Stonewall change definition of transphobia - questioning gender identity ok now

You know Red, I had an hour spare. And it was interesting to see the subterfuge that the US agencies are pulling at the moment.

I think that they have worded their policies on gender care very carefully now compared to what they used to be. I think people who read them without understanding the back history probably do think that when they talk about 'appropriate gender treatment' that those agencies actually do give very careful diagnosis and long term counselling etc.

But, there are far too many anecdotes from patients and clinicians to show that what these agencies support is very poor quality care in the USA indeed.

Potentially Janine has not really thought as deeply as they think they have about the issues. It is always worth providing links to counter misinformation.

It is very disheartening when you realise just how much misinformation is out there and just how much emotionally manipulative 'be kind' pleas have actually led to significant harm, isn't it?

And it serves a nice reminder to even regular posters on where to find the information they want to read.

You've far more patient than I have Hellofabore.

I am not going to continue to look for the Norway and Danish national health researchers findings. I think there are enough 'Western European' countries here that have indicated that they recognise that they are significant issues around treatments for children with gender dysphoria just like Hilary Cass did.

Here are more organisations making the same statement about low evidence supporting treatment plans as Cass did.

In January 2024, the WHO has become the latest to declare that there is a significant lack of evidence that the current treatment for children and adolescents around gender.

"the evidence base for children and adolescents is limited and variable regarding the longer-term outcomes of gender affirming care for children and adolescents"

tgdfaq16012024.pdf (who.int)

This update came less than a month after the WHO released what was supposedly their guidelines that were supposedly, at the time, very well evidenced and supposedly balanced.

Plus Finland

https://www.thefp.com/p/gender-affirming-care-dangerous-finland-doctor

Here are the recommendations Dr Kaltiala refers to in Finnish

https://palveluvalikoima.fi/documents/1237350/22895008/Alaikäiset_suositus.pdf/c987a74c-dfac-d82f-2142-684f8ddead64/Alaikäiset_suositus.pdf?t=1592317701000

An English version has not been posted to the site. But it is available on SEGM.

https://segm.org/sites/default/files/Finnish_Guidelines_2020_Minors_Unofficial%20Translation.pdf

This is from the article above.

In June of 2020 a major event happened in my field. Finland’s national medical body, COHERE, released its findings and recommendations regarding youth gender transition. It concluded that the studies touting the success of the “gender-affirming” model were biased and unreliable—systematically so in some cases.

The authors wrote: “In light of available evidence, gender reassignment of minors is an experimental practice.” The report stated that young patients seeking gender transition should be instructed about “the reality of a lifelong commitment to medical therapy, the permanence of the effects, and the possible physical and mental adverse effects of the treatments.” The report warned that young people, whose brains were still maturing, lacked the ability to properly “assess the consequences” of making decisions they would have to live with for the “rest of their lives.”

COHERE also recognized the dangers of giving hormone treatments to young people with serious mental illness. The authors concluded that for all these reasons, gender transition should be postponed “until adulthood.”

By the way, SEGM has a page with links to studies. This is a great archive.

It covers treatment, and side effects, mental health, suicide, even social transitioning.

https://segm.org/studies

Regarding detransition and regret rates and why I said that the link to HRC was really spreading misinformation.

HRC from where Janine got the quote: "Every single major medical organization, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association, and the American Psychiatric Association, supports the provision of age-appropriate, gender-affirming care for transgender and non-binary people. These organizations represent millions of doctors, researchers, and mental health professionals in the United States. Gender-affirming care has always existed and isn’t a new phenomenon" from.

Says this about regret and detransition:

www.hrc.org/resources/get-the-facts-on-gender-affirming-care

What if someone transitions and then they change their mind about it?

"Previous studies have found that de-transitioning is quite rare —with some studies finding levels of de-transition and regret as low as 1% or 2%. Transgender youth who meet criteria for gender dysphoria and who undergo social or medical transition are actually the least likely to de-transition — and those vast majority of transgender youth remain consistent and persistent in their gender identity over time: One recent study, published in the academic journal Pediatrics, followed over 300 transgender youth after first initiating social transition, and found that over 92% remained consistent and persistent in their gender identity 5 years later. However, evidence-based standards of care exist to ensure that no one, regardless of their age, undergoes any permanent, irreversible changes without informed consent and careful consultation with medical and mental health care providers."

