Trans in children's and young people's services

[YetAnotherSpartacus]

OK … I can’t hold this in any longer. I went searching for a safe space to talk about trans issues and I found you guys (as per a previous post). I’m really hoping that you won’t think I’m stirring the trans pot for the sake of it. I really do have concerns.

I teach people who will one day, amongst other roles, work with boys, girls, young women, young men, parents and others in a range of ‘social care’ roles. This includes child and youth services and protection. In both my teaching, and the broader sector of practice that I prepare people to work in, I am facing a wall of ignorant, unthinking, militant trans orthodoxy, or a general fear of challenging this, or downright don’t-give-a rat’s-ism. The kinds of things that I hear people (and these are people with power as teachers, workers and even policy-makers) say uncritically (and as if they were droning a script) are:

• trans children have the brains of the opposite gender
• children should not need court consent, counselling or parental permission to have puberty blockers or hormonal drugs
• if a child wants to access PB’s or other hormonal drugs and the parents object, it should become a child-protection matter
• children should be watched for gender variant behaviour
• children should learn about trans from an early age
• all school toilets should be gender-neutral
• boys / men should be allowed into women’s / girls’ facilities if they say they are girls. Girls should not object.
• single-sex residential care homes (for girls, often those who have been sexually abused) should accept males who say they are female (even though we know there are high levels of sexual abuse in care homes)
• terms such a ‘women’ or ‘girls’ should be changes to ‘people who identify as …’

Beyond this, I have the following experiences:

• teaching a small but significant number of males who identify as ‘queer’, ‘trans’ or ‘female’ who have made it clear that they are entering the area to ‘save’ trans children from not being able to transition
• being told by management that the official position is ‘pro-trans’
• being told by some students that I am transphobic if I mention ‘women’. One was a ‘trans’ male who dressed in leather and studs and wore shirts with violent imagery and slogans.
• having colleagues tell me that they think the orthodoxy is rubbish, but being afraid to speak out (as am I)
• being in a meeting of practitioners and told that we must use ‘persons who identify as …’ instead of ‘women’ or ‘men’
• being in a meeting of practitioners and being shown a ‘trans-positive’ manual that advises that trans boys be allowed into girls’ spaces (camps, homes, detention facilities, etc.)
• raising an actual instance of harassment of a young lesbian by a trans man and general instances of lesbians being denied lesbian-spaces to be told that ‘trans comes first because they are so oppressed’.

This does not happen all the time, and nor is it ‘me against the world’, but it is prevalent enough to concern me and make me feel marginalised and silenced.

The reason I am writing this, apart from to get it off my chest and hopefully find some people who don’t think I am nuts for questioning it, is that I don’t think this is spoken of much (i.e. institutional responses to trans issues). Plus, these people have power over the lives of individuals, and some have the ears of policy-makers. Some make policies for organisations. This isn’t stuff happening on social media – it’s real – and to me it is terrifying because it can lead to the abuse of children, whether they be ‘trans’ kids or girls.

We don’t know the long-term effects of a set of drugs (PB’s) that were developed as an emergency measure to allow the treatment of some childhood cancers. We don’t really know much about child-transitioners. We don’t know much about the long term effects of hormone therapies on children’s bodies. Yet, we have generally moved away from a treatment regime that saw medical and surgical interventions as the last means to the first. Counselling and other therapies have fallen out of favour – and indeed are seen as ‘oppressive’ by some. This has all happened so fast that we don’t really know much at all, beyond isolated and mostly non-longitudinal studies. We know that some variants of ‘the pill’ have had detrimental effects, as has HRT – why are people naïve enough to think that hormonal treatments on young children are going to be magically better?

The issue of boys in girls’ and women’s spaces has been spoken of here, but I worry for girls who have no (or inadequate) parents to care for them or look after them, such as those in justice centres or care homes. These are vulnerable children.

Honestly, I know that many of us are wondering when this trans rubbish will dissipate, but I can’t help thinking that it might take a class-action of young people with cancers or a girls or two to be raped / murdered by a male claiming to be ‘trans’ for this to happen.

