New NHS children’s gender clinic hit by disagreements and resignations - Guardian

Though I know such disputes based on strongly help positions occur in every field, this example extreme belief-led factionalisation is more characteristic (on one side at least) of religion than science.

It sounds basically like one group wanted to ignore CASS and the other wanted to acknowledge it's findings. When the former wouldn't budge the latter quit - which is pretty much the pattern at the Tavistock with the responsible clinicians whistleblowing.

Also fascinating to see this position on a day when WHO will not be making any recommendations for trans identifying children & adolescents due to lack of evidence...

Which begs the question about why the hell the former group think social transition of children is good and just how ideologically driven they are.

There IS no evidence for transition of children and the lack of follow up from the Tavistock is definitely part of this lack of evidence.

It is a similar situation to the one being unpacked in court in Edinburgh at the moment. A passionate genderologist sees anything but their view as heretic and sinful, and the purpose of their job is to enforce their belief system over and above anything else. Which includes the service users.

Neutrality is sin. Anything but slavish service of the belief system is sin. Non compliant policy is sin. To consider people's actual needs and rights is sin. To provide services to sinners is a sin. To tolerate colleagues not of the one true faith without trying to get rid of them is a sin.

Which unfortunately makes it increasingly obvious that someone committed to this belief system is rendering themselves unsuitable for a post in a public service where neutrality, impartiality, and serving the public (all of them) is the job requirement. And to run places like this is going to require making political neutrality a key part of the job description. Because more and more places are just descending into a group of this particular lobby creating havoc, and preventing anyone from doing anything useful, while stacking up employment tribunals.

It is a mess. On one hand the executive team are aiming to get the training right this time. And on the other hand the waiting list is huge and children are at risk of going private where they will not receive exploratory care and therefore receive a low standard of care.

The training modules has to be developed as there must be none available to use and modify. However how is this going to work with people on the team who will only ever approve affirming only care? Meaning anything that might be exploratory might be rejected. There seems to be an issue in implementing Dr Cass’s recommendations.

Can’t make out whether it the pro-affirming or the pro-exploration clinicians who have resigned?