Jeremy Vine show is discussing Keira Bell's case today

I think from what others on here have previously said that it is normal for courts to refuse right to appeal because it is rather like saying "here's our judgement, but we're not sure it's right". Applications to appeal thus normally go directly to the appeal court.

Considering that Jolyon doesn't seem to have even read the judgement (otherwise he'd know that they did hear from trans kids), I'm not sure we should put that much stock by his opinion on the chances of appeal. The GIDS already said that it is going to try to appeal.

Did anyone listen to the Times podcast on this? A mother of a FtM transitioner who is around 20 now, talking confidently about how PBs were a pause and fully reversible.

Just wanted to reiterate what a PP said about the poor children caught up in this. How do you explain this to a young child who has been told by all the adults around them that they're on the right path, that puberty blockers are "just a pause", that they were born in the wrong body etc? My heart breaks for them. What a mess.

Hopefully the Dr Cass review will pull all this muddy mess together and unearth all the dead end studies and unpublished results.

I have a lot of faith in her as paediatrician and she is well versed in the needs of autistic girls. Fingers crossed my faith isn’t misplaced, but I currently truly believe her to be of the calibre of the excellent HCPs who have been busy saving my little girls life.

My experience of paediatric oncology/haemotology/immunology/genetics care within the NHS is that it’s world class. GIDS seems to be some kind of abhorrent basement dwelling monster, in comparison. It’s a national shame.

Hilary Cass background: www.rcpch.ac.uk/about-us/our-team/dr-hilary-cass

Info on the GIDS review: www.england.nhs.uk/2020/09/nhs-announces-independent-review-into-gender-identity-services-for-children-and-young-people/

JamieLeeCurtains didn't an ethics committee give the go ahead to the Tavi way back when, when the Tavi said they would be doing this for a number of years and then report on it, and every time they were asked for the report they came up with some excuse or other - "sorry miss, teh dog ate my homework" style. I believe we're still waiting for that one and that must be getting on for 10 years now. Whatever they claim is being peer reviewed now, I don't expect it to ever materialise.

I'm sure people will put me right on this - I really am dredging my memory

As for comments on the length of the judgment... It is 38 pages long. It is not an overly long judgment, although it is comprehensive. I have read much longer judgments on far less important cases.

It is also very accessible to a lay reader. There is simply no excuse for anyone with a professional interest in this matter not having read it.

My comment on the length was merely to support my opinion that the High Court did not want to hear the matters again so covered all bases in their first ruling

It won't attract much if they don't know what, when or how they'll be appealing. Very very strange.

Sorry I don't know how to do links, but the Stonewall/Mermaids stuff is on Stonewalls Twitter feed from earlier today.

Mermaids and Stonewall, along with Transgender Trend, applied to be intervenors. They weren't able to show that they could contribute any new, relevant evidence that would warrant their inclusion in the case.

As for comments on the length of the judgment... It is 38 pages long. It is not an overly long judgment, although it is comprehensive. I have read much longer judgments on far less important cases.

It is also very accessible to a lay reader. There is simply no excuse for anyone with a professional interest in this matter not having read it.

Unless of course they suddenly had that document peer reviewed that wasn't available for a very important court case. bloody shambles and this is our NHS

Guess ‘Reece’ and Reece’s waiting time court challenge has been fucked over for this higher profile one? The crowdfunder isn’t attracting much, compared to Keira.

Usually the CoA takes it's lead from the High Court unless new evidence is presented. I think that's right. Yes. Appeal couldn't go through High Court because they did not allow

Thanks Maud

Not that I really understand what that means. I assume they can ask the CoA if they'll hear the appeal, but the High Court won't have any more to do with it.

Re the article linked to by a pp www.theguardian.com/society/2019/feb/23/child-transgender-service-governor-quits-chaos

It's dated Feb 2019 and talks of a £1.3m research study getting underway to follow-up former GIDS Tavi patients to see what happened to them.

But in her Newsnight interview of November 2019, GIDS Tavi psychiatrist Dr Elizabeth van Horn was unable to offer any information on this subject, that I could tell.

And it would appear that still none was available for presentation by the Tavi to the Nov-Dec 2020 court case brought by Bell and Mrs A.

I'm puzzled.

They refused leave to appeal, but gave the Tavi till 22 December to appeal directly to the Court of Appeal according to the Lucy Bannerman Times article.

Just wanted to add that I am certain that children at GIDS and on waiting lists are devastated today. Of course, they won't see this as extra layers of protection because they are so far down this rabbit hole and are surrounded by adults unthinkingly affirming them and shrieking about suicide that being told they have to wait or have decisions reviewed is an anathema.
My heart goes out to them - they are the casualties of what has happened. Sold a series of lies, experimented on medically and having no access to thoughtful exploratory therapy. We can only hope that the adults surrounding them find the wisdom to metaphorically hold these children and enable them to deal with what must be a crushing disappointment. The performance of Green and Mermaids today suggests that this wisdom is sadly lacking.

I thought an appeal would be thrown out. DIdn't the justices say yesterday that they didn't give leave to appeal. The justices were applying the current law, no change in the law, therefore no case for appeal. An appeal isn't just a 'oh I don't like that, I want a different decision' which is probably why he's not come straight out with. All being considered, lots of great minds, blaahh blaahh. We'll see. Maybe he's talking about taking a completely different case? Otherwise crowdfunding, as procrastinator says would be for the NHS??? Batty or what

In the case of Charlie and similar children the proposed treatment was also deemed life saving by those wanting him to have it. The courts job is to weigh up factual evidence and make decisions on a child's best interests outside of emotive arguments.

.Suing the NHS for giving puberty blockers to child-
at the bottom of the same article
.Suing NHS for taking too long to give puberty blockers

This is what happens....you could see this coming a mile off. Common sense left the building years ago.

Also fairly sure that if there was international scientific consensus demonstrating beyond all doubt that the Tavistock were doing the exact right thing, the Tavistock would have submitted that in their evidence to the judge.

I doubt the judge just missed that, and nobody thought to tell them.

has already redirected his crowdfunder towards an appeal

The judge was requested by a Tavistock patient to review if they were working with practice and procedure within the law. The conclusions from facts and evidence presented by the Tavistock themselves is that no, they are not. And yes, they must adapt their practice now.

Appeal against what?

It's quite worrying that several very involved and well known figures seem convinced that they know better, should have been consulted by the judge to veto any possible conclusions drawn, and have some ownership or even authority over what should happen within the Tavistock - who are the experts who presented the evidence assessed by the judgement.

Thanks Fine.

which we believe to be legally, scientifically and morally flawed

Of course you bloody believe that Mr Fox Beater, of course you do.

Didn't the judge, in a sense, just tell Tavistock that they have to abide by the current law? That they'd been applying Gillick incorrectly? Is the law unlawful now, or...?

I'm getting a headache

But surely the whole point of the detailed judgement
is that it was not just about Trans

It was in fact about the Gillick principles of informed consent
not being properly applied
and how they should be applied in future

it links to cases like Charlie Gard
where the wishes of the parent
were weighed up by the court of Protection
against the good of the child
because the child is too young to give informed consent
to any life changing procedure
that is not rock solid proven to benefit them

eg Chemo is OK - the evidence base is huge
but going overseas for exploratory treatments
of any kind
is not

Foxy Kimono has already redirected his crowdfunder towards an appeal.

This is his current pinned tweet. Aside from the fact testimonies from children on a gender affirmation pathway were submitted (as can be read in the judgement) why is he suggesting their were no orgs representing their interests? What does he think the Tavistock is?