Government announcement on petition to ban medical intervention to change gender for under 18s

[NiceHotBath]

I couldn’t see a thread about this, apologies if I’ve missed it. The Government has responded to a petition seeking to ban medical intervention to change gender for under 18s:
www.gov.uk/government/news/voice-for-justice-uks-campaign-about-gender-reassignment

I think the summary is that they’re not going to do so, but to keep the law as it is.

That response tells me they really don't know what's going on. They consider that most children will be 15 when they go on hormone blockers.

That's absolutely not the case. They won't have blocked any kind of puberty if they start at 15.

The whole point is to give it to children at the onset of puberty.

Way before age 15.

Ffs I expect people who make the laws to understand them. Apparently thats too much to ask.

Unless they are secretly still on board with the whole trans agenda. Which would explain why parents can take their children abroad to be sterilised.

Has anyone asked whether doctors would perform a hysterectomy on a girl or a vasectomy on a boy who wasn't "transgender" but who was 16 and absolutely sure they would never want to have children.

If not, why not? Competence is competence, surely any 16 year old is old enough to know the consequences

And why are so-called transgender children, with no formal diagnosis (not to mention there are no diagnostic criteria to even attempt a diagnosis) different? Why is it ok to sterilise them at 16 or younger?

You are right about the puberty blockers at 15 - makes no sense at all.

This response, plus the pages on the NHS Choices website, are predicated on an assumption that a child has been " born in the wrong body ", has been struggling with it all their life, and that surgery and hormones is the humane and effective treatment. There are doubtless some children who fall into this category, whatever you may think of this.

However, this doesn't take into account the new type of gender difficulty (I have heard it described as Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria) where a teenager comes out as trans often after a period of mental ill health and almost always after being immersed in social media. Or are autistic. The new way to self-harm, is another way to see it. This is precisely the group who do not need surgery or hormones, they need careful and supportive therapy.

I don't think whoever writes the NHS responses has been brought up to speed by medical practitioners working at the coal face. That's what happens when social justice and activism takes the place of evidence-based healthcare.

for girls this is a new way to try and opt out of "growing up"

In my day girls starved themselves and wore baggy clothes, to try and slow or stop periods, stop breasts growing etc

Why? Because when you start to grow and men start looking at you in a certain way (and worse) it is quite frankly very scary. These days many girls will have seen porn and understand from that what their sex lives will look like ie painful, brutal and for the pleasure of the man. Even ordinary sex looks pretty gross to an underage child (male and female), choking, anal, come on the face, slapping, yeah what girl wouldn't see that , start getting attention from men and think, no I want this to stop.

And now, puberty blockers are on offer, binders, is it any wonder that rates of girls seeking this are going through the roof.

I mean even periods.

Who wants periods? I mean, the blood mess and pain? No-one, that's who. We kind of have to have them as part of our sex and if we want to reprodcuce and that, but the actual periods, who wants that?

Now it can be stopped.

Excellent point Maryz. The current situation WRT transitioning kids is just asking for lawsuits in ten years time. Sterilising kids and YP isn't okay.

The NHS page the article links to is extraordinary. Loads of pro-trans stories, and the first support group linked is Mermaids.

Where is the "hang on a sec, first do no harm" advice that is applied to every single other medical treatment? I mean, we can't even get antibiotics on request, we need proof of infection. But children can get untested drugs with serious side effects on demand, with no verifiable proof of illness or medical need.

It is recommended that certain important decisions, such as sterilisation for contraceptive purposes, should be referred to the courts for guidance, even if those with parental responsibility consent to the operation going ahead.

Those under 16 are not automatically presumed to be legally competent to make decisions about their healthcare. However, the courts have stated that a person under 16 will be competent to give valid consent to a particular intervention if they have “sufficient understanding and intelligence to enable him or her to understand fully what is proposed”.

Am I reading this right?

There is an external judgement call that can be made regarding a child's decision.

But they are not competent to decide that they never want to have children, but they are competent to decide that they want to be sterilised, on lifelong medication and sexually dysfunctional? And either retain the undeveloped genitalia of a prepubescent child, or dilate a surgically created hole, regularly and for the rest of their life?

At the onset of puberty?

Who the fuck writes this crap.

You could have blocked my puberty at the age of 15 without too many repercussions tbh. I was getting into nightclubs at 13 - along with most of my friends.

What are they blocking at 15? Additional wisdom teeth?

Interesting. As with many things on this board, I’m not able to comment, even anonymously. But I do get to see this type of announcement through my professional updates, and I feel that it can’t be inappropriate to share relevant updates without comment.

"The NHS has strict guidelines regarding the prescription of puberty-blocking and cross-sex hormones for young people. These drugs may only be prescribed with the agreement of a specialist multidisciplinary team and after a careful assessment of the individual, and generally once the patient is around 15 years old for hormone blockers and 16 years old for cross-sex hormones."