Here is Dr Az Hazeem saying he had about 26% of his patients regretted transitioning.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12623643/Being-trans-non-binary-new-sub-culture-risk-raising-nation-chemically-castrated-children-Doctor-spent-12-years-working-vulnerable-teens-Tavistock-warns-gender-ideology.html

He said 26 per cent of his patients at the Tavistock and Portman regretted transitioning.

Here is a study on a small sample of trans patients and the standard of care.

www.mdpi.com/2227-9032/10/1/121/htm

A few things stand out.
-the number of patients with underlying mental health issues. And how they are being completely let down by affirming only treatment.

-The number of visits before receiving hormones was 2.7 appointments.
-67 patients average age 27.8 years -range was 12- 54
-42 females, 22 males, four NB (3 f / 1 m)
-Female mean age is 18 years, male 23 years.
-Out of the 67, only 9 (13%) had NO mental health diagnosis. 10 (15%) had diagnosed ASD, 4 with ADHD (6%), 3 (4%) with OCD, 1 with Bipolar, 7 (10%) with a Personality Disorder. 13 (19%) had documented childhood abuse, neglect or violence.

The rate of "detransition" amongst those who had received at least hormones was 9.8%. This is in line with the European study below which showed a long term detransition rate of medicalised transitioners of males 8.8% and females 8.3%.

However from this study

Nine patients had stopped hormone therapy; one related to practice policy because they had not attended any GIC follow-up (the patient has restarted since the audit). Thus, eight patients had stopped hormones voluntarily (20% stopping rate; six trans men, two trans women).

This is another study with the figures 8.8% & 8.3%:*

//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5580378/

135 natal males (119 living in the female role, 12 in the male role, 4 did not report their current gender role) and 66 natal females (60 living in the male role, 5 in the female role, 1 did not report a current gender role)

So... 8.88% of males and 8.33% of the females (this does not include those who did not answer the question which if the answer was to detransition would make these figures higher). And in Figure 3. 22.2% of those who socially transitioned, detransitioned.

IMPORTANT NOTE: MOST OF THE ABOVE RELATES TO EARLIER TRANSITIONERS AND DON'T REFLECT THE CURRENT COHORT WHICH DROVE TRANSITIONING NUMBERS EXPONENTIALLY AFTER AROUND 2017. There are no figures for current detransitioners however, they are quickly becoming vocal like never before and there seems to be a great many of them. All unmeasured!

Those figures of 1% or 2% look pretty much false in the light of just these reviews, testimonies and studies. But... apparently.... the HRC is a reputable source of information according to heavily invested transgender activist groups.

And here are the WPATH leaked files. I would suggest readers should not simply take transgender organisations at face value when they double down on saying things that support the current treatment plans and that don't highlight the very significant issues with affirming only. There has been a great deal of concern that has been frequently dismissed by those very ideologically driven organisations.

Here is one link to the WPATH pdf
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/56a45d683b0be33df885def6/t/65e64b9e5cbd756da9fbbdfa/1709591479160/Final+WPATH+Report.pdf

and another
https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/wpath-files

Here are some of the reactions:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13156695/Trans-healthcare-doctors-exposed-admitting-patients-young-mentally-ill-understand-consequences-treatment.html

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/05/wpath-tansgender-hormone-therapy-cancer-links-leaked-emails/

https://sex-matters.org/posts/updates/wpath-the-truth-about-gender-affirming-healthcare/

https://genspect.org/the-wpath-files-revealed/

Here is a summary from Michael Shellenberger.
https://x.com/shellenberger/status/1764800595473686865?s=20

And the first part. Much more of it requires images.

Here is the threadreader version:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1764799914918490287.html

THE WPATH FILES

Advocates of gender-affirming care say it’s evidence-based.

But now, newly released internal files from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) prove that the practice of transgender medicine is neither scientific nor medical.

American Medical Association, The Endocrine Society, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and thousands of doctors worldwide rely on WPATH. It is considered the leading global authority on gender medicine.

And yet WPATH’s internal files, which include written discussions and a video, reveal that its members know they are creating victims and not getting “informed consent.”

Victims include a 10-year-old girl, a 13-year-old developmentally delayed adolescent, and individuals suffering from schizophrenia and other serious mental illnesses.

