Three NHS trusts to adopt guidelines written by a trans activist

I find this encouraging, but yes, we can't afford to let our guard down for one second.

It worries me though that if local women hadn't objected, it would have just been rubber-stamped, no EIA etc. No questions were raised internally.
Systems need to be more robust than that.

It also states in the impact assessment
^The EHRC states “In UK law, ‘sex’ is understood as
binary, with a person’s legal sex being determined by
what is recorded on their birth certificate. A transgender
person can change their legal gender by obtaining a
GRC. A transgender person who does not have a GRC
retains the sex recorded and is protected under the
Equality Act as per their legal sex or under the protected
characteristic ‘Disabled’ in some circumstances (impaired
or limited ability to engage in certain tasks or actions, or
to participate in typical daily activities). ^
and recognises the recent no self id decision by gov. This seems a good sign.

[quote Thelnebriati]Heres the link to the impact assessment, if you dont want to download it;

The assessment shows the toolkit has a positive impact for the group with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, and a negative impact on 4 other groups.
bnssgccg-media.ams3.cdn.digitaloceanspaces.com/attachments/govbody_1Dec20_item6.1.pdf[/quote]
Which makes it a 'Glass 100% full" situation, for some.

There are many positives, including a 2 week review period.

One thing that stood out to me was this:

PSED
“Young people who are referred to a GIDS may go through a rigorous process before any medical intervention takes place, but there is a small percentage (less than 1%) of people who de-transition mostly as a result of unsatisfactory surgical procedures or social difficulties.”

Risks/Mitigation
“The toolkit should make reference to the fact that some - albeit a very small percentage of people - de-transition; and highlight that there are risks to certain medical interventions.”

There is no mention of the % of children who desist if there is no intervention.

Just caught up on the EIA stuff, feel much better now.

I haven't finished yet (reading the EIA's) , but this is really interesting. It is clear that the author if the toolkit comes from a radical 'everyone needs to be educated' viewpoint, but the legal eagles have said those references need to be removed, along with the statistics on suicide and that other statistics must be put into context. There is a lot going on (it is 64 pages) so have only looked at a few.

I am all for proper healthcare for trans community and I think the EIA does acknowledge the need for non-discriminatory care however, EIA does look carefully at so many areas and comments that some areas are awaiting either court cases, or Secretary of State or NHS input.

I am much more positive reading something like this (which I will finish later) than something from the twittersphere

This is in Bristol soo I'm not surprised. Medics will (secretly) laugh at the idea that anatomy is not a good guide to the sex of children. They will be well aware of differences in sexual development and also that dsd people and trans people are not the same.
The poor children who will suffer medical intervention as a result of this.

Yes there are lots of positives - but they should have recognised the negative impact on ppl with PC of sexual orientation, most obviously young lesbians.

Heres the link to the impact assessment, if you dont want to download it;

The assessment shows the toolkit has a positive impact for the group with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, and a negative impact on 4 other groups.
bnssgccg-media.ams3.cdn.digitaloceanspaces.com/attachments/govbody_1Dec20_item6.1.pdf

Calling a group of humans 'an infestation' is an interesting take on human rights.

Thanks for that anotherFOIrequester

From the paper (for anyone who can't open it):

A series of edits are recommended to mitigate against identified risks, which include:
 Amending the ‘Treatment works’ section; including removing references to the use of hormone blockers in young people pending the outcome of the nationally commissioned Hilary Cass review.
 Amending the treatment pathways section; being clear that this section is intended to illustrate a typical patient journey rather than define a single pathway.
 Acknowledging sex as a protected characteristic under law in the crisis management section, and making stronger reference to national guidance in this area.
 Removing reference to suicidality in young people and improving the use of statistics throughout the document; contextualising with sample sizes.
 Including more case studies to bring people’s experiences of accessing local health and care services to life.

Very positive.

Update on this story - one of the three trusts has now completed an Equality Impact Assessment which you can read here:

bnssgccg.nhs.uk/library/governing-body-paper-1-december-2020-item-61/

More on TW Hewitt's influence here. What's startling is when advocates like Bergdorf or Hewitt are given prominent positions without any qualifications, skills or expertise. Yet their reach is causing catastrophic consequences for women and informing policy - Stonewall steering group also being a key example of this.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3385533-Prominant-campaigning-role-of-Tara-Hewitt-NHS-TELI-Social-work-universities-etc?pg=1&order=

I've added this to the 'It Will Never Happen Resource Thread'

So many organisations are captured. The NHS fell a long time ago when the likes of Tara Hewitt became involved in dictating policy.

This is so dangerous and irresponsible. I hope the women who will be impacted by this dangerous environment in those trusts speak up. But by then it's too late.

I wish I could edit posts here

I'm referring to the Cheryl Morgan mentioned in the article as the person who wrote the guides.

This Cheryl Morgan?

twitter.com/CherylMorgan/status/1228655272287178752

''Personally I find it worrying that women should be reduced to a bunch of biological characteristics. I thought that not doing that was one of the points of feminism.''

You would only think it reduces women for us to be defined as a biological sex class if you think there is something inherently inferior about the sex characteristics typical of that sex class.

There's a sharetoken for the Times article about the NHS on this thread (also sharetokens for other Times articles today).

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3823385-The-Times-View-on-Harry-Miller-Twitter-the-trans-debates-Thought-Police-15-2-20

Earlier thread about these guidelines.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3784009-Are-you-in-Devon-Bristol-North-Somerset-or-South-Gloucestershire-Tell-NHS-your-view-on-trans-guidelines-NOW?

The toolkit has also been criticised for saying that trans patients “need to be given priority” when it comes to...

Everything.

I am so tired and fed up with this emotional blackmail that women must never matter as much, nor be considered as much, and can never be as distressed or affected as much. It reminds me of past times in history where it was considered that certain types of people didn't have real feelings, or feel as much pain, or need the quality of food that their betters needed.

It's pure elitist misogyny, it's dehumanising women and creating different standards according to the perceived importance of the person instead of equality. There is nothing good about this, society has no excuse for indulging it.

If the child or anyone at all needs a blood test or a transplant then no doctor is going to do anything but act wholly on the person's biological sex

Is Sarah Woolastone back in the day-job now?

'women are an infestation' - the extreme misogyny is hardly a surprise but thank you, that's a quote I'll be keeping to demonstrate it.

The whole 'anatomy is not always a good guide to determining a child's sex' is bonkers, a flat out lie. If the child or anyone at all needs a blood test or a transplant then no doctor is going to do anything but act wholly on the person's biological sex, regardless of whether the person likes to be known as that sex or not. Otherwise they're going to kill their patient.

They're saying social lies for social approbation against their own knowledge, judgement and social responsibility, and it's ridiculous.

Some children may present with gender identity needs, or the medical condition of DSD. They are not 'a different sex' to their anatomy.

I said this at #WomensLib2020 - but do we need a Bluestocking Letter Writing Club to write to relevant authorities and protest about this?

Also sorry didn't read full thread, ignore me

Sorry for all the acronyms!