Great post Kr1stina

matilda I knew they'd coopted black civil rights, just had a total blank as to why. But yes. Sex segregated areas are like apartheid.

They've taken Joan of Arc.

Oh, yes! Good ones, matilda and felas.

I also forgot "women who've had hysterectomies" (they don't have a uterus, are they not women???1!)

The lack of understanding that ATM demonstrates about the pill link with depression is very telling when ATM claims to be the only person on the thread who can properly understand science

Your binary view that gender is always aligned with biological sex is wrong

ATM it's quite worrying that you have engaged for days across several threads and yet you still think that this is the radical feminist position. Are you hard of thinking or are you just not listening?

Your binary view that gender is always aligned with biological sex is wrong. That's the underpinning issue. Some kids are transgender. You can either deal with that and accept they need to right treatment to align their bodies with that gender identity (like most of the medical evidence points to, despite anything you have linked), or you can let them experience a life of depression, angst and suicide attempts.

Why is there no attempt to align their gender identity to their body? Why is it the body, the very thing that is defined at point of conception, that must be wrong and so must be changed?

If "gender" exists (and I'm not convinced it does as anything more than a social construct) then it is determined later in development than biological sex.

So it must be this part of development that has gone wrong. The brain has developed misaligned to the body.

So surely it makes sense to correct the brain, not change the body?

I think ATM is not listening, Poldark.

Kittiesinsane said "We actually had the experience, about 6 years back, of having one of our children referred to CAMHS because he was deeply unhappy, self-harming, and saying he wished he was a girl.

We got a brisk, not too sympathetic, but useful professional who listened to all he had to say and then said, 'He doesn't have gender dysphoria. He doesn't have a mental health problem. He has a school bullying problem.'

He moved school to one that had boys in the choir, boys doing drama, and boys in the knitting club. As soon as he was free to follow his own tastes without any little toads telling him he was being 'such a girl ' or 'so gay ', things calmed right down for him.

Just an anecdote. But what if the professional had been through the course in the OP, and had been on the alert for signs of 'non-gender conforming'?"

Thank fuck for that. It is good to know that there are (or were - hopefully still are) sane people out there.

I was just wondering if you would be interested in writing up this story (I loved the way you characterised the professional in question with their forthright and quite blunt appraisal :)) on this site:

www.transgendertrend.com/

I just can't help thinking that the more stories out there with a critical perspective and the more opportunity parents, professionals and other have to read these the more that people might begin to question - even if it is in the cases of individual children?

Also, out of interest, who referred your child? I was just curious re the rest of this happy-ended story - if you want to tell.

*ATM - Biological sex and gender identity aren't the same thing. Underpinning tenet of being trans.

I'm sure I explained this already. Like many of the questions you keep asking..."

I don't understand why you think that answers my question. It's got nothing to do with what I asked as far as I can see?

But this tenet, which I agree used to exist is being disappeared like other elements of trans ideology. And you seem to be on board with the new theory that if your gender identity is female then your sex is also female as you claim femaleness despite having posted information that tell us you meet the criteria for being male in every dictionary I've ever consulted (over 10). If you believe that gender identity and sex aren't the same then on what basis do you consider yourself female if not due to your gender identity? I'm finding this baffling!

Sorry, having now understood your logic I get why you think your response answered my question. But it isn't consistent with what you've said repeatedly on the thread. That transwomen are female which to me implies that you think gender identity determines sex...?

Kua - "I also have the same concerns as the OP and I'm concerned of the strain being put on an over stretched CAMHS."

I totally agree. The articles in the Graun recently re the rise in cases have been disturbing.

Thank you, spartacus - in among the torrent of derailment, I'd missed that. I'd also be interested in hearing more about that case.

I'm so sorry that I am falling for the derailing. I'm really trying not to, but it seems I can't help it. Will try to rein it in.

I've been reading The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins and it strikes me that trans ideology as portrayed by ATM is very like a religion in quite a lot of ways. I am in a tearing hurry this morning and shouldn't be hanging round here at all. I'm developing a theory and will post later - or maybe start a new thread.as I'm away for 24 hours.

ATM, you strike me as someone in a room full of samurai armed only with a potato peeler.

