Stella O'Malley, Trans Kids: It's Time To Talk

[drum123]

Apologies if there is already a thread about this. Channel 4, 10.00 tonight. 'Stella O'Malley considers the huge rise in numbers of young people embarking on gender transition, through the prism of the gender identity issues she experienced when she was a child.' According to The Times no TRA groups were prepared to contribute to this . Stella feels this may be because she was a tomboy as a young girl, (even insisting she was a boy until she hit puberty), and is now a confident, mature woman who believes that nowadays she would be pressured to go down the transition route. Sounds like it will be worth watching.

So with rudimentary science, one can surmise the amygdala remains in control for longer while blocked, the frontal cortex remains undeveloped. Fuck knows what happens when cross sex hormones happen then.

I'm getting increasingly more concerned about this aspect.

The youngsters who transition seem to have a childlike quality to them. I don't know if it's the lack of sex drive, brought on by medication or puberty blockers. But they seem unaware.

When you listen to them talk, there's a lot of the superficial going on. It's difficult to explain, but it wouldn't surprise me if their intellectual development hadn't been stunted along with their puberty.

Isn't there some evidence to suggest that their IQ decreases by eight points?

If you don't develop a fully mature intellect, you don't know what you don't know, right?

OMG, Datun, I have thought that....the persistent child-like outlook and demeanor of transitioned kids now in their 20s. I have wondered if it was just a sunny personality, a determination to demonstrate that all is well with their world tra-la-la, but I am not sure.

Of course puberty has an effect on neurological development. We know that. We're told so often that the brain is plastic at crucial times in adolescence (one of the reasons why the typical teenage body clock is so whack, and does not fit in with school days and exam requirements). Messing with puberty cannot be a good thing.

...send the clear message that it’s OK to explore those identities and find what’s right for you, not close off options to people.

That’s exactly what puberty blockers etc DOES do though surely :( literally closes off the “option” of being allowed to just explore who they really are and coming to terms with their own body. Not to mention fertility etc

Re the Spiked piece linked to below: much of what BO'N writes is good sense, but here he claims that the trans agenda insists that transgenderism is a medical condition.

Not so. Or not always so. The TRAs are often contradictory of course, no doubt about it. But many will say that being TG is not a pathology, not a mental illness, and it doesn't need (and crucially should not have) a medical diagnosis (hence the drive to self-ID) It is all just a natural normal feeling.

The contradiction comes when this natural normal feeling ends up requiring hormones and surgery to be validated.

The youngsters who transition seem to have a childlike quality to them. I don't know if it's the lack of sex drive, brought on by medication or puberty blockers. But they seem unaware.

Without being too Wells or Huxley about it, they remind me of the Eloi

the Eloi have slowly become dissolute and naive: they are described as smaller than modern humans, with shoulder-length curly hair, pointed chins, large eyes, small ears, small mouths with bright red thin lips, and sub-human intelligence. They do not perform much work, except to feed, play, and mate; and when Weena falls into a river, none of the other Eloi helps her (she is rescued instead by the Time Traveler). Periodically, the Morlocks capture individual Eloi for food; and because this typically happens on moonless nights, the Eloi are terrified of darkness.

and the Fortunate Boys:

Fortunate boys!" said the Controller. "No pains have been spared to make your lives emotionally easy - to preserve you, so far as that is possible, from having emotions at all."

rightreckoner; you may well be right about the professional bodies unhappiness, but then, as I said, this is about" checks and balances", more than about clinical competence.

Actually, I doubt if she has got an actual " criminal conviction"; I don't think the court case has that status. I may be wrong on this. If anyone has the precise facts on that, I'd be interested.

When in the past action has been taken against private clinics, in all cases but one the action has involved disapproval, doubts, constant suspicions, checking up. Quite famous cases ( "R", for example) have been seen as the clinician being " closed down/ struck off" have actually been a ruling that there needed to be "supervision/ second opinions. "R" retired, but was free to carry on in the work.

The complexity of the whole damned business is underlined by the fact that the case that drove "R" to distraction , and resulted in retirement, was based around a particular male to female patient who later "retransitioned" to male and screamed " malpractice. Ironically the patient has since " retransitioned" m to f. Who would be a gender specialist psychiatrist? :-)

Yet that does underline need for checks and balances, and second, even third opinions. This is messing with people's lives. In my case, and those of other late transitioners, we could argue that we had had 40/ 50 years of GD, and it was not going away, but worsening.

With kids, it is different. How is anyone to tell what is for the best?. I'm inclined to be strongly against kids transitioning, on principle, but it is easy to say that. Faced with the actual problems , who would say what we would do?.

So with rudimentary science, one can surmise the amygdala remains in control for longer while blocked, the frontal cortex remains undeveloped. Fuck knows what happens when cross sex hormones happen then.

I'm getting increasingly more concerned about this aspect.

Well, I guess, this will make a fascinating research topics in ten years or so, when there will be a really big and therefore statistically meaningful cohort of guinea pigs prepubsesently transitioned adults can be studied regarding these hormonal effects on their brain, IQ and maturity.

deepwatersolo;
Some of us "been there/ done that" TS men and women have been saying for a while that there will be "career ending / family relationships ending" court cases over all this in 20 years time.

That clinic has been accused of overstepping some marks, not making actual (proven) clinical mistakes. It is all about procedures and clinical oversight.

Where do you draw the line between 'overstepping some marks' and 'making clinical mistakes'?

Whatever the Webberleys have been doing, their good faith and overall professionalism need not be doubted.

