NHS announce independent review of puberty blockers and cross sex hormones!

[rogdmum]

www.england.nhs.uk/2020/01/update-on-gender-identity-development-service-for-children-and-young-people/

Am pleased.

Patients, families, experts and interested parties will be invited to comment on a draft specification

Cautiously optimistic about this. If the usual suspects get their way, we know who gets to count as "experts" and "interested parties." And even which patients and families deserve to be heard. But I think this is only happening as a result of pushback, so hopefully there will at least be properly independent elements to the review, which can only be a good thing.

I went straight to Transgender Trend to see what their response is. This tweet in response to the Transgender Trend PSA-style tweet says the clinical reference group are all signed up to gender identity ideology: mobile.twitter.com/RogdFamily/status/1223383624764088320

My twitter doesn't work, would you mind posting a screenshot?

They really should be consulting with other groups and Michele and Stephanie for example.

I wonder if the Sue Evans / Kiera Bell Case will have an impact?

It feels like there needs to be lots of letters written.

Badger she didn’t say

twitter.com/hilary_cass/status/1223376064740765697?s=21

Having detransitioners could be seen as similar to having trans individuals. If they are simply looking at the medical effects neither would be appropriate, I'd think?

Goosefoot I should have asked about trans people. Does someone want to tweet her and ask or ask who the members of the public on the WG will be (backgrounds)? I don’t want to use up my goodwill right now as will probably have lots more questions as it goes on!

@Hilary_Cass

Here is the screenshot StealthPolarBear.

We all know who Polly Carmichael is after her car crash NewsNight interview. Dr John Dean features in this article from Penis News:

Dr John Dean, Chair of the Clinical Reference Group for Specialised Gender Identity Services for NHS England, called for existing doctors and GPs to be trained on trans issues, saying: “There’s so many things competing for medical practitioners’ time for professional development that it’s difficult to get them to prioritise it until they are confronted for a patient for the first time – and that’s happening with increasing frequency.

“The number of people seeking help is increasing dramatically, and it is no longer appropriate for any doctor to say ‘this is a terribly rare condition, it’s very specialised, I don’t have to know about it’.

“Trans people are people, who want to be treated like people, and want to access healthcare just as other people. That’s possible and appropriate.

www-pinknews-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/09/08/nhs-doctor-refused-to-treat-transgender-patient-because-of-his-religion-parliament-hears/amp/?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCKAE%3D#aoh=15805421195875&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pinknews.co.uk%2F2015%2F09%2F08%2Fnhs-doctor-refused-to-treat-transgender-patient-because-of-his-religion-parliament-hears%2F

Suzanna Hopwood appears to be a member of the Stonewall Trans Advisory Group (or at least she was in 2017).

I can't find "T Stone".

This might be relevant

www.england.nhs.uk/publication/terms-of-reference-gender-identity-programme-board/

This appears to be 'T Stone'.

www.stonewall.org.uk/people/tara-stone

Thank you langittleClegabbage

Hopefully they'll be declaring conflicts of interest, or does that not apply for anything to do with gender

I believe that it does not apply, even whete the safeguarding of children is concerned

Surely the 'independent expert group' being established is not the same thing as the current 'gender identity programme board'?

Hopefully not

Assuming it was a mumsnetter, thank you to the person who has asked Dr Cass about the members of the public and their backgrounds.

Surely the 'independent expert group' being established is not the same thing as the current 'gender identity programme board'?

It appears that the names of the people in the independent working group have not yet been released. From the link in the OP:

The working group will be made up of 20 members from a range of clinical and academic backgrounds and will include members of the public. We will provide an update on the full membership shortly.

If it is like a NICE review then there should be an independent academic team of research scientist who will carry out a systematic review. If there is and if this is rigorous and unbiased then that should show up the paucity of evidence but will just rely on current research evidence (so no detransitioner evidence). Then interested parties will be given the chance to go to town on why this review is not relevant, why they are needed anyway, drum up noise, all of which (and the fact the CRG are ideologues) will mean that an unbiased systematic review will be basically ignored in any recommendations.

The only thing that may give them pause for thought might be the fact that by making recommendations the NHS will be putting itself in the firing line for future litigation (and letting doctors off the hook).

Aesop I know I’m hammering on about this, but what sort of “member of the public” would normally be involved in this sort of review?

OldCrone independent should mean people not currently involved in the debate at all - so no Stonewall, Mermaids, GIRES, or Tavistock links. Seems unlikely.

Dr Cass’ latest tweet this morning says:

All perspectives, experiences, data and evidence - about both risks and benefits - will be important in coming to a balanced view about policy. Aim is to listen, learn and try and achieve best possible consensus on way forward.

twitter.com/hilary_cass/status/1223532037925220354?s=21

independent should mean people not currently involved in the debate at all - so no Stonewall, Mermaids, GIRES, or Tavistock links

So no detransitioners, parents of ROGD kids, whistleblowers from the Tavistock? None of those are independent either. Is anyone independent if you exclude everyone who is 'currently involved in the debate'?

I hope so.

I know she will now be under fire a bit but we are talking kids here and being bullied into what they see as the right answer to avoid grief and threats well that doesnt bear thinking about

They would be truly stupid to spend this money and resources coming up with yet another unbalanced, overegged TRA political lobby designed answer that excludes everyone that the lobby will tantrum about. All that will happen is that it will be immediately discredited, provide yet more evidence of the concerns in hand including institutional capture and niche politics overwhelming best interests of children, and be used accordingly.

It's going to have to be faced up to sooner or later, and the government and the TRA lobby are going to have to admit that any legitimate case can stand on its own merits without having to be heavily stage managed to force the right answer.

OldCrone I agree. But it should at least exclude active lobbying organisations and those directly involved in prescribing puberty blockers.