NHS Trans kids public consultation OPEN

[DoesNotApply]

The NHS have opened a Public Consultation on the guidelines for treating children who identify as trans.

It was a little difficult to find on their website so here is the link:

www.engage.england.nhs.uk/specialised-commissioning/gender-dysphoria-services/

I'm sure they didn't mean to put it in a hard-to-find corner of their website, down 3 flights of stairs and past a padlocked door marked "There be Dragons" 😂

Anyone can comment until it closes on the 4th December.

Thank you for highlighting this DoesNotApply.
It's so important that everyone responds to this. For too long adults with a vested interest in transitioning children have been allowed to influence and silence dissenting opinions & we're now seeing the devastating consequences, especially with vulnerable teenage girls believing that drugs and surgery will fix their developing bodies.
The proposals seem positive (imho) as long as the trans activists are kept well away from influencing how the NHS treats these vulnerable children.

I though Tavistock had been shutdown? Have I misunderstood, why are they being named and their ‘extensive experience’ being cited as important in this? Surely an NHS trust which is infamous for a clinic very recently closed for what amounts to doing experiments on children, should not be used as an advisor in the field?

Not yet. I think it is due to close next year. I guess they couldn't just close it without having yet set up the new system.

The GIDs service is being closed and is being transferred into children's hospitals - who have an honourable history of ethical, child centred, evidenced and researched medical treatment in contrast to GIDs. I think Cass is playing the long game - firmly but diplomatically closing GIDs without open blame (that will come later with the law suits). I'd be surprised to see the management moving across - if only because of the failings identified by the CQC assessments. There will need to be levels of patient transfer and I suppose some staff will apply for posts. I'd hope that with the normal medical standards being applied this will ensure that ethical medicine rather than activist ideology will be the priority.
Bit I may be wrong. 😟

Thanks. Hoping we may get some guidance on points to raise from relevant groups.

And/or some of the very knowledgeable women on MN

Done. Thanks for flagging

I'm sorry I'm raging!

Have a look through the Equality and Impact Assessment.

They mention the risks to people with disabilities including Autism and who may be Gay and Lesbian and yet there are NO recomendations to prevent adverse impact.

If I say any more I'll be banned. But what the holy fuck?

Here are some issues that are asked about in the survey (which is short and anonymous).

They also may give us some idea as to what was actually happening in clinical practice before the Cass Review.

I've used the survey's numbering.

A: Should the clinical team now include specialists in paediatric medicine, autism and mental health?

B: Should the clinical lead and decision -maker now be a medically trained doctor?

C: Should service provision now follow a sensible, controlled pathway that includes local professionals too?

D: Should referrals now be restricted to GPs and NHS professionals or shall we continue to allow others such as teachers and charities to refer?

4. As social transition is not a neutral act (causing significant psychological effects) and most gender incongruity disappears before puberty, should we restrict the wholesale adoption of social transition to children who are in significant mental distress AND fully understand the implications? Or should we just continue to socially transition any child that wishes to?

5. if children get hold of unregulated drugs eg online, should we now start making them aware of the risks of taking them? Please note there is no mention of police or safeguarding referrals (unimaginable in the case of a child being sent experimental drugs online without parental or medical consent in any other area of medicine).

6. are you happy with GIDS staff being in charge of setting up the new services and training clinicians as we plan to use their expertise.

7. We are not currently considering any protection for children with special needs (eg autism) who think they are trans but may actually be gay/lesbian. Should we add something in to reduce risks of harm to them?

Please please respond to the survey! It's only 7 questions. These recommendations are still up for discussion and change depending on the public's response.

Wow the idea that GIDs staff might be involved in setting up the new clinic. How would they prevent the ideological spread from old to new?

The survey feels very much like it is trying to appease everyone.

As if 'gender disphoria' is even a thing.

It isn't!

I think this post belongs on a main boards on mumsnet and not in a niche room down 3 flights of stairs etc!

Agree, Hairy.

Thanks, OP.

This has been open for a while. I've been surprised how little there is about it on here. We all need to respond before 4th December. There is a response by Transgender Trend and another by OurDuty with some useful points. I will try to find links.

From memory: a good thing the Equality Impact Statement states that not all children who id as trans have the PC of gender reassignment.

A bad thing: it states social transition of teens can be the right thing to do if it would cause significant distress not to do so. (I will find the precise wording). I think all teens and captured parents in this position would argue this applies to them and therefore social transition in schools should go ahead.

Thank you, I have completed the survey.

This is my major concern with the guidance. It is very woolly on adolescent social transition:

"adolescents the provision of approaches for social transition should only be
considered where the approach is necessary for the alleviation of, or prevention of, clinically significant distress or significant impairment in social functioning and the young person is able to fully comprehend the implications of affirming a social transition."

I think all trans identifying teenagers and parents and teachers who've swallowed the ideology would strongly assert they meet this criteria.

TransgenderTrend response:
www.transgendertrend.com/new-nhs-service-specification-consultation/

OurDuty response (more critical)
ourduty.group/2022/10/23/response-to-proposed-nhs-interim-service-specification/

I am going to answer 'Disagree' to question 4. For the reasons stated above.

"To what extent do you agree that the interim service specification
provides sufficient clarity about approaches towards social transition?
(Agree / Partially Agree / Neither Agree nor Disagree / Partially Disagree /
Disagree; comments)"

Thank you for posting, I have just responded.

Something I emphaised in my response was the harms that social transition does to the classmates of the ‘trans’ child. The new service is generally good news, and considers the welfare of the trans child in great detail, but it has not been brave enough to recommend against social transition of children in all circumstances.

To socially transition Child A is to force all of Child A’s classmates to lie and to deny the evidence of their eyes and instincts. It is particularly harmful to teenage girls who are told they must accept a male body into female safe spaces and get changed in front of him for PE etc.

The service ignores the harms that social transition does to to other children and this is a failure.

Mumsnet HQ please can you move this to the main boards?

Thank you 👍

That makes for interesting reading , thanks

Hi @DoesNotApply - we've moved this to the chat board. Is there another board you would like it moved to?

I'm happy to take your advice on that, please put it in the best place 😊👍