Michael Biggs paper on the Tavistock

I’ve never really thought about this angle before, but the kids on puberty blockers - how do they do university/friendships/relationships/hold down a serious job/decide to settle down/get a mortgage if mentally they are stuck at 11 even in 20s and 30s?

I've been wondering that too. All the youngsters I've seen on documentaries, etc have either still been living at home, or in one case at university.

But yes, it's a horrifying thought.

They consulted the parents on the content of the patient information???
Christ. Christ. This is just unbelievable. How are they getting away with this?

I’ve never really thought about this angle before, but the kids on puberty blockers - how do they do university/friendships/relationships/hold down a serious job/decide to settle down/get a mortgage if mentally they are stuck at 11 even in 20s and 30s? They are going to need support just to get by surely?

What madness has seized these people?

The madness known as power.

Interesting UCLparent.

I have to say, as a parent of a child with ASD, that I already knew how few people working within children’s services actually care about them or centre them in any meaningful way.
Yet even I am shocked and appalled by what I am seeing here. What madness has seized these people?

And don't get me started on Jazz asking their mother at the dinner table quite how much of her vagina dad sees when they had sex. Worried, in case jazz's own vagina didn't measure up

Which of course shows a massive misunderstanding if what a vagina is and what it's for. The delusion that this perfect vagina can just be created from nothing. How are people with so little understanding of the human body and the amazing things it can do be a surgeon.

The surgeon - and the whole medical team - must have known this before Jazz was put on puberty blockers.

I agree, but in that case why the endless search for someone to do some pioneering surgery. And jazz being filmed having to make crucial decisions about whether to expand their genitalia somehow, or use other parts of their body.

It all looked as though no one had even thought of it. They certainly hadn't prepared for it.

The surgeon gave the impression that it had come as a surprise, to everybody, that the puberty blockers and cross sex hormones had kept Jazz's genitalia that of a prepubescent child. And therefore incapable of forming a neo-vagina.

Jazz is not the first child to have this treatment. Jackie Green had the same treatment and the same result. Susie Green was filmed laughing about the lack of 'material' to make Jackie's neo vagina. And presumably some other children have had this treatment as well, but less publicity. The surgeon - and the whole medical team - must have known this before Jazz was put on puberty blockers.

I wonder, when all this first started, if they really knew that loss of sexual function would be an issue?

There was a scene in the I Am Jazz show, with Jazz Jennings, the poster child for everything trans in children.

Jazz was attending a meeting with the surgeon, who airily waved in the direction of Jazz's chest saying the drugs did you a lot of favours there, but not there, indicating Jazz's crotch.

The surgeon gave the impression that it had come as a surprise, to everybody, that the puberty blockers and cross sex hormones had kept Jazz's genitalia that of a prepubescent child. And therefore incapable of forming a neo-vagina.

I find it incredulous that the surgeon didn't know. Because what's the fucking point of the drugs, if not to keep a child in a childlike state?

But, the to-ing and fro-ing, and angst in the subsequent episodes and the trauma Jazz had to go through to find a pioneering surgeon who might be able to help them, made it look like they really had no clue.

The whole thing was unutterably horrific. I can't believe that the initial meeting with the surgeon who bemoaned the lack of genital material, wasn't scripted. Did they really film Jazz hearing that for the first time?

And if they didn't, why let the surgeon say it? It looks so negligent.

So quite apart from exploiting a vulnerable teenager they appeared to use them as a surgical human guinea pig, and then broadcast it to the world for entertainment.

And don't get me started on Jazz asking their mother at the dinner table quite how much of her vagina dad sees when they had sex. Worried, in case jazz's own vagina didn't measure up.

And, of course, Jazz has never had an orgasm, despite trying very hard for both the surgeon and the show.

(nc for this post)

This is the first time I've seen Russel Viner's name involved in all this. My child is treated at UCL for an endocrine condition (unrelated to 'gender'). Our consultant works in the same team as Viner, and was listed on Weberley's website as one of the complainants against her.

