Tavistock puberty blocker study published

Well there's Hilary Cass's review to be done, and whistleblower David Bell has a fundraiser on crowdjustice to try to cover legal costs as the Tavi are threatening action for what? His internal report into the service of a couple of years ago?

London teaching hospitals are absolutely ruthless and will hang some poor bugger out to dry to protect the institution. The Baby P case was a classic example - the paediatrician who examined him last didn't do a good job, but there were loads of extenuating circumstances which GOSH covered up link. She was also conveniently a non-UK trained doctor, so the perfect scapegoat, and was duly hung out to dry by an 'independent' review conducted by her own boss.

Expect something similar from the Tavi. There will be some token sacrificial resignation/sacking, and everyone else will carry on as normal.

If there was an "outlier" doctor independently pushing this and getting new protocols into place that would be one thing (that person ought to lose their job).

But I get the impression it's been more a case of institutional capture with it getting ever harder to resist. Doctors like you and me going along with the culture.

What would be nice would be recognition of the whistleblowers but sadly I think whistleblowers are often unrewarded or even villified in real life.

It’s not a good outcome for the children involved. They knew this and kept doing it. That’s the big thing for me

Yes, I feel like this too. They knew.

I don't think there will be much professional fall out, unfortunately. They will all hide behind the fact that they had Ethics Committee sign off, and that the NHS stance at the time was that PBs are reversible. The GMC have fully swallowed the Kool-Aid and won't be looking to pursue the Tavi aggressively, as doing so would call attention to their own complicity. Ditto the CQC and NHS England.

Probably the best we can hope for is that someone (who was on the cusp of retirement anyway) resigns as a gesture. It's shit but I don't think we will see restitution, other than through personal injury awards.

It’s not a good outcome for the children involved. They knew this and kept doing it. That’s the big thing for me. No evidence that it helped their mental state. They got no mental health support.

TBH, I think some of the suggestions about legal action on here are a bit fanciful and not necessarily helpful. For instance, we probably wouldn't want to see prosecutions under criminal law (in the unlikely event of the CPS agreeing to bring charges), with its the higher burden of proof - any acquittal would be used as 'proof' that the Tavi has done nothing wrong.

We don't need anything fancy, legally. We just need a steady drip-drip of personal injury cases.

In the meantime, I am reminded of how Marcus Evans was refused permission to read David Bell’s report, despite being on the Governing body, with the justification that he was too new a governor to read it

Bloody hell - just when you think things can't get any dodgier.

What would happen if they are?

As mentioned in previous posts, I think it's more likely a breach of the duty of candour rather than contempt. Given that the case is over, the only consequence that seems relevant for such a breach is a highly adverse award of costs, but given that there is already a costs order in place in favour of Kiera I don't know whether she will see to change it.

Does someone have to notify the court and they take action? I'm clueless about everything

How are the Tavistock not in contempt of court for hiding that report and this bone density information?

Amazing!

Thanks!

Although the to do list just got a lot longer

@PlantMam
These minutes?
tavistockandportman.nhs.uk/about-us/governance/council-of-governors/meeting-and-papers/

I will do a bit more ‘indexing’ of the board meeting minutes this evening. 2018 should be interesting as that’s when GIDs started publicly acknowledging the skyrocket in referrals and the group of concerned parents wrote to the trust, resulting in this Observer article www.theguardian.com/society/2018/nov/03/tavistock-centre-gender-identity-clinic-accused-fast-tracking-young-adults

In the meantime, I am reminded of how Marcus Evans was refused permission to read David Bell’s report, despite being on the Governing body, with the justification that he was too new a governor to read it (!)
(Marcus Evans says this in his recent interview with Erin Brewer on YouTube. Will look it up and find a time stamp later)

I wonder if minutes of the governors meetings are available to the public, the way the board meeting minutes are? If not, would they be available via FOI, do you think?

@MoleSmokes thank you for your superb and very enlightening post. NHS England has, imo and experience, been thoroughly captured. It will take time to turn the juggernaut around.

There are rumours that Simon Stevens will be leaving soon. Will be interesting to see who next takes the helm and the direction they steer in.

Am 3 pages on and still reeling from that case of a kid staying on PBs because

HOW can that be ethical? There is nothing wrong with that child's body, there is no precocious puberty. They are medicating no condition and they don't know what the outcome of that will be. "First do no harm, unless it's a gender issue, then just do what the person wants"

There is a whiff of Andrew Wakefield around all of this.

Re: detransitioners and potential for medical negligence claims

Summary of Bell V Tavistock written by Susanna Bennett of 1 Chancery Lane Chambers.

Scroll down for opinion on possible legal action.

archive.md/aPY7T

(Archive link because the Lexology.com site asks you to sign up before viewing if you visit more than a couple of times)

Bennett’s work page: 1chancerylane.com/barristers-staff/susanna-bennett/

1chancerylane.com/

1 Chancery Lane is a set of leading barristers offering specialist advocacy and advice in the fields of Complex Personal Injury; Public Authority Liability; Travel & Cross Border Claims; Medical Law; Property, Chancery & Commercial; and Professional Liability. With a recognised specialism in acting for clients in the police, insurance, travel and professional services sectors, as well as more widely across local & public authorities and the healthcare, education, manufacturing, property, construction and consumer sectors, 1 Chancery Lane, combines a modern approach to legal excellence with a commitment to delivering the highest levels of client service.

Thanks very much NotBad

It would be very interesting to see similar research done for subsequent cohorts, given that the study was done before the massive increase in referrals particularly of girls. Have they become less or more selective in who they give blockers to? How have the numbers of children treated with puberty blockers changed over recent years? Has anyone seen this data anywhere?

Over 300* not 309, I’m not that accurate.

Not sure of source for that and it says “suggests”. Someone might have a source for more accurate numbers.

A BBC article in July last year had the number at 267.

www.bbc.com/news/health-49036145

Gids' data suggests that between 2012 and 2018, 267 people under the age of 15 started using the blockers.

So that’s up to 2018, highly likely to be over 309 now.

Does anyone know if there are any numbers available as to how many children GIDS have treated with puberty blockers? This study was done before the huge increase in referrals - have they continued collecting data?