Sunday Times poll on puberty blockers

[poshme]

The Sunday times are running a poll- should children under 16 be prescribed puberty blockers?
At the moment 97% say no..
Poll open until Friday.

Sorry- don't know how to link to it on my phone.

What is the point in puberty blockers AFTER age 16?

Puberty blockers as an idea full stop are deeply disturbing.

What is the point in puberty blockers AFTER age 16?

Precisely. The whole point of puberty blockers is that they are given to pre-pubescent children.

What is the point in puberty blockers AFTER age 16?

This is what it says in a GIDS statement about their 'Early intervention study'

Routine practice in the London service prior to the early puberty suppression study was that pubertal suppression was available for suitable patients over the age of 16 years, using gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRHa). Patients were considered eligible if they were fully pubertal, had persistent Gender Dysphoria, had no other endocrine disorders and understood the risks and benefits of GnRHa (i.e. could provide informed consent). The use of pubertal suppression was to induce a sex-hormone-neutral environment to provide young people with space to decide whether to progress further with gender reassignment treatment as an adult.

As a treatment for transgender people they have only been approved for use in people who have been through puberty. Using them to prevent puberty is an experiment on children.

There's a link to the Sunday Times article with a share token on this thread.
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3631383-Penny-Mordaunt-It-s-vital-we-look-into-surge-in-girls-wanting-to-change-gender

I’ve just voted. It’s still 97% No. Encouraging to see such a clear majority against child abuse.

Am extremely gender critical, unfortunately alongside being the only actual transphobe on mumsnet, but I'm absolutely not having medical decision making via newspaper polling.

but I'm absolutely not having medical decision making via newspaper polling

Luckily, thats not whats happening. Just a poll happens to show that people tend to be against drugging young kids because they like the wrong stereotypes

Its as I expect really. However, times readers will generally be aware of the issues much more than readers of say..the guardian or the bbc, who purposely hide the bad stuff.

Though really I do think if you did a poll of the general public, without all the fluffy wording used to try and hide what it actually is, and flat out asked people if very strong drugs usually used in cancer treatments should be given to children so that they did not go through puberty and could then progress to cross sex hormones, because they do not follow the 'crrect' stereotypes for their sex..I fully expect the results to be about the same. No right thinking person would be for that, surely. Its only TRAs, and the few that have been brainwashed by queer theory. I know parents are frightened into it by the likes of mermaids too..who tell them its this or their kid will die. But generally, the huge majority of the public would be against it.

Medical ethics are something that are relevant and should be upheld to a certain degree by public support and consent.

If you have a significant percentage of the public concerned about a lack of medical ethics in a certain area this is important to flag up.

Yes a newspaper poll is flawed and self selecting and is definitely problematic but a poll of that strength does show a public concern over medical ethics which is a good thing.

Medicine should be evidence based and led but there are also things which shouldn't be doing to produce evidence based medicine. That very firmly includes experimenting on children except in very selective and exceptional circumstances, as although it's possible we might find a miraculous cure we do so at the risk of great harm to people who are unable to give informed consent ourselves.

Medical ethics should come before evidence based medicine. And public opinion, is an important thing which safeguards and underpins those ethics and stops overzealous doctors and ideologists getting carried away with the idea of 'the greater good'.