Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Puberty blockers trial can start recruiting children after judge rejects legal challenge

30 replies

IwantToRetire · 31/07/2026 18:27

A high-profile clinical trial of drugs that can delay puberty in children questioning their gender can go ahead after the High Court rejected a legal challenge by campaigners.

The Pathways trial, run by researchers at King's College London (KCL), will start recruiting more than 220 children aged between 11 and 16 years old from 1 August.

The study was commissioned to assess the benefits or risks of puberty blockers, after a landmark review into gender services found the evidence for treating young people with the drugs was "remarkably weak".

Campaigners who brought the legal action had argued the safeguards in place were inadequate and raised concerns about the long-term physical and psychological effects on young people.

The judge, Mr Justice Chamberlain, refused the application for a judicial review saying that none of the claims made by the campaigners had a realistic chance of success.

He said that each patient involved in the trial will have been assessed over "many months" by specialist doctors who will have "formed the opinion that a child has a reasonable prospect of receiving a clinical benefit from the treatment".

Full article https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0jl4np49w1o

A young person with long hair tied in a ponytail looks of her bedroom window. They are in shadow, while the roofs of other houses are clearly visible and there are trees in the background.

Puberty blockers trial can start recruiting children after judge rejects legal challenge

Campaigners brought the legal action to try and stop the trial going ahead.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0jl4np49w1o

OP posts:
IwantToRetire · 02/08/2026 18:33

MarieDeGournay · 02/08/2026 10:59

So... have I got this right?

226 children under the age of 16, who may or may not have a condition that may or may not exist will be experimented on for a condition that may or may not exist, which they may or may not just grow out of anyway, with treatment which may or may not have serious and permanent side effects on bone density, brain development, fertility and mental wellbeing, in order to prove or disprove
that the treatment has or does not have serious and potentially permanent side effects on bone density, brain development, fertility and mental wellbeing in any or all of the 226 children.

Open to correction.... please tell me I've got this nightmare scenario wrong.

What you have written is my understanding. And without checking earlier threads is I am sure what most posted at the time it was first announced.

OP posts:
MashaPav · 02/08/2026 18:37

Being transgender is a condition that exists. I hope that helps.

Shedmistress · 02/08/2026 18:39

MarieDeGournay · 02/08/2026 10:59

So... have I got this right?

226 children under the age of 16, who may or may not have a condition that may or may not exist will be experimented on for a condition that may or may not exist, which they may or may not just grow out of anyway, with treatment which may or may not have serious and permanent side effects on bone density, brain development, fertility and mental wellbeing, in order to prove or disprove
that the treatment has or does not have serious and potentially permanent side effects on bone density, brain development, fertility and mental wellbeing in any or all of the 226 children.

Open to correction.... please tell me I've got this nightmare scenario wrong.

I believe that the number is not actually technically capped at 226.

But apart from that, yup.

Lougle · 02/08/2026 18:45

MashaPav · 02/08/2026 18:37

Being transgender is a condition that exists. I hope that helps.

No it isn't a condition. It is a behaviour that results from a psychological discomfort with the observed sex of the individual. The condition that will be treated is gender dysphoria.

Lougle · 02/08/2026 19:12

MarieDeGournay · 02/08/2026 10:59

So... have I got this right?

226 children under the age of 16, who may or may not have a condition that may or may not exist will be experimented on for a condition that may or may not exist, which they may or may not just grow out of anyway, with treatment which may or may not have serious and permanent side effects on bone density, brain development, fertility and mental wellbeing, in order to prove or disprove
that the treatment has or does not have serious and potentially permanent side effects on bone density, brain development, fertility and mental wellbeing in any or all of the 226 children.

Open to correction.... please tell me I've got this nightmare scenario wrong.

From reading the Protocol it's wider than this.

  1. Puberty Suppression And Transitional Healthcare with Adaptive Youth Services (PATHWAYS): PATHWAYS TRIAL

226 CYP randomised into two trial arms:

  1. Immediate gonadotropinreleasing hormone analogues (GnRHa) injections, given at 0, 6, 12, 24 months.
  2. Delayed GnRHa injections, given after 1 year of trial start

Those CYP who start in the trial have an official 'endpoint' of 24 months, but on 'compassionate grounds' may continue to be given GnRHa after that point.

  1. Meanwhile, Puberty Suppression And Transitional Healthcare with Adaptive Youth Services (PATHWAYS): PATHWAYS HORIZON INTENSIVE

300 CYP to give a 'naturalistic comparator'. Same outcome/progress measures.

But interestingly, exclusion criteria includes "Is considered clinically eligible for GnRHa and wishes to receive this intervention", so that in itself surely means that they aren't naturalistic comparators?

  1. Puberty Suppression And Transitional Healthcare with Adaptive Youth Services (PATHWAYS): PATHWAYS CONNECT

250 participants (150 from PATHWAYS TRIAL, 100 from PATHWAYS HORIZON INTENSIVE).

MRI scanning but no other details.

https://www.kcl.ac.uk/ioppn/assets/pathways/trial/pathways-trial-protocol.pdf

New posts on this thread. Refresh page