The injuries described in the WPATH Files include sterilization, loss of sexual function, liver tumors, and death.

WPATH members indicate repeatedly that they know that many children and their parents don’t understand the effects that puberty blockers, hormones, and surgeries will have on their bodies. And yet, they continue to perform and advocate for gender medicine.

The WPATH Files prove that gender medicine is comprised of unregulated and pseudoscientific experiments on children, adolescents, and vulnerable adults. It will go down as one of the worst medical scandals in history.

Why I Am Publishing WPATH Files And How I Got Them

The written WPATH Files come from WPATH’s member discussion forum, which runs on software provided by DocMatter.

Ninety seconds of the 82-minute video was made public last year. We are making the full video available for the first time.

One or more people gave me the WPATH Files, and my colleagues and I attempted to summarize them as a series of articles. We quickly realized the topic was too sensitive, complex, and large to be dealt with as a work of journalism, and we moved the project to the research institute I founded seven years ago, Environmental Progress (EP).

The Files are authentic. We redacted most names and left only those individuals who are leading gender medicine practitioners to whom we sent “right-of-reply” emails. We know WPATH members discussed our emails internally. No WPATH leader or member has denied that the Files are anything other than what they appear to be.

EP is publishing a 70-page report to provide context for the 170 pages of WPATH Files. Mia Hughes is the author of the report. It and accompanying summary materials can be downloaded at the link below. That link also provides a link to the full WPATH video.

Or, if you prefer your facts to be accompanied by music, there's this:

What this covers is that no gender clinic has been able to replicate the results of the Dutch paper.

Generally in science if no one can replicate the results of an earlier study or research there are questions asked about whether the original research was reliable or potentially falsified.

Regarding low quality evidence of the studies that are being used to support the WPATH treatment plan. Here are Canadian and NZ research teams also agreeing with Cass that there is little supporting evidence.

Canada finds low evidence

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/transgender-treatments-for-kids
https://archive.ph/fLMxA
"The Canadian team combed the available evidence, pooling the results of research on puberty blockers and gender affirming hormones for children and youth up to age 26. They graded the evidence using a scoring system co-developed by Dr. Gordon Guyatt, a celebrated McMaster scientist who coined the phrase evidence-based medicine.
Article content
After screening 6,736 titles and abstracts involving puberty blockers, only 10 studies were included in their review. While children who received puberty blockers compared to those who don’t score higher on “global function” — quality of life, and general physical and psychological wellbeing — the evidence was of “very low certainty.” Very low, meaning researchers have “very little confidence in the effect estimate” and that the true effect “is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect.”
The studies also provided low certainty of evidence on the impact of puberty blockers on depression. While they may decrease depression in “male-to-female participants,” they didn’t decrease depression scores in the female-to-male group. “We are very uncertain about the causal effect of the (drugs) on depression,” the researchers wrote.
“Most studies provided very low certainty of evidence about the outcomes of interest thus, we cannot exclude the possibility of benefit or harm,” they said."

Here are the studies referenced in the article from McMaster University
https://adc.bmj.com/content/archdischild/early/2025/01/24/archdischild-2024-327909.full.pdf
And
https://adc.bmj.com/content/archdischild/early/2025/01/24/archdischild-2024-327921.full.pdf

New Zealand

https://www.health.govt.nz/news/additional-safeguards-for-puberty-blockers

Publication date: 21 November 2024
The Ministry of Health is today releasing an evidence brief and position statement on the use of puberty blockers for gender identity issues and outlining a more cautious approach to their use.
The evidence brief shows a lack of good quality evidence to back the effectiveness and safety of puberty blockers when used for this purpose.

Here are some links to criticisms and the serious flaws of the 'Dutch Protocol' which Janine might find interesting. Sadly the NY Times, podcasts linked to above failed to give full context to the Dutch Protocol and didn't mention that significant studies that the Dutch used to support their model have been debunked.

The Dutch Model is falling apart

By Stella O'Malley / 2 January 2023

First, Stella O’Malley writes about an article in Nederlands that is throwing a great deal of light on the Dutch Protocol. It also seems that there will be a review of the patients that the Dutch team had not previously included in their papers.

