Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Parents kept in the dark by teachers about their 16 year old daughter’s medical transition

138 replies

rogdmum · 25/06/2023 06:25

In this case the Head appears to have supported the parents’ wishes that their daughter’s social transition not be supported, but some teachers ignored this and even went further, keeping the daughter’s use of cross sex hormones secret:

“The couple found out how far their daughter had progressed with transitioning only after hiring lawyers to demand sight of school records. To their astonishment, the records showed some staff also knew their daughter was taking cross-sex hormones as a step towards making her body more masculine.

Subsequent disclosures showed she had also been using a chest binder to flatten her breasts, another troubling revelation the school had not shared.”

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/c4af6f1c-1276-11ee-9673-09365d127a9f?shareToken=dcf6a82e739f6596fbb7897c6484f5a4

OP posts:
NotBadConsidering · 25/06/2023 08:45

No child is Gillick competent for puberty blockers.

Goldencup · 25/06/2023 08:36

Whatwouldscullydo · 25/06/2023 08:27

It still begs the question that if adults are unaware of the consequences of the decisions and we have seen several examples of this. Like the transman who didn't realise removing their breasts would mean they couldn't breast fees their baby. The drs who had to find a work around when they were confronted with having to do surgery on male patients who had puberty suppressed and therefore didn't have enough penile growth to invert. The adults who woke up after surgery and didnt realise that using their colon would mean their fake vagina smelt etc

How when we have all seen adult drs in that specific field arguing about and being surprised at the issues presenting in the surgeries on tv broadcast to millions, can anyone think an under 18 could possibly understand.

What are they basing the decisions on. Schools are so reluctant to even give a paracetamol. I'm sure we've all been called in for period pain and head aches because the school will not give the medication. Tbey eveb prefer that you give the antibiotics kids are on outside if school hours Yet they can do this? How?

Not for 16 year olds. Dd carries paracetamol in her bag with the school's knowledge and consent, she is 16. It is her choice when and if she takes it.

Parisj · 25/06/2023 08:34

Capacity has to be assessed in relation to the decision and the individual. We can't take away the right to decisions about their healthcare or confidentiality from all people with autism or from all young people over 16, that would be terrible and is exactly what the Gillick ruling was about, the young persons right to choose contraception. I say go for the ideology, for the people prescribing, for the drug pushers, not for the people abiding by the law and attempting to provide support within their role. If she was under 16 and not Gillick competent that's different.

Whatwouldscullydo · 25/06/2023 08:27

It still begs the question that if adults are unaware of the consequences of the decisions and we have seen several examples of this. Like the transman who didn't realise removing their breasts would mean they couldn't breast fees their baby. The drs who had to find a work around when they were confronted with having to do surgery on male patients who had puberty suppressed and therefore didn't have enough penile growth to invert. The adults who woke up after surgery and didnt realise that using their colon would mean their fake vagina smelt etc

How when we have all seen adult drs in that specific field arguing about and being surprised at the issues presenting in the surgeries on tv broadcast to millions, can anyone think an under 18 could possibly understand.

What are they basing the decisions on. Schools are so reluctant to even give a paracetamol. I'm sure we've all been called in for period pain and head aches because the school will not give the medication. Tbey eveb prefer that you give the antibiotics kids are on outside if school hours Yet they can do this? How?

RedHelenB · 25/06/2023 08:24

Goldencup · 25/06/2023 07:35

There is some shocking misconceptions on this thread. A sixteen year old does not need parental consent for any medical procedure or prescription, at all. In law they have bodily autonomy you will not be asked about medications any more than you would for a spouse or a close friend. It is up to them who they share the information with.

Show quote history

This

Goldencup · 25/06/2023 08:18

Theeyeballsinthesky · 25/06/2023 08:14

Should say for info not got info 🤦🏻‍♀️

I nearly linked that, it's a good summary isn't it ?

Theeyeballsinthesky · 25/06/2023 08:14

Should say for info not got info 🤦🏻‍♀️

Helleofabore · 25/06/2023 08:14

So, the child was ‘estranged’ while still living at home and still in their care, all because the parents was advocating to watch and wait until adulthood. And the school knew this was the path the parents had chosen for a field where treatment is finally admitted to be experimental.

Something needs to change here.

This is nothing like contraception and abortion.

This child was vulnerable due to their autism. The child, now mid teen, has been let down by ideologically driven adults. The parents approach in this instance was to wait to adulthood, it was not to deny fully.

gogomoto · 25/06/2023 08:13

At 16 a person does not need parental consent and teachers cannot tell parents except in very limited circumstances or by going to court. It's not black and white. There is a case for increasing medical consent to 18 but as it stands that isn't the case

Goldencup · 25/06/2023 08:09

rogdmum · 25/06/2023 08:06

I don’t know why you keep mentioning blockers. It is cross sex hormones that this child was prescribed

Show quote history

They would have needed blockers first. That article is so poorly researched I am fairly sure they are using the term " hormones" generically. But it makes little odds what is was really.

Goldencup · 25/06/2023 08:07

rogdmum · 25/06/2023 08:04

Of course I do. This is one of the areas the Charities Commission is hopefully looking into during their investigation of Mermaids (as in, I sent the screenshots to them, maybe they are looking at it, maybe not), though I’m not claiming Mermaids was involved here.

