Royal Society of General Practitioners issue 15 page warning

[Yeahnahyeah]

Unprecedented, according to the daily mail.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7220897/GPs-risk-transgender-storm-issuing-unprecedented-warning-lack-evidence-treatments.html

Great news. I try to hold onto faith in the NHS. I spent a bit of time working with psychiatrists in gender identity clinics whilst at med school and they were very frank that they didn't "get it" either. There's been a lot of astroturfing around this but most people - voters, doctors, lesbians, parents - are really really not on board and I honestly think the tipping point is going to come soon.

Just came on to see if there was a thread about this. Please let this be the start of the backlash against mostly unnecessary surgery on our young people!

I'm starting to be hopeful that this will protect some of the legions of pubescent girls who can't see how they can fit the feminine stereotype that society says women should be like. Let them have the time to find out that they can be wonderful young women who can learn to love their womanly bodies and have courage that they can be whoever they want to be, as a woman.

Mermaids statement here:

www.mermaidsuk.org.uk/lets-look-at-this-rcgp-statement.html

They seem to have a read a different document to the DM...

Not read all of the study but it at least says biological sex observed at birth ...

They've read that through some rose tinted specs.

Or as old Monty python would say 'Always look on the bright side of life.'

But for the rest of us it is actually a very welcomed article.

Wow that mermaids take on the policy is totally different from the daily mail article! It focuses on the waiting list and GPs being better trained - not that they should take a 'wait and see' method. The Mermaids person who writes it took hormones as a child! Just so odd. 🙄🤔

It says at one point gender identity services are needed for those uncomfortable or distressed by [...] gender roles or behaviours assigned to them by society (p5)

In other words, it acknowledges that gender norms cause distress for some people, but suggests the individual therefore needs treated, rather than the gender roles need to be challenged.

Honestly? I can see why Mermaids welcomes this. It doesn’t really challenge the narrative that individuals with gender incongruence need treatment but suggests such treatment be rolled out. This pathologises people who feel at odds because of assigned gender roles and does nothing to dismantle such gender roles.

Hence my discomfort with being of the sex assigned to domestic shit, ‘gender-based’ abuse, unequal pay is my gender incongruence issue and not a structural inequality which should be challenged.

Not clicked on DM link.

Is somebody making a lot of money from the drugs used here?

Someone is making a lot of money from the drugs and the surgeries and the psychotherapies.

The drugs aren't all cheap and they are lifelong. So lots of money all round.

@AnnaMagnani Good for you for not reading but not financially supporting a newspaper that is fairly and accurately covering a controversial topic the left wing press refuse to touch/sarcasm

What has Anna done?

Wow, this is positive, considering the RCGP has previously promoted the line that anything other than unquestioning affirmation of trans identity is conversion therapy.

I think MrsDumpty meant to refer to KTara (and not Anna) who said that she won't click on the Daily Mail link.

I notice that the Mermaids statement refers to "a transgender person's constitutional right to an initial appointment within 18 weeks".

We don't have a constitution in this country.

Sick of the utter dimwittery of these people.

I notice that the Mermaids statement refers to "a transgender person's constitutional right to an initial appointment within 18 weeks".

They probably mean the NHS constitution, in fairness.

(Also, to be pedantic, we do have a constitution in the UK, it's just not handily written down in a single document like the US one).

Yes I thought MrsDumpty meant me but did not wish to respond.

But anyway, I said I had not read the DM link by way of explanation in case it conveyed something other than what I had gleaned from the report (because I did not understand why Mermaids would not welcome it) - and I had not read it because I had DS beside me needing to go to bed not for some moral high ground. I thought the additional comments made, if directed at me, were unwarranted and not worthy of a response.

Hopefully that now suffices as an explanation!

Fair enough, KTara.

If Mermaids made a fuss, more people would read it to find out why. Selective acknowledgement works in their favour. It maintains the illusion that they're committed to 'best practice'.

Its possible to have more gender identity clinics, without hormone treatments and such being doled out though.Could be basically, counselling places. If the document (I have not read it yet, just the mail link and mermaids response) does go into waiting times and the need for more clinics, alongside how such drugs are basically untested and that, then I would think thats much more likely?

Mermaids obviously not even acknowledging that the document goes against everything they stand for, drugs as the only option. Drugs or die, is basically what they say right?

TRAs are not happy. This was the best one I saw:

Sorry but sex assigned at birth isnt clinical information. Body type & other information relevant to specific period of care is. The solution is for example maternity systems accepting men get pregnant not mandating every trans man has female written on record. That is abuse.

I think they mean that rather than a tick box for sex of male/female, they should list the parts that a person has instead. Yeh. That's such a great idea...

This is great news if it helps GPs to focus on alleviating psychological distress and other symptoms with eg the use of talking therapies- rather than rushing to ‘affirm’ in line with the lobby groups’ unevidenced, unscientific advice.