This article in the Nederlands points out the dangers on only using a nation’s own sources with no international input or even wide review.

genspect.org/the-dutch-model-is-falling-apart/

and

The Myth of “Reliable Research” in Pediatric Gender Medicine: A critical evaluation of the Dutch Studies—and research that has followed

E. Abbruzzese, Stephen B. Levine, Julia W. Mason

www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0092623X.2022.2150346

Our analysis of the Dutch protocol has been written with three goals in mind. First, we wanted to definitively refute the claims that the foundational Dutch research represents “solid prospective research” that provides reliable evidence of net benefits of youth gender transition. In fact, it is much better described as case series—one of the lowest levels of evidence available (Dekkers et al., Citation2012, Mathes & Pieper, Citation2017). Second, we aimed to demonstrate that the type of non-comparative, short-term research that the gender medicine establishment continues to pursue is incapable of generating reliable information. And third and most importantly, we wanted to remind the medical community that medicine is a double-edged sword capable of both much good and much harm. The burden of proof—demonstrating that a treatment does more good than harm—is on those promoting the intervention, not on those concerned about the harms. Until gender medicine commits to conducting high quality research capable of reliably demonstrating the preponderance of benefits over harms of these invasive interventions, we must be skeptical of the enthusiasm generated by headlines claiming that yet another “gender study” proved benefits of transitioning youth. This time-honored concern about risk/benefit ratio is a sobering reminder that the history of medicine is replete with examples of “cures” which turned out to far more harmful than the “disease.”

And then the documentary and the researcher who worked on the one of the studies reworked the findings correctly....

A documentary on the Dutch Protocol

There are currently almost 3,000 young people on the waiting list for gender care in the Netherlands. They are vulnerable adolescents who are frequently subjected to discrimination. Many of them suffer severe mental distress. Doctors at the gender clinic in Amsterdam are pioneers in care for transgender young people. The treatment developed here years ago is now used worldwide. Now, criticism is growing. International experts are questioning the scientific evidence put forward by the clinicians in Amsterdam. Zembla investigates the Dutch transgender protocol.

What this covers is that no gender clinic has been able to replicate the results of the Dutch paper. One patient of the group died due to the surgery complications of gender surgery and even de Vries questioned why no one seemed interested in that patient while accepting the study. Dr Riittakerttu Kaltiala (Professor of Pschyiatry, Tampere and who set up gender clinics) and Mikael Landen (Professor of Pscyhiatry, Gotenberg) and Dr Angela Samfjord (Head of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry at the University of Gotenberg ) all are interviewed about the quality of the study behind the protocol and its flaws that became apparent later. Ie. The 55 patients is so small and de Vries acknowledges that they are not really similar to todays cohort of adolescent transitioners. That only 32 filled in the survey with positive results. The others were not chased up and one died.

Gerard van Breukelen, a professor of Methodology at Maastricht university goes on record to say that the methodology of that initial study was weak. There was no control group so the conclusions should not have been considered as strong as the gender clinicians claimed. Other academics declined to be interviewed due to fear for their employment as it is such a contentious issue. When talking to de Vries, she mentions that many more studies have been done by other countries now. And the doco makers mention that all those studies de Vries refer to have stated that the evidence is low quality. A Swedish team led by Landen was asked to do a full review by the Swedish government and he confirms that the evidence was just not there. Hence the Swedish government withdrew treatment.

The mention the Cass review and discussion ‘locking in’ of identities contradicts the ‘time to think’ narrative. They interview three transitioners. One detransitionered before surgery and one is happy with transition but not with the process the team followed. The one who detransitioned was put on hormones despite not even socially transitioning as he felt wearing a dress was ‘a man wearing a dress’. But was put on hormones but didn’t go through surgery after all. It also wraps up with Lucy who was stuck on the waiting list and who believes that if she was given PBs, she would not have ended up transitioning. She has obviously detransitioned now after double mastectomy and testosterone, then ovaries and uterus removal.