I'd be interested to see how these strick guidelines are monitored. Two weeks ago, my local news featured a trans child at 13 on puberty blockers, and I know of another who was given them at 11. As pp said, puberty for most is well underway by 15.

And in any case, cross sex hormones at 16? You can't get a tattoo, vote or even drive at that age.

Nothing more to add but, to my mind, this is absolutely the most disturbing aspect of the whole transgenderism fad.

It really makes no sense
I guess puberty is slightly later in boys - they don't seem to bulk out until after 15, so perhaps its a boy centric policy?

I think girls are at full adult height and generally started periods by 15 but boys still have quite a way to go but this would still be a late end of average start for puberty.

A friend of mine has very bad endometriosis and pelvic inflammatory disease which has seen her hospitalised a couple of times in the last year alone. She has had various treatments, none have which have worked and her condition is worsening.

She is in her late 20's and has two children and is sure that she doesn't want anymore. She wants a hysterectomy. Will they give her one. Will they buggery. She's too young... might change her mind about more kids... might have a new relationship and he might want kids.

A grown women can't be trusted to make these sort of life decisions but 11 year olds can? It boggles the mind. My 11 year old can't make a firm decision on which character he wants to go as on WBD Aaaaaaargh!, never mind if he wants children in future.

What are they thinking?

grasspigeons that makes sense - male as default

My DD just started her periods - a couple of months after turning 10.

For girls, the puberty blockers need to start when first signs of puberty start I suppose, or before? - So 8 ish, 8.5. Have they not thought about girls at all even though of young people they are the fastest growing group? That's really interesting and telling.

Again - this is all about men (and boys).

I think the procedure is for girls to start their period before blockers are given. But isn't the average age something like 12? That's a long time to be on blockers.

And yes to it being very male focused.

i suppose they want girls to reach full height?

I think it is Tanner stage 2.

I want to know if they are going to advocate giving diet pills and liposuction to anorexics and amputate limbs from children suffering BIID?

DickTERFin

I honestly don't get it. If a woman doesn't want any more kids, she signs a damn form, and if she regrets it later, too fucking bad.

People make decisions they wish they hadn't made all the bloody time. They're allowed to.

If that's not a demonstration of the absolute control of women's fertility, I don't know what is.

When feminists talk of the patriarchy manifesting itself as the oppression of women through control of their reproductive labour, people go into a massive eye roll.

But there it is, right there.

I'm reading this with dismay, but on a medical point, hysterectomy is a very serious operation, and has lifelong risks for the women following.

There are two ways medicine acts to change children's gender that haven't been mentioned yet in this thread.

Firstly, intersex babies and babies with abnormal genitals are routinely operated on by doctors to give them normal-appearing male or female genitals. Some of those surgeries include full sex reassignment (usually male to female, because it's much easier to surgically construct a vagina than a penis).

If you look, the internet is full of horror stories from people who were put through these unconsented cosmetic genital surgeries, by doctors playing God. In many cases, the sex doctors chose for the baby subsequently turned out to be the wrong one. Even when it wasn't, the people put through these surgeries often end up with so much nerve damage and loss of sensation that it's impossible for them to enjoy sex later in life.

oiiinternational.com/2574/intersex-genital-mutilation-igm-fourteen-days-intersex/

The second thing doctors have been doing is to administer high doses of synthetic female hormones (estrogens and progestins) to pregnant women, as treatments for preventing miscarriages and premature births. Many of these drugs have been shown to be capable of altering the trajectory of sexual development in animals, sometimes spectacularly so. For instance, at least two of these drugs (diethylstilbestrol/DES and ethisterone), are capable of completely overriding genetics in fish, and producing all female (or all male) fish populations.

There is evidence that they've also produced abnormalities of sexual development in human beings. I've found a number of case studies in which ethisterone, or a slightly modified version of it called norethisterone, were shown to have induced male development in female babies. The case studies all focus purely on genitals, however having now chatted online to several genetically people who were prenatally exposed to ethisterone or norethisterone, they show signs of having undergone male brain development. Two of the people I've talked to are FTM transgender.

Meanwhile, DES has long been rumoured to be associated with MTF transgender, and in the one study of DES and gender that's ever been conducted, 150 out of 500 DES "sons" identified as women rather than men. Many of the DES exposed natal males I've talked to show signs of physical feminisation too (in particular, a type of body structure called "eunuchoid habitus", that is usually associated with intersex conditions, and makes you look a bit like a cross between a man and a woman).

DES, ethisterone and norethisterone were all discontinued for use in pregnancy decades ago, however other synthetic female hormones remain in use. There's one in particular called hydroxyprogesterone caproate, that has feminising properties and certainly looks like it's being given in doses high enough to interfere with normal male development.

There are two ways medicine acts to change children's gender

That's a really odd sentence for starters...