Kay As an adult you may have found it useful to have a health practitioner who was prescribing illegally, but this doesn't exonerate her. You may not agree with the system which refused the registration of her clinic, but you cannot argue that breaking the law is a 'professional' way to behave. The requirement for registration is for the protection of patients.

This is what Health Inspectorate Wales had to say about the Webberley case:

Unregistered healthcare services pose a risk to patient safety as they are not subject to the same level of scrutiny as registered services. HIW’s role is to check that patients receive good care and we are committed to taking action where standards are not met and against those who provide services illegally.

hiw.org.uk/news/onlinegpprosecution?lang=en

KayM2, found this story and it is talking in terms of guilty and conviction:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-45767360

This is not the place to be defending Webberley, Kay. I find it highly suspect that you're so keen to do it.

Kay

From the link I posted just now:
HIW proceeded with criminal action against Online GP Services Ltd and Dr Webberley for operating a service without being registered under Section 11 of the Care Standards Act 2000.

I don't think there's any doubt that this is a criminal offence.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/14/contents

Thanks teawamutu. It is more or less what I thought. Not good for her, of course, but whether it is a "criminal" case I still don't know. It's not good.

It fits with the narrative that the medical establishment don't like things they can't control or oversee. They will argue that that is the correct and safest thing to do, and on the whole who could disagree? I wouldn't.

At the very least it makes her position if sued rather less safe than she would wish!

Old Crone ( I'm sure you aren't)
Just saw your post. Thanks. She's possibly in even deeper trouble , then.

I wish I could get an apology from a Trangender website I used to be on, but was chucked off for supporting WPUK. I and others used to say stuff about the risks of using that clinic unless one was 100% willing to take your own risks in life, and we did not have the mood of the meeting.

Incidently; someone referred to her prescribing illegal hormones; although the hormones were not developed for m to f useage, it is not unusual for medications to be used for groups they were not developed for, and it is not of itself illegal. It needs to be defensible, which is not the same. I am told. This applies to a number of painkillers, for example.

Langcleg; I am not defending Dr Webberly; I am trying to strike a dispassionate , balanced, tone.

She may end up struck off, she may end up sued ( quite possible) but there is no reason to think she has bad intentions.

Dr Marrietta Higgs comes to mind. She had good intentions as well, but did harm.

Incidently; someone referred to her prescribing illegal hormones; although the hormones were not developed for m to f useage, it is not unusual for medications to be used for groups they were not developed for, and it is not of itself illegal.

She was prescribing illegally to children. She prescribed cross-sex hormones to 12 year olds when the minimum legal age is 16.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-41213534

it is not unusual for medications to be used for groups they were not developed for, and it is not of itself illegal.

Grey-label prescribing is unusual in the UK.

Dr Webberleys analysis that Stella "wasn't really transgender" and that had she presented at a GID clinic today she wouldn't have had medical intervention, misses the point entirely.

Today, with schools, sporting organisations and parents told to affirm, whether or not there has been a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, Stella is very likely not to have reconciled herself to her own body. That, together with the online cheerleading, is the difference, not whether she was actually transgender.

Langcleg; I am not defending Dr Webberly; I am trying to strike a dispassionate , balanced, tone.

Kay you asserted on the previous page:
Whatever the Webberleys have been doing, their good faith and overall professionalism need not be doubted.

We have different ideas of what is defence & dispassionate and balanced tone.

There are clear medical, ethical and professional standards which underpin any medical or theraputic intervention in the UK.
This includes treating people who may experience gender dysphoria.

When treating children and young people there are additional safeguarding frameworks.

I find them weirdly blank or something and yes, childlike. It's terrifying to think their intelligence might be stunted. And all these men who transitioned in middle age after reaping the benefits of malehood and adulthood- the wife, the kids, the career etc. pushing this agenda of transing kids. It's so disturbing.

Webberley saying someone isn't really trans is a bit bloody rich when she and all her allies constantly hammer on about saying the words makes you AN ACTUAL WOMAN.

Old Crone; good point; it was to a 12 year old. Not sure if it is illegal, ( probably is) but ) it MUST be wrong.

Someone said I had "found a practitioner"...I am not and have never been a patient of Dr Webberly; ( today, 10.21) I said I had considered using her for long term hormones,. I used the NHS, many years ago.

According to my GP, grey label prescriptions are not all that unusual.

And... I've been accused of defending Dr W; if anyone cares enough to look at the words I carefully chose, I have consistently been pretty negative about the set up there. But not insulting .

as I said, this is about" checks and balances", more than about clinical competence.

Clinical competence involves ensuring appropriate and rigorous checks and balances. Recognising the importance of these and being proactive in seeking them.

Profesional supervision and reflective practice is essential when working with vulnerable adults, children and young people whether in a medical, theraputic, counselling, social care or voluntary sector.

This is at the heart of Safeguarding and child protection frameworks.

Roantrees; I think I may be getting in trouble because of my " writing style". I have tried to use careful wording that makes it clear that I don't think Dr Webberly is mad or bad, or ill intentioned, but I think that her clinic has behaved in ways that could only leave themselves open to criticism, and could have harmed others.

In fact, some one I know who is reading this has just emailed me to say that I am "attacking Dr W again and again".

So ( I've posted a few this morning, so I'll stop;
I don't approve of unsupervised gender clinics.
I don't support giving hormones to under 16 years olds , and am unhappy about puberty-blockers as well.
I am not a patient of Dr Webberly.

Sorry to be a pain; I hope I have made myself clearer now.

To be honest Kay, this isn't about you and given the issues raised in the program and this thread, can we move on please?