The peer reviewed reanalysis of the UK study. McPherson & Freedman both worked on the initial analysis of the patient clinical data.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0092623X.2023.2281986

Psychological Outcomes of 12–15-Year-Olds with Gender Dysphoria Receiving Pubertal Suppression in the UK: Assessing Reliable and Clinically Significant Change

Susan McPherson & David E. P. Freedman

Published online: 29 Nov 2023

Abstract

The evidence base for psychological benefits of GnRHA for adolescents with gender dysphoria (GD) was deemed “low quality” by the UK National Institute of Health and Care Excellence. Limitations identified include inattention to clinical importance of findings. This secondary analysis of UK clinical study data uses Reliable and Clinically Significant Change approaches to address this gap. The original uncontrolled study collected data within a specialist GD service. Participants were 44 12–15-year-olds with GD. Puberty was suppressed using “triptorelin”; participants were followed-up for 36 months. Secondary analysis used data from parent-report Child Behavior Checklists and Youth Self-Report forms. Reliable change results: 15–34% of participants reliably deteriorated depending on the subscale, time point and parent versus child report. Clinically significant change results: 27–58% were in the borderline (subclinical) or clinical range at baseline (depending on subscale and parent or child report). Rates of clinically significant change ranged from 0 to 35%, decreasing over time toward zero on both self-report and parent-report. The approach offers an established complementary method to analyze individual level change and to examine who might benefit or otherwise from treatment in a field where research designs have been challenged by lack of control groups and low sample sizes.

However, continuing on, the wider societal issue needs to also be considered here. It absolutely is harmful to the needs of female people for people to use preferred language. Because we have seen a repetitive theme in activism from extreme transgender activists that runs along the lines of 'because society uses she/her and calls me a women, it is a cruel violation of my rights to be excluded in any provision that is meant for female people'.

In other words, because my work and all my well meaning friends used my demanded language changes, I am now telling you as policy makers that you are causing me untold mental harm in denying me access to female single sex provisions, even though I was born a male.

Here are just two examples of trans 'spokespeople' saying that people using pronouns and changing identity documents does mean that society views them as women and that therefore they should absolutely be treated as women.

F Wallace

https://twitter.com/Isla_macy/status/1706382987682554144 at around 2 hr 5 mins

Ivy/McKinnon

https://news.sky.com/story/trans-cyclist-rachel-mckinnon-defends-her-right-to-race-in-womens-competitions-11838131

And here

https://twitter.com/Isla_macy/status/1706382987682554144

I believe that somewhere in the transcripts for the court cases of Mridul Wadha (Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre) and the NHS Fife case where Dr Upton gives testimony, that they too have said this. Or maybe just inferred it.

Either way, this theme of because society treats me as a women it is cruel to deny my access to female single sex provisions is a common emotionally manipulative tactic that has been used.

Then comes the harm to society where due to using demanded language misinformation is spread. You only have to look at the BBC reporting of where male people with transgender identities are convicted of sex crimes. If you were not aware, you would think that female sex crimes are dramatically increasing. Last time I looked, due to the statistic collection at the time, it had doubled. Because it included male people. And I am not sure yet whether the CPS has rectified the issue.

The harm comes when people hear or read something like:

She has been excluded from using female single sex provisions, this is discrimination .

vs

He has been excluded from using female single sex provisions, this is discrimination .

So, no. I cannot agree with you that it is harmless and just polite.

You can choose to do whatever you want, of course. But your narrative that it is doesn't cost us anything. And that is a false claim when you consider the collective harm on society. I think people who try to dismiss the harm and the cost to society and to people either choose to ignore the impacts or they prioritise one small group of people knowing the wider impact to society.

Why do you think it doesn't cost anything to just be polite and use demanded language?

Janine2363

Twice you have mentioned that it is harmless to use someone's demanded pronouns. And yes, I consider any emotional manipulation turns a request into a demand.

"However, imagine a transgender colleague at work, and on purpose, misgendering that person, that would be rude, and persistently doing so would be bigoted, because it is 'reasonable' to do not see a transgender in a certain way, but it is 'unreasonable' to behave like that, because of ones belief."

"When interacting with people, different origins, different belief, different preferences, you name it, the world is a large place. Why not be polite ?"

and

"Even simpler: Why would you not use the pronouns befitting that person, it is not as if it costs us something not ?"

Perhaps when you consider it harmless and costing nothing, you are only looking at the individual rather than collectively. And that is fine. But it needs to be acknowledged that even there, there IS harm to children and vulnerable people in general in using the language of their identity.

