of when.
When, does the child have the maturity to understand why a procedure needs to be done.
Even minor procedures sometimes need a bit more than consent.
A second opinion perhaps or simply waiting and watching.

I think the use of puberty blockers on children being described as a 'pause' is misleading us all.

The 'pause' narrative is key here.
It suggests they are taking a step back and doing no harm.

When in reality they are doing completely the opposite.

and to seek advice from experts in the field who are medically trained and paediactrically trained without the fear of being fired or harassed for asking questions
This statement ^^
... is where the problem is.

When doctors fear speaking out is a problem.

Probably the ability to discuss with all of the childs care givers and to seek advice from experts in the field who are medically trained and paediactrically trained without the fear of being fired or harassed for asking questions.

Yes, the amount of information available is immense.

The doctor, is the person with knowledge and experience to offer help and advice to the child.
But,
I was thinking at the point where the doctor scratches their head and asks themselves this question,
if I proceed, will the child be mature enough to deal with the effects?

What guides the doctors at this point?

I also think the difference with the medical incidents you mentioned is, that they are physical and measurable conditions.

It's not reliant on other people to pretend they cant hear either or that its something its not.

Other procedures do not depend on the rest of the word colluding or being held responsible for their death.

Procedures often involve an alteration of lifestyle in some way, eg a stoma bag, side effects, cochlear implants etc

Thing is there is information for these things. Success rates. Infection rates . And a wide range of material to read.

I think if someone told parents that 50 percent of people who didnt get a cochlear implant killed themselves based on 27 self selecting people and no control group people would be complaining about that as well.

Capacity to consent
This is an interesting point.

With children, doctors have to make decisions on the basis of medical need, and the effects of the treatment.

Procedures often involve an alteration of lifestyle in some way, eg a stoma bag, side effects, cochlear implants etc.

Doctors constantly have to balance the medical intervention with the child's capacity to cope, understand why, and if there is sufficient family support.

Age is not always relevant, maturity of the child is.

I am not sure if the Gillick (guidelines?) cover this aspect.

Information sheets written by academics without consultation can be offputting and opaque, which also doesn't help with informed consent.

Got to agree with niceberg here. Ethics committees have strict rules about what is included on information and consent sheets and they are NOT user friendly. People often need, and want, a verbal explanation.

From the discussions upthread, it is not clear that enough attention was paid to highlighting potential risks like infertility, anorgasmia (hope that is real word) or even brain development.

Capacity to consent also needs to relate to the consequences. If you fill in a survey about your favourite hot beverages, it might not matter that you don’t know whether the research is sponsored by the Tea Drinkers Association or the Coffee Lovers Club. What worries me is whether a 12 year old can make decisions about their later sexual lives (among so many other things).

I also worry about children who experience puberty early. People refer to ‘teenagers’ taking puberty blockers but actually some children might ‘need’ to take them earlier. I don’t think we know yet the ages of the youngest children in this trial.