Ah, basing your assumption about trans people on two of them, both very different. And casually misgendering both of them in the process. An excellent way to draw conclusions about an entire culture.

And yet, you feel you are qualified to draw conclusions on women's culture, despite never having been a member of that group! Pots and Kettles I think.

Plus condemning anecdotal evidence in one post, then using it as an argument a couple of posts later.

Do you actually read what we (or even you) are posting ATM?

Selkie - "I'm so sorry that I am falling for the derailing. I'm really trying not to, but it seems I can't help it. Will try to rein it in"

Well, I guess to point out the elephant in the living room, there has been a derailing ... but I don't blame posters here for it. It was a little like a red rag to a bull.

It's such a common occurrence when women raise issues related to women, though. Men jump in and ask us to justify ourselves, or dispute our facts, or whine that they are just as bad off, blah, blah, blah. Then the next thing we know, we are spending all our energy on THEM and their arguments and point sof view, and we lose sight of the original struggle.

I sit in a lot of meetings and I often watch to see who really sets the agenda in terms of what is talked about and how long it is talked about. As in, I do that backwards - I look to see what topics are most talked about nd by who - and I know that it is that person who has the power. Usually, they are a man.

I can't tell you the number of times I've heard;

Woman - I want to raise this really important point about ...
Man - Oh that's a great point Mary, it relates to this thing I want to say (spends some time outlining something tangentially related)
Meeting - discusses what the man in power wants to talk about.

I'm so pleased that this thread led to an action thread and that I have a couple of really supporitive off-board leads from it too.

I just keep reminding myself that battles should be picked and that the main focus should be on the war :)

YetAnotherSpartacus - I'll think about it; probably already over-sharing on here, though.

He was referred by the family GP after some very worrying behaviour at school including suicide threats.

The thing is, he had no experience of anything outside his own life, in which he was rejected by the boys and fitted in better with the girls. Once that changed and he was with like-minded kids of both sexes, he realised it wasn't him - his inner or outer self - that was wrong.

He has a transgender friend at college at present. I asked about that situation, and DS says 'X just finds it easier to be a girl instead of arguing about whether it's OK to wear skirts and stuff.'

I look to see what topics are most talked about nd by who - and I know that it is that person who has the power. Usually, they are a man

Oh this, totally this!!

OP, the way I would put it to colleagues would be that where a child I potentially trans or gay, the job of the professionals is to allow self-realisation to happen at the child's own pace a not to impose current trend thinking on the child. A responsible approach is to act as the brake (so that ramifications can be properly considered) not the accelerator.
So much of what you've described seems to be about the adults positioning themselves as down with trans rather than responding to th needs of the child.

It would be interesting to see what the Court of Protection would make of this stuff if it ever had to consider it.

Kittiesinsane - thank you for that. That does build a less worrying picture for me in terms of the trans issue. I thought he might be have been referred by a transwarrior for gender-related assessment.

I do find it telling, though, in an Ockham's razor sense, that the onus might first lie on the trans issue, instead of more obvious environmental things like what's happening in the child's immediate context. In your son's case it was school. In the case of many other children I suspect it is the same, or it is something about home life, ranging from abuse to thinking or realising that parents favour a sibling of the opposite sex.

I am so glad that your son seems to be doing well now.

WindPowerRanger - yes indeeed. We are supposed to act in the best interests of the child, but that is so often ill-defined, grey, or subject to dispute. And the agenda has been set by the trans lobby. Those arguing for self-realisation get hit by 'suicide!', 'self-harming!', child's implied right of self-determination!' 'transphobe!'.

It's very sad.

If you want to read some of the latest thinking look here (I think this has been discussed, but I am not sure of a link has been provided):

www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmwomeq/390/390.pdf

It's long, so you may want to do word searches for 'parental' and 'children'. The government is taking a conservative stance (so far). It is the lobbyists that are problematic - organised, vocal and very careful in the way that they phrase things. If you want to depress yourselves the submissions are clickable - so you get to read what the lobbyists are saying. If you really want to depress yourselves search for "single-sex".

And yes, they (some lobbyists) do dance around the issue of providing advocacy for children through the courts outside of parental consent.

