Child with Asperger’s taken into care, parents won’t give hormones

[JessicaWakefieldSVH]

This is another article about a child given a child protection order, because his parents wouldn’t allow him to take hormones as advised by the NHS clinic. This is really scary to me as I have a teen with late diagnosis of ASD who also self harmed and is gender non-conforming. Thankfully I had raised her to fight strongly against gender stereotypes and she has never had any issues around her sex or ‘gender identity’, but teachers have sent her to the doctor without telling me before because they saw her ritualistic eating and assumed she had an eating disorder. I feel so sorry for these parents. Imagine being told by your school, your kid isn’t coming home because you won’t give him hormones and let him change his sex- at 15!!

Having the autism assessment really opened my eyes to how little people, including professionals, understand it. How many autistic children are going to be sterilised due to this? Is anyone else worried??

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6817935/Autistic-boy-taken-care-school-reports-parents-refusing-allow-sex-change-treatment.html

they were warned he would be

By a teacher

There is no evidence that a social worker told them this is there? Unless I missed it. Teachers cannot decide to take children into care. Neither can social workers actually; but teachers DO NOT all understand child protection procedures.

I do understand that parents can have negative experiences with professionals, can have well founded fears and i completely accept that the climate of affirmation around gender issues with children is a HUGE issue and concern. But I do not accept that this is evidence that children are being taken into care over lack of gender affirmation and so this whole situation is a strawman/scare story with no basis.

to send the child elsewhere strongly suggests to me that the relationship with the child had deteriorated to the extent that there were concerns about the child's safety at home (I mean risks of absconding etc)

I’m puzzled as to how you can’t see that the relationship breakdown was at the very least partially caused by the child been fully supported by Tavistock and the school to the point of recommending hormones, rather than the official ‘ wait and see’ approach being implemented. The suggestion to move the child, was the schools, and they threatened them that he would be put in foster care if they didn’t. I can’t imagine why you would assume, or think that strongly suggests, that there was a family breakdown, rather than a school overreacting and abusing their position. My DD self harmed. That’s not due to a ‘family breakdown’, and she had some demands of her own around that time, things around independence. No therapist we sent her to threatened us or reported us to social services for not doing exactly what she wanted- thank god. We thankfully were not pressured by therapists or school to do things we as her parents thought were not in her best interests. We retained parental control and her issues were worked through and she was supported, without any blame being put on us, any threats or otherwise. Autism can be difficult when you’re a teenager, any person working with a child with autism must understand these complexities. I don’t think the school or Tavistock did in this case.

There is no evidence that a social worker told them this is there?

No. You obviously are reading my comments. So you can see why I think parents would get very nervous and concerned their children could be put into care, if threatened by someone of authority. They were reported to social services for emotional harm. That’s very scary for a parent. To say this is a scare story with no basis, is to show a total lack of concern. It’s very dismissive. Especially considering concerns from Tavistock staff, which you’re ignoring.

I think parents of ASD non-conforming kids have plenty to be scared about.

Also Daily Mail I'm afraid but the case above - whatever the specifics - is not the only example of agencies getting involved where kids and parents do not agree on treatment for gender dysphoria.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6797093/Councils-taking-children-want-change-gender-care.html

It's not necessarily a clear risk that resisting hormone treatment = kid taken away but the point is this general shift towards an environment where someone other than a parent somehow knows what treatment is required based usually on the kids self-diagnosis. In what other circumstances would that happen? Obviously in the absence of any other risk factors.

I'm not in any way downplaying the risks of professionals getting groomed by mermaids/allsorts et al. My colleague has sat through trans awareness training that is uncritical bollocks. BUT out of my team of 8 social workers 3 of us are active gender critical campaigners, 2 are close to peaking and even if they were not, all of us are thoughtful, careful and critical practitioners who would not uncritically accept affirmation based approaches. Crucially, nor is our manager.
Please don't assume that all or most social workers and departments are proponents of this model.

Please don't assume that all or most social workers and departments are proponents of this model.

I’m definitely not doing that. I appreciate that’s what you’re trying to point out, it’s a fair point totally.

This needs to go onto the main boards. It affects every parent

I had a needs assessment meeting with a disability social worker recently who asked for the preferred pronoun for my 6 year old non-verbal autistic son .

I share SocFem19's observations about autistic women more often falling into the 'camps' towards the ends of the spectrum - either very GC or trans. My dd and I are autistic and naturally very GC.