Clinicians and researchers have been raising concerns about this for years now. That even socially transitioning children and vulnerable people has the potential to harm because it locks that person into an identity that they don't feel they can change again.

I know several sets of parents of teens who declared they had transgender identities who don't use requested pronouns, will use a 'nick name' but will not agree to the child having their school records changed etc. They do provide their child with extensive mental health support and have been clear that they would not be giving permission for hormones or surgery. Five years on, some of those children are adults and still declare they have transgender identities, but still live with their parents and they all get along fine.

Have you talked to the parents of Vince at all? Do you know what Vince's parents would want you to do as part of Vince's current treatment plan? Because some of my friends had all found counsellors that told them that it would be harmful to fully affirm with complete name changes and pronouns. Have you checked? Just because your son told you to do something, doesn't mean that is in the best interest of Vince.

@Janine2363 if you have just recently started thinking about this (which is what I am assuming from your rather naive posts) then you might find it more helpful to step away from the very experienced and knowledgeable women of Mumsnet and do some foundational reading. In no particular order:

Transgender Trend
Bayswater parents support group
Safe Schools Alliance
Trans by Helen Joyce
Irreversible Damage by Abigail Shrier
Time to Think by Hannah Barnes

These are all resources that were written by (mainly) women) who started from the position of deep concern for children's safety and wellbeing.

Some of the references you have cited are written by people with a specific ideological position, or who have not demonstrated that they have children's long-term health and welfare interests at heart.

You have been quite dismissive of Cass. This is the definitive study of the medical evidence of treatment for children with gender dysphoria and more and more medical bodies are endorsing its findings.

OTOH, if you are just a troll, bore off!

Sweden:

This is a report on The Swedish changes - based on lack of evidence.

genderreport.ca/the-swedish-u-turn-on-gender-transitioning/

France:

The latest from National Academy of Medicine, France. They have issued a press release about treatment for gender disphoria in children and adolescents.

SEGM have translated it, but also linked up the original version.

segm.org/France-cautions-regarding-puberty-blockers-and-cross-sex-hormones-for-youth

Extract

Transgender identity is a feeling of identifying as a gender different from that assigned at birth, which is persistent and lasts more than 6 months. This experience can cause significant and prolonged distress, which can contribute to an increased risk of suicide [a].

No genetic predisposition has been found.

While this condition has been long recognized, a sharp increase in demand for medical interventions has been observed (1,2) first in North America, then in Northern Europe, and, more recently, in France, particularly among children and adolescents. A recent study of a number of high schools in Pittsburgh revealed a prevalence that is clearly higher than previously estimated in the United States (3): 10% of students declared themselves to be transgender or non-binary or were unsure of their gender [b]. In 2003, the Royal Children's Hospital in Melbourne diagnosed only one child with gender dysphoria, whereas today it treats nearly 200.

Whatever the mechanisms involved in adolescents - excessive engagement with social media, greater social acceptability, or influence by those in one’s social circle - this epidemic-like phenomenon manifests itself in the emergence of cases or even clusters of cases in the adolescents’ immediate surroundings (4). This primarily social problem is due, in part, to the questioning of an overly dichotomous view of gender identity by some young people.

The demand for medical interventions, due to the distress that this condition (which is not a mental illness per se) causes, leads to a growing supply of care in the form of consultations or care in specialized clinics. This involves many pediatric subspecialties. The psychiatric consultations are utilized first, and if the identity is authentic and the discomfort persists, endocrinology, gynecology and, ultimately, surgery become involved.

However, great medical caution must be taken in children and adolescents, given the vulnerability, particularly psychological, of this population and the many undesirable effects and even serious complications that can be caused by some of the therapies available. In this regard, it is important to recall the recent decision (May 2021) of the Karolinska University Hospital in Stockholm to prohibit the use of puberty blockers.

If France allows the use of puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones with parental authorization and no age limitations, the greatest caution is needed in their use, taking into account the side-effects such as the impact on growth, bone weakening, risk of sterility, emotional and intellectual consequences and, for girls, menopause-like symptoms.

I will look for the others.