Actually I didn't "casually misgender" them. I call them he because they're men. Men who present in feminine attire, but still men. The first one agrees with me and frankly I don't give a flying fuck what the other one thinks, not when my kids know his kids. You know, the ones he fathered.

Sorry - just in case I wasn't clear - I was providing the report in its full version so people could (if they wanted) look at what the lobbyists were saying, not so much the Committee. I'm aware that there has been a Government response to this Report and the Government is acting with caution. But I was more interested in the lobbyists - who was lobbying, who is loudest, who was heard the most by the Committee. Most interesting are the clickable links to some of the submissions and statements - this is where the stuff that is being said that did not make the report is and it is quite interesting just in terms of seeing what people / groups are thinking.

ATransMum wrote - "I understand scientific method" then in a later post, "Or are you going to debunk that research?"

I see no evidence in your posts that you do understand scientific method and you give the impression that it is some kind of crime to even dare to try to debunk research.

People should try to debunk the findings of researchers. If research has shortcomings or errors, it can be debunked, should be debunked, must be debunked. If the objections are valid, the research is partially or completely invalidated, depending on the specific nature of the objections. If people try to debunk research and the objections can be shown to be invalid, then the research can stand as valid. Without a debunking process, science becomes something else.

I must get on but here's a quote from another (and far ruder) site: "The main reason trans activists are so prolific online is that they find it hard to be taken seriously in person."

That transwomen are female which to me implies that you think gender identity determines sex...?

Err...nope. I've never said that we can override biology. We can't change our chromosomes (yet). I'm saying gender identity should be permitted to override sex. Not determine.

That's one of the purposes of the trans agenda - having trans women accepted as women and vice versa for trans men.

We all fully accept that our bodies started out as the wrong gender (that's kind of the definition of gender dysphoria). Doing whatever we can to align that body with our gender identity is our goal (for those of us choosing to transition - see below). Of course we can't change our biological sex - what we want is to be accepted in our acquired gender.

Saying we are still 'male' however devalues that. Saying we have 'XY' chromosomes, or we were assigned male at birth is completely fine (and are both factually true).

Various people saying fix the brain, not the body

Not every trans person needs to transition - plenty find other coping mechanisms. Some of those cross dress. Or go androgynous / gender fluid. All are valid (and helping to dismantle gender in various ways). That's why the transgender umbrella is so big. But like you I would argue against the fetishistic cross dresser being included in there. But motives for cross dressing vary as well.

So yes, some trans people can live healthy lives without having to change the body. But not everyone can. And you don't think people have tried to fix the brain instead?

Do you honestly think that people would choose to be stigmatized by society, face a lifetime of medical interventions, pill popping and increased health risks if you could fix it with a bit of psychotherapy? Seriously. I tried that already - I've spent a fortune on counselling, psychiatry and other avenues before going down this route (actual transition has been 2 years, knowing I'm trans has been 30+ remember). Plenty of other people have as well.

You should see the list of things people have tried (Electroconvulsive therapy anyone?) to stop the disconnect between gender and sex. Transitioning is the only choice for some people.

Back on topic

Like I keep asserting with children, it's the extreme cases that need evaluation and potentially puberty blocking drugs. The transgender umbrella is a spectrum, not a one-size-fits-all solution.

For some children transition may be the best option in the longer term (i.e. post 16 or 18). For extreme cases that may need accelerating. For others accepting they are a bit non-binary, finding another coping mechanism or just being allowed to express their gender identity in other ways is enough for them.

That's the trans agenda I stand for. Medical intervention is the last option for children, but it should be an option.

Once they are over 18, they can choose for themselves if they want to transition and they should be supported correctly if they do chose that route for themselves.

I'm equally concerned for the pressure put on CAMHS - the NHS mental health services are already stretched and there is still a massive disconnect between society at large and mental health.

Plenty of people still say 'just get over it' to someone with depression, anxiety or whatever. More recognition is required that mental health problems exist, and are just as valid as physical health problems. And more resources from the NHS looking into this.

Separating transgender services from the mental health teams will assist this as well. That's one of the things happening at Charing Cross in London right now (albeit badly publicised).