I'm not in any way downplaying the risks of professionals getting groomed by mermaids/allsorts et al. My colleague has sat through trans awareness training that is uncritical bollocks. BUT out of my team of 8 social workers 3 of us are active gender critical campaigners, 2 are close to peaking and even if they were not, all of us are thoughtful, careful and critical practitioners who would not uncritically accept affirmation based approaches. Crucially, nor is our manager. Please don't assume that all or most social workers and departments are proponents of this model.

I can see very well that you're not and am reading with interest.

However, it is somewhat misleading to posit that social work is not as prone to falling for trend, ideology and contagion as any other institution. Let's all remember re: B-S, in which Judge Munby criticised - and stemmed, with one judgement - a trend in forced adoptions that had increased by almost a third in a very short period of time in which social work practice was a major factor.

www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed117048

What you're saying is useful - not many people understand the difference between degrees of social work intervention, family courts and the Looked After system. Feminists are right to point out that there are multiple axes of conflict in this case - ASD, gender confusion, self harm, and that it is dangerous to prioritise gender confusion above comorbidities. You're right to point out that relationship breakdown, whatever it is about, can be a serious risk to the safety of a child that may require intervention.

But let's not pretend there's nothing to see here. Because there is plenty to see.

But let's not pretend there's nothing to see here. Because there is plenty to see.

Thank you once again Lang, for always managing to clearly articulate important points.

But let's not pretend there's nothing to see here. Because there is plenty to see

Absolutely. As a gender critical woman I'm as concerned about the creep of this ideology as anyone. I've been very active in online and RL GC communities and follow matters closely so I'm fully aware. I just think we need to be really clear about what is actually happening and where the threat is.
It might not be a bad thing if a local authority were to try to obtain a care order for refusing to affirm a trans identity. (Obviously not for any hypothetical family involved, im not a monster). A test case that could be ripped apart by a competent gender critical barrister would be quite reassuring to social workers and parents.

thanks Lang and Borsetshire.

"A test case that could be ripped apart by a competent gender critical barrister "

my turn to stick a professional oar in. Barristers aren't supposed to take on cases according to their own political persuasions.

"The cab rank rule is set out at rC29 of the BSB Handbook. It states that if you receive instructions from a professional client and the instructions are appropriate taking into account your experience, seniority and/or field or practice, you must (subject to the exceptions in rC30) accept those instructions irrespective of:The identity of the client;The nature of the case to which the instructions relate;Whether the client is paying privately or is publicly funded; andAny belief or opinion which you may have formedas to the character, reputation, cause, conduct, guilt or innocence of the client.rC30.7.c states that you are only obliged to accept instructions where you are being asked to act oneither the Standard Contractual Terms for the Supply of Legal Services by Barristers to Authorised Persons 2012 (published on the Bar Council’s website) orif you publish standard terms of work, on those terms."

sorry if a bit off the point but if you lose the impartiality of the bar you lose the public's trust that the next generation of judges will be unbiased.
I expect a barrister will be along in a minute to correct me :)

It might not be a bad thing if a local authority were to try to obtain a care order for refusing to affirm a trans identity. (Obviously not for any hypothetical family involved, im not a monster). A test case that could be ripped apart by a competent gender critical barrister would be quite reassuring to social workers and parents.

I very much agree. The same would go for contested medical treatment in a case of doctors+child wishes vs parents wishes.

I mean, would an ASD child need a CAFCASS guardian appointed, for instance?

Any child in care proceedings will have a guardian appointed

Any child in care proceedings will have a guardian appointed

Sorry, meant for contested medical treatment.

That would depend a bit on the situation, but in a case where the parents are against and the hospital or LA are pro, then yes, a Guardian would be appointed.

www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/b25thu/autistic_boy_taken_into_care_after_school_reports/?st=jtdcmwja&sh=1cf27cf1

The thread over on Reddit is appalling. Everyone is supporting social services! I was going to comment but don't want to be downvoted into oblivion...

my turn to stick a professional oar in. Barristers aren't supposed to take on cases according to their own political persuasions.

That's right, the cab rank rule for barristers does exist and barristers are obliged to put their clients' cases forward to the best of their ability.

However barristers can and very frequently do gain a reputation in a particular area of law or for their ability to run a particular legal argument, so that they will become a 'go to' expert in that particular area.

And there's nothing to stop barristers having a public position on a particular issue. As long as when representing each individual client they fight that client's case as best they can.

I've frequently represented both employees and employers, for example, and put the same effort in regardless. I'd also be allowed to have a publicly held view on employment rights.