Treating a mental illness is never about forcing someone back to normal. What a strange thing to think?
Medicine is just not as robust as it would have us believe. I think the use of puberty blockers in children who are gender incongruent is a huge medical scandal sitting in the wings. If you have time I recommend the New York Times podcast 'The Protocol'. It charts how the often cited Dutch Protocol developed a clinical management approach using therapy and assessments over a long period of time to identify the very small number of children likely to have real gender dysphoria. Once imported to the US the protocol was quickly watered down due to cost/lack of trained staff and became affirmative instead. I don't think any child should receive puberty blockers for dysphoria, but this podcast does demonstrate how 'medicine' is influenced by many other social and political factors and does not always act in the best interest of the patient.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-protocol/id1817731112

Without the need to cite references or studies, @Janine2363 can I ask whether you believe that there is any quality - found in the brain, the personality, the skills, manner, characteristics of a person - that is found only in one sex and not the other?

If so, what is it?

To my knowledge anyone can have any type of brain and it has zero bearing in what sex they are. So "being good at spatial reasoning" wouldn't categorise you as male even though as an entire class of humans, men tend to be slightly better than women in this area.

I'm sure Vince is very nice but I think Vince's parents are abusive so I wouldn't want my children around Vince's parents at any point when I'm not there. So my child would not be going to visit Vince. That makes play dates awkward. But my priority is ultimately safeguarding - thats both for my children and for Vince where I could.

Vince would still be welcome out my house as long as I could get around the receprical playdate expectation somehow. If Vince still came over (because Vince is friends with my child) and my child wanted a sleep over with Vince that wouldn't be happening though.

I couldn't let Vince stay. Its too problematic. If Vince believes he is a girl, then if I put him with my son that could put me at risk from batshit parents (I'm not going to have that conversation with them over this as they can't be reasoned with), theres not a cat in hells chance Vince is sharing with my daughter and I'm damned if I'm going to put myself at potential risk of accusations by sticking him in the spare room by himself. Thus its a completely unworkable situation to the detriment of Vince.

But since social services haven't grasps the red flags of a very young child claiming they are the opposite sex, I can't otherwise do shit with regards to safeguarding Vince.

I would not be calling Vince, Vanessa at any point because social transition is not a neutral act and its not recommended by Cass. Vince needs space away from the meer idea of Vanessa and the pressure to transition from his parents.

Vince is a child who is not capable of making long term decisions about his gender identity because hes too young to understand any of this. Vince is a lovely kid who is being deeply let down by all the adults around him who enable this shit and thing they are being kid by calling him Vanessa.

One day despite how much he's been primed by his parents, hes still going to hit puberty. His parents might try and stop this by using harmful drugs they've bought off a dodgy website on the internet which may not be fully trust worthy, and even if he gets the correct drugs rather than knockoff versions there's still the many side effects to deal with. Or he might have to cope with the trauma of his body changing and no longer being so easy to pass as feminine. This is not a kind situation to put a child in.

Poor Vince. Why did no one spot how much hes being harmed and why did they enable him to be in this situation? Vince has no way out; detransitioning is not acceptable in his parents social circle and his friends social circle where they know him as Vanessa. He's seen whats happened to others who have detransitioned and how could he cope with all the questions about why.

Vince has been sold down river by all the people trying to do the right thing, yet not one of them has put him first because they are all to busy pandering to the 'lovely parents' because they didn't read the safeguarding training which makes the point that abusers can be upstanding members of the community who are utterly charming, so don't trust anyone on that basis. Nor did they consider Vince's ability to express his wishes in the midst of a cult.

And thats why I won't virtue signal to the world how amazing accepting I am of Vince, because wrong sex pronouns and a new name are harmful. I like Vince. Vince is a nice kid who deserves better.

If you come on a site spouting nonsense (that we all know is nonsense because we've read all the papers) as fact yes you will get push back and asked to cite your evidence. If you then cite discredited papers as evidence of your false claims you really should expect even more push back.
Perhaps you should take time to read professor Appleby's report on suicide or the cass review or even polly carmichael's (then head of guids) testimony in the Bell v Tavistock trial where she admitted that trans people were no more likely to kill themselves than any other cahms patient, you would understand that what you are spouting is dangerous discredited nonsense

I'd be willing to bet most of the posters here, certainly those over 40 or 50, didn't know a single trans child when they went to school. Possibly one or two at the lower end. What happened to all those ladybrains in male bodies and fellabrains in female bodies that we went to school with? It can't be lack of acceptance or there'd be tens of thousands of particularly middle aged women declaring they're blokes, they've always been blokes. Or, if tras would have you believe, they'd all have committed suicide. Where is this missing cohort of misaligned brains?