Mermaids Youth Forum held a document with shall we say, “friendly” GP practices for children “lucky” enough to live in their area. Practices were widely discussed and shared with named GPs by children on the forum. In addition, strategies for lying to their usual GP in order to obtain bridging cross sex hormones were also frequently discussed (a separate issue).

I’m also aware of a GP who is providing his own child with puberty blockers. My daughter’s former school actually included this information in a subject access request to me. The GMC would like to know the name of the GP so they can determine whether or not an investigation needs to be carried out. I can’t say for sure, but I suspect the school has not provided this information to them.

I don’t ever make claims I can’t back up. 🤨

Show quote history

😧I thought the GMC had intervened about 2 years ago and those GPs had been struck off. As for prescribing to their own child - I have no words.

Original poster
rogdmum · 25/06/2023 08:06

Goldencup · 25/06/2023 07:50

I would put money on the fact no one was prescribing blockers for a 15yo without parental consent. However even if they were, I think it could be argued that Gilkick competence was used. That would be very difficult to contest particularly if the child was suicidal. We just don't have the details- as I said lazy journalism.

I don’t know why you keep mentioning blockers. It is cross sex hormones that this child was prescribed

OP posts:
Original poster
rogdmum · 25/06/2023 08:04

Goldencup · 25/06/2023 07:21

Presumably you have evidence of this ? This is absolutely not my experience.

Show quote history

Of course I do. This is one of the areas the Charities Commission is hopefully looking into during their investigation of Mermaids (as in, I sent the screenshots to them, maybe they are looking at it, maybe not), though I’m not claiming Mermaids was involved here.

Mermaids Youth Forum held a document with shall we say, “friendly” GP practices for children “lucky” enough to live in their area. Practices were widely discussed and shared with named GPs by children on the forum. In addition, strategies for lying to their usual GP in order to obtain bridging cross sex hormones were also frequently discussed (a separate issue).

I’m also aware of a GP who is providing his own child with puberty blockers. My daughter’s former school actually included this information in a subject access request to me. The GMC would like to know the name of the GP so they can determine whether or not an investigation needs to be carried out. I can’t say for sure, but I suspect the school has not provided this information to them.

I don’t ever make claims I can’t back up. 🤨

OP posts:
Goldencup · 25/06/2023 08:02

Whatwouldscullydo · 25/06/2023 07:56

That poor family 😢

How can gillick competence even apply here anyway. You can't make an informed decision without information. And there isn't enough or any really on what happens to young developing bodies on blockers and cross sex hormones.

Its not like pregnancy amd abortion where we know after decades if information and reports if outcomes, what happens when underage girls have babies they don't want etc.

You cabt assess someone's ability to make a decision when there's not even enough info fir adults to make a decision.

Basically we can no longer trust schools. How are parents meant to hand over their vulnerable children with additional needs to these people...

Gillick competence does not just related to reproductive medicine, there is case law in this. I did say it could be argued, not that I thought it was ethical or good medicine, which is why I am as sure as I can be that these blockers were prescribed by an online service not a family doctor and that it wasn't done using Gillick competence, although life saving treatment is an exception.

Do all the naysayers on here know what the waiting lists in CAMHS are like right now ? Also this child was estranged from their parents and children's services were involved- could you be sure they (the parents) were acting in their child's best interests.

ValancyRedfern · 25/06/2023 08:02

What an awful awful situation

Abreezeintheglade · 25/06/2023 08:00

You do wonder how some children are deemed Gillick competent when they have body dysmorphia?? Surely having a mental health condition makes you incompetent to make decisions.

Moonandstarzz · 25/06/2023 07:59

This is disgraceful. The child was already vulnerable due to her autism. How dare this be exploited especially without her parents knowledge or consent. Have they a strong legal case?

Whatwouldscullydo · 25/06/2023 07:56

That poor family 😢

How can gillick competence even apply here anyway. You can't make an informed decision without information. And there isn't enough or any really on what happens to young developing bodies on blockers and cross sex hormones.

Its not like pregnancy amd abortion where we know after decades if information and reports if outcomes, what happens when underage girls have babies they don't want etc.

You cabt assess someone's ability to make a decision when there's not even enough info fir adults to make a decision.

Basically we can no longer trust schools. How are parents meant to hand over their vulnerable children with additional needs to these people...

Helleofabore · 25/06/2023 07:55

rogdmum · 25/06/2023 07:17

Unfortunately there are some unscrupulous GPs in the U.K. who will prescribe cross sex hormones. Unfortunately there are also equally unscrupulous LGBT groups who know where to send these children.

At least once the lawyers got involved, the school were forced to disclose that they were aware that CSH had been prescribed.

I expect that the local project group provided details of where to buy binders (without giving the list of serious negative side effects) and the details on which GP will provide the prescription. And we all know which one that could well be and that there is no exploratory therapy given, just prescriptions.

Goldencup · 25/06/2023 07:53

Capacitous

Theeyeballsinthesky · 25/06/2023 07:53

Yes exactly that’s why I wasn’t surprised

Goldencup · 25/06/2023 07:51

Theeyeballsinthesky · 25/06/2023 07:50

And she also has autism :( why am I not surprised - these poor girls

They always have autism.

Goldencup · 25/06/2023 07:50

BettyFilous · 25/06/2023 07:46

Parents or guardians are still responsible for the child until 18.

Not medically, not for capacious 16 year olds, seriously trust me on this.

Theeyeballsinthesky · 25/06/2023 07:50

And she also has autism :( why am I not surprised - these poor girls