NHS England and NHS Improvement - Puberty blockers update

a new independent multidisciplinary professional review group will be established to confirm decision-making has followed a robust process.

The MDT is a well established process for reviewing decisions in cancer care.

I read it as independent. Given the bad press, I imagine the NHS is going to use the term 'robust' when looking at the steps they take. At least I bloody well hope they will

Not 'independent' at all then?

The members of the group will immediately find themselves the focus of intense lobbying and threats and criticisms it they disagree with TRAs. This is also likely to affect who would be happy to join.

I agree with you about pressure from TRAs but will also now be also be more pressure to be cautious without good reason to intervene. Not to mention scrutiny which was missing previously and legal weight.

The MD team will be people involved in the young persons care, I don't read it as being a separate panel.

The members of the group will immediately find themselves the focus of intense lobbying and threats and criticisms it they disagree with TRAs. This is also likely to affect who would be happy to join.

The make-up of the group and who has voting rights is all important.

This ^^

This is a much needed interim measure in order to Safeguard the children previously seen only by GIDS specialists. Providing of course these experts come from without a gender ideology framework and are free to apply their professional expertise in making a holistic assessment.

The make-up of the group and who has voting rights is all important.

As an interim measure, and in direct response to the Court’s suggestion that additional safeguards may be warranted, a new independent multidisciplinary professional review group will be established to confirm decision-making has followed a robust process.

This group will be comprised of health and care professionals with expertise in child development, neurodevelopment and mental health, assessing capacity and consent, and safeguarding processes.

This is a much needed interim measure in order to Safeguard the children previously seen only by GIDS specialists. Providing of course these experts come from without a gender ideology framework and are free to apply their professional expertise in making a holistic assessment.

It's not reasonable for every decision to be referred to court though and the proposed process includes MH professionals and will be a lot more open than previous practice.

As an interim measure, and in direct response to the Court’s suggestion that additional safeguards may be warranted, a new independent multidisciplinary professional review group will be established to confirm decision-making has followed a robust process.

This group will be comprised of health and care professionals with expertise in child development, neurodevelopment and mental health, assessing capacity and consent, and safeguarding processes. The review group will ensure:

the Tavistock’s GIDS has carried out an enhanced clinical review of each patient;
there has been a robust process for providing parental consent and child assent;
adequate information, including on the risks and benefits of puberty blockers and on the limited available evidence such that the court has described the treatment as ‘experimental’, has been provided to both patient and parent(s);
the clinical process for forming a prescribing recommendation followed good practice guidelines;
any relevant needs of the patient, and what this may mean for their wider healthcare, has been fully explored.

I think we can assume this will be monitored very carefully with outcomes tracked too.

So rather than going to court for decisions, GIDS will now take the decision with parental consent (which they stated they wouldn’t do) and then the process will be assessed by a review group.

Unless the review group is wholly chosen from parties which are not influenced by GIDS and their policies or the lobby groups that have influenced GIDS, then I have to wonder whether it will provide any useful improvement to the safeguarding procedures that were so noteably absent when examined in court.

The review group talks about good decision making but still ignores the central point of consent unless they switch to parental consent which it looks like they are despite telling the Bell court they never would.

New patients currently require court order to start, but this will be replaced by a "decision group" of experts
I dread to think exactly who will be on this "decision group".

Interesting inclusion:

"The judgment of the Administrative Court, accepted by the Family Division, was that the use of puberty blockers to treat gender dysphoria in children should be considered experimental given the limited evidence of efficacy or long-term effects of the treatment."

How do they get to overrule the court of protection who say they are needed to make a decision on behalf of a child? The NHS has no capacity to make decisions for others.