By the way, there are actually 'female brains'. As many of us know.

That is the physical structure of a female brain is different to a male brain. That is due to the shape of a female skull which is different to a male skull. And of course there is the impact of the estrogen and progesterone. There are differences in the % of grey vs white matter on average because of the shape and size as dictated by the skull.

But also, the Swansea University also picked up that female brain fibres are more delicate than male brain fibres. This makes them more susceptible to damage and injury.

But again, it is simply impossible for a male person to have a female brain physically.

But they are not female brains

This bears repeating.

Looking at some of the research cited to support the paper posted by @Janine2363 , includes this:

The biological sex of a child immediately influences its social and physical environment, even before birth. Our gendered place in society strongly conditions our life history, concept of self, and reaction to social and nonsocial events81. Parents and teachers create robust sex-specific expectations for children, fostering gendered behavioral development82. The different environments for boys and girls contribute to strong sex differences in choice of occupation and other gender-specific environmental stratification83, no doubt contributing to life-long sex differences in social roles, stress and disease. The sex-specific effects of these differentiated social environments, no doubt pervasive and profound, have long been the purview of social psychology and not a topic integral to the study of brain sexual differentiation. In part, this deficit stems from the difficulty of modeling human social environments in animal models. Studies on humans are also problematic because of confounding sex-specific biological and environmental factors, which makes it impossible to disentangle the effects of the two.

@Janine2363 or course you’re going to be pleasant to your DSs friends and no one here would say to refuse them entry to the house! As another parent here where many of my DCs friends are a mix of NB or trans, I call them by their preferred name, never use pronouns in their presence and treat them exactly as I’ve always done. Fortunately, for most it seems it’s a phase and move from trans to gender fluid. I’m hoping they’ll eventually reclaiming their biological sex rather than an identity. Luckily none had surgery. One boy went on CSH for a while and sadly may now be permanently infertile. I don’t judge but I certainly share the papers on the wider negative implications of CSH etc so that my DC, whilst not GC, are aware of the harsh medical facts.

Edited to add, that I agree it is difficult to find robust and reliable research and that is firmly on health care professionals. Doing a bit of reading makes me despair how much public money is wasted on the craziest and most arcane of research.

So Janine2363, as a child over about 8years old, I would get changed for swimming in with my girl friends.

Since your daughter is now friends with Vanessa, does that mean you will be very happy for your daughter to get changed in front of Vanessa? Would your son insist?

How far does your son expect you to treat Vanessa as being the sex that Vanessa believes they are? After all, if a child is in the 'wrong body', they shouldn't be discriminated against by being excluded from changing with other children of the sex they believe they are, should they?

Yes, we are aware of the study you refer to.

It was from 2015. As you say you know something about this topic, you would know that pre-2015 the numbers for transitioning were small and from then have increased exponentially. Also the treatment plans became more 'affirming only' under the guidance of WPATH.

Even before this though, detransition rates were at least 8-9% in Europe.

A few years ago a UK academic, James Caspian, wanted to do an analysis on detransition numbers in the UK and his study announcement resulted in so much pressure on his university that it did not go ahead. It was considered transphobic for him to do this study.

If I remember rightly, the average time to detransition is 7-8 years and that usually is enough time for people to undergo hormone treatments and surgery. We are about to find out just how fucked up the dismissal of 'less than 1%' detransitioner numbers are that the lobby groups have spread as misinformation.

Such as the dismissal of detransition rates on that link from HRC. Which is the Human Rights CAMPAIGN. ie. a political lobby group and from what I read, not one who seeks to promote balanced information.

I hope Vanessa is happy. I hope Vanessa is staying out of the girls sports and their changing rooms. I genuinely think you are treating your son's friend well, but if your son was a daughter would you, for example, let Vanessa sleep over in her room or go swimming with her knowing they would be showering and changing together. Would you want your daughter playing rugby against Vanessa and Vanessa's ladybrain. Vanessa is not like other girls, his brain is irrelevant. His body will always be male, even stunted and scarred by hormones and surgery. the only one he will ever have. I fear for his future.