I don’t know much about this subject, so thanks for the information.
Dissenting people , ie the people challenging the use of “puberty blockers” will probably be shot down as anti “choose your own ending “

I am on the "they cant understand so they can't give consent" page.

I wonder, when all this first started, if they really knew that loss of sexual function would be an issue? It seems a reasonable possibility, but they don't seem to have really spent much time thinking about the possibilities, as if it was ok to just go ahead until bad things started showing up.

Thanks drspouse, google befuddled me.

I think some of the parents may have a lot in common with the anti-vaxxers really. Although they are accessing medicine for their kids when the anti-vaxxers are rejecting it, there is a similar conspiracy culture in their thinking around the establishment dictating treatments or diagnoses the internet says are wrong.

I do hope one day that the parents are also held accountable.

How so many parents cry at the idea if their babies being made to cry with vaccination injections, who cry on their first day of school, who spend hours on trip advisor before booking a birthday meal and only ever bust one mechanic cos everyone else will rip them off, are still somehow the same parents who will allow this to be done to their children..

Makes no bloodynsense

Thanks to Michael Biggs for this piece of research. It is shocking to see it laid out in the way he has, and if he is wrong then the way for GIDS to correct his errors is with complete transparency. That they haven't been transparent up until now suggests that the situation is as he has outlined, which is utterly repugnant and those involved are likely to face serious punishment, whether it be struck off, sued and/or criminal charges.

These poor poor children. I was telling my husband about it this morning, and he simply can't believe that this has been happening, it is so utterly insane.

Why aren't they being told

Because it would impede an experiment and agenda of people with a vested interest in achieving specific outcomes. This paper mentions the active exclusion of negative or unwanted data.

This same group is trying to compel a national experiment in removing single sex spaces from women and in reducing safeguarding from children. This is shattering in how something so unethical, so blatantly wrong has not only been allowed to happen but actively helped along by parties in positions of ultimate trust: the NSPCC, the Health Authorities and MPs and the government in particular.

oldcrone

Which is why I said that they should be telling kids everything. If they withhold anything then they are admitting themselves that kids dont have capacity to understand and going ahead is unethical.

And if its assumed it's not appropriate to discuss it with them due to their age. Then they again arent old enough and mature enough to consent to treatment.

Either way these people know its unethical. Asking these questions would cement that fact
So why arent parents asking...and why arent they being told...

@NeurotrashWarrior you can archive a web page on www.archive.org

If they dont understand then its not informed consent and none of it should go ahead.

A child who hasn't gone through puberty is unable to give informed consent about treatment which will result in them having no sexual function or reproductive capability as an adult. They can't give informed consent about something which they don't yet have the capacity to understand (because they haven't gone through puberty).

These children will not be asexual by choice and self definition, they will live out the effects of having been chemically castrated.

The idiots insisting this is better than trying to help distressed children cope with their bodies and secondary sex characteristics are thinking very short term, because we will have a generation of distressed adults who will realise what they have been deprived of, how alienated they are from their peer group, and the lifelong impact this will have on them. And that's putting wholly aside the detransitioning ones distressed about a surgically scarred and altered body, and all of the ones who will be living with surgical complications and severe chronic illnesses that are likely to massively affect their earning and career potential.

For what? As a pp so well said. Because it props up the agenda of AGPs who are all about their unaffected sexual function. Take these kids out of the narrative the majority of whom are female, and it's pretty exposed: we have adult transsexuals who have always been there, and we have one hell of a lot of AGP men. Who are pushing the politics and demanding to colonise and own women. And it's hard to miss what's driving them.

Although if course they know that already which is why akk this stuff is so hush hush.

Seems parents put more research into what car to buy or what lap top than the ethics of gender care

Well if you are going to chemically stunt your child long term then at the very least you need to try I think.

If they dont understand then its not informed consent and none of it should go ahead.