BMA to vote to 'disavow' the Cass review

BMA calls for ban on puberty blockers to be lifted - BBC News

I find the word 'disavow' strangely olde-worldy, like they'll all dress up in funny outfits and go down on one knee and Withdraw Fealty and ritually burn a stethoscope or something. You'd expect something like 'critique' or 'analyse' or even 'refute' from a bunch of professionals, not 'disavow'.
I looked up the exact meaning of 'disavow', and the first definition that appears online is:
to say that you know nothing about something😂
DISAVOW | English meaning - Cambridge Dictionary

The Good Law Practice have condemned SEEN’s review as methodologically unsound and lacking evidence and once SEEN have written their review of the review of the review, GLP will demand a judicial review of the review of the review of the review… fundraising page opening soon.

SEEN in Health is organising a Review of The BMA's Review Of The Cass Review. Get involved if you are in the Health sector.

That's fantastic.

And a great inspiration to other SEENs.

Whoever started this type of organising has really started something.

Taking action right in the centre of each area of work.

Good News.

SEEN in Health is organising a Review of The BMA's Review Of The Cass Review. Get involved if you are in the Health sector.

SEEN in Health is disappointed that the BMA is undertaking a Review of the independent Cass Review. As the leading representative body for doctors in the UK, the BMA has a special responsibility in upholding the ethics, standards and professionalism in the medical profession. 1/5

We are concerned this is an attempt to undermine the findings of the #CassReview- an independent, 4 year review by a leading Paediatrician. We expect the BMA to take contributions from the experience and expertise of its members, including those in SEEN in Health 2/5

Given the clinical, research and policy expertise of Dr Cass, we would wish to ensure that any such review can be objectively held to the highest standards and does not bring the Union or the profession into disrepute in seeking to critique a 4 year expert review. 3/5

Many of our members are also members of the BMA and we have expertise in Psychiatry, General Practice, Emergency Medicine, Ethics and Law, and in systematic review which would be invaluable in recognising the conflicting rights within the Equality Act 2010, 4/5

while also considering the rights and responsibilities of children and young people, parents and clinicians alike. We would like to contribute our experience and expertise to aid the BMA to reach an evidence based child centred conclusion. 5/5

https://x.com/SEENinHealth/status/1818721910521577532

Is there a union that isn't totally batshit over this? Hilarious watching a labour government dealing with them for a change.

@TheTrickyWitch
I feel the same about deciding how best to write to them to express my frustration at this absolute batshittery.

I joined the BMA recently because of KBS actions as chair of GPC and to express an opinion on collective action.

Now I remember why I hadn’t joined now despite being a doctor for 16 years. Ditto leaving RCGP.

There were incidents and accidents. There were hints and allegations.

The only things missing from your post are actual facts.

Exactly! The same standard as all other medical treatment

If anything the BMA failing to find medical evidence to question Cass will strengthen Cass. I think the best thing for the BMA is to skip the whole boring evidence process and go straight to the courts to sort this out. I think the Good Law Project will be happy to represent them for a hefty fee.

Meanwhile in the real world, the insurers are taking notice...

I don't think Streeting will be swayed by this vote and I'm sure he'll be happy to review any critique the BMA produce. If it's as robust and thorough as Cass's review, and is evidence and not ideologically based, I expect consideration will be given to alternative findings. If it's ideologically driven and not evidence-based they will find they have wasted their time.

Ultimately, Cass simply called for gender services to be subject to the same standards as other areas of medicine. I'm not sure what the BMA can produce to convince people this shouldn't be the case.

Anecdotal evidence and opinions won't cut it. Neither will poor quality research (based on anecdotal evidence and opinion).

So the BMA want to review the review? If you don't agree with a systematic review you need to do your own systematic review on the topic. Or just read the review and list what they specifically think the issues are - 'methodological weakness' is just waffle

Thanks for the laugh Butterfly. It was a bit overdone on the hyperbole and copium, but still an enjoyable read.

The thrashing of a dying ideology

🙄

The Cass review was doomed from the outset - the obfuscation of the selection and appointment process, the dismissal of evidence and the poor methodology was always going to bring it down eventually. The reveal that a nice cosy peerage was all lined up for its creator - only the small cost of enduring a few years of public grief and horror from those actually affected by it - was damning. Too many people cared and noticed.

It has unfortunately done immense, completely unwarranted damage to the young people its creators and supporters claim to want to protect, and will continue to do so for years to come - but there is now so much formal and unambiguous national and international criticism of its flaws on record that it has lost most of its value as a discussion-slaying thought-terminator.

I'm surprised by this announcement, however, and the courage it must have taken to make it in this political climate. I thought it would take years to get here.

Cass is about to become a nightmarish shackle for the 'GC' cause - while preying on the rightful fears of concerned parents and the cowardice of politicians, it actually highlighted the necessity to salvage the disastrous state of trans healthcare in this country. It also shone much-needed light on the insidious influence of Tufton Street and dark money in UK politics.

It will sink Streeting if he digs his heels in once an actual serious review has taken place. It's going to be fascinating to see how he responds.

We want evidence

no no not evidence we don’t like only evidence that agrees with our pre determined position 🤦🏻‍♀️

The BMA want evidence but just not the evidence contained in (and confirmed by) meta analysis carried out in Finland, Sweden, Germany, France, the Netherlands, and the UK’s Cass Review 🤷‍♀️

Yep. As a GP I am absolutely horrified by this. I really don't think the people making these decisions are remotely representative of ordinary doctors views. I am still a BMA member and need to work out who best to write to express my horror and disappointment. 😕

The BMA want evidence?

Maybe, just maybe, they should have kept some fucking records then. They've had 30 years.

How do they have endometriosis if they are male ? ( stomach upset ?)

I am almost without words.

Almost. I think those medics who insist Cass is wrong should put their money where their mouth is and write the PB scripts - and accept the responsibility/liability for them. After all, if they are certain Cass is wrong, why wouldn’t they?

Hannah Barnes was right then. So why try to silence her?

This motion was passed on a vote by the 69 BMA Council members, not by their 190,000 members.

I think the daft parts of the Labour party will leap on this. Other parts of the Labour party know a lot about union politics and will be sceptical.

Interesting that the BMJ (subsidiary wholly owned by BMA) came out in favour of Cass immediately.