Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Three NHS trusts to adopt guidelines written by a trans activist

58 replies

jadefinch · 15/02/2020 09:17

3 NHS trusts have adopted a trans activist's manual that says sex is assigned, not observed, at birth, anatomy 'is not always a good guide' to determining a child’s sex and puberty blockers, currently under an NHS ethics review, can be used on children.

The activist who wrote the guidelines is a biological male who believes they can breastfeed and has called 'cis' women an 'infestation'.

OP posts:
jadefinch · 15/02/2020 09:19

Here's the story, there's quite a bit on Twitter about Cheryl Morgan and some of their views on women.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/2d7d6724-4f57-11ea-b112-75acb94b3417

OP posts:
JellySlice · 15/02/2020 09:40

Can you post a share token?

BovaryX · 15/02/2020 09:44

Good grief. That is absolutely bonkers. I have just read Janice Turner's excellent opinion piece in The Times about Nandy et al at the vanguard of Labour's witch hunt. She makes an interesting point about purity spirals and how they explain the rapid ascent into authoritarian insanity. This snippet seems relevant....

Drafting the Labour manifesto, Lachlan Stuart observed that LGBT activists were not “driven by a motivation to improve the quality of life for trans people”, such as better mental and physical health care, only “to erode or erase the political rights of female people”. Their alarming central goal was a total end to women’s single-sex spaces. How will voters, hitherto unaware of this arcane debate, feel about a Labour leader committed to ending historic safeguards? About a party which believes any male should be allowed to legally change sex without qualification or checks, leaving women and girls vulnerable yet unable to object? Will Labour leaders pull out of the purity spiral and heed the fears of thousands of women members? Or will they, as that nice Lisa Nandy demands, simply chuck them out?

jadefinch · 15/02/2020 10:00

I don't know how to do a share token but I've used up my free article on this so here it is:

Disputed trans guide gets NHS nod

Three NHS trusts have endorsed a guide for transgender patients that approves puberty blockers and declares that anatomy “is not always a good guide” to determining a child’s sex.

The “Supporting Trans People” toolkit, written by campaigners, was formally endorsed to be sent out to medical staff with NHS logos attached by Bristol, North Somerset, South Gloucestershire Clinical Commissioning Group (BNSSG CCG), North Bristol NHS Trust and Devon Partnership NHS Trust.

The toolkit approved the use of puberty blockers on adolescents without explaining to medics that the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health and NHS England have both ordered national reviews into the ethics surrounding the rapid increase in the use of hormone blockers to treat under-16s who identify as transgender.

Many health professionals have said there is no robust evidence on the long-term safety of the drugs, which are licensed in the UK only to treat children who start puberty abnormally early, not to treat adolescents who wish to switch gender. Their off-label use has been likened by one expert to “an unregulated live experiment on children”. The toolkit also relied on a non-peer reviewed and non-representative survey of trans people to make claims about self-harm and suicide risk.

The toolkit was co-ordinated by a Bristol charity, Stand Against Racism and Inequality (Sari) and the lead author was Cheryl Morgan, a trans woman and director of the Diversity Trust.

The guidance for medics contains statements such as “anatomy is not always a good guide to what gender a child will be or even what sex they are”. It states that sex is “assigned” rather than observed at birth “based on physical characteristics”, and defines gender as a “social system for coding the behaviour of people as either masculine, feminine or something else”.

Minutes from a BNSSG CCG meeting on November 5 last year, where they endorsed the toolkit, show that North Bristol NHS Trust had already approved the guidance and that it was the culmination of two years of work.

The minutes show that the BNSSG CCG governing body “Endorsed the toolkit and its dissemination to relevant practitioners within BNSSG” and “Agreed that the BNSSG CCG logo can be added to the publication.”

Kathleen Stock, a professor of philosophy at the University of Sussex, said the statement in the toolkit that “doing nothing or delaying treatment CAUSES HARM” [toolkit’s emphasis] was “scare-mongering” and “not responsible or well-evidenced advice”.

“It gives the impression explicitly that the only way of treating gender dysphoria is some kind of transition, social or medical. Yet there is ample evidence that a ‘watchful waiting’ strategy can be right for many young people experiencing gender dysphoria,” she said.

The toolkit has also been criticised for saying that trans patients “need to be given priority” when it comes to provision on single sex wards and that “forcing a trans person to use a single sex ward that does not conform to their gender identity is likely to have a catastrophic effect on their emotional wellbeing.”

Professor Stock described this as “shockingly hyperbolic and unevidenced”.

“What should be about well-evidenced medical and psychological treatment for people with gender dysphoria has been instead narrowly over-politicised, with potentially adverse effects for patient welfare,” she said.

The toolkit was not put to public or patient consultation. After complaints made by several women who learnt about the toolkit, the governing body has now asked for an equality impact assessment to see if it is compatible with its own safeguarding policies.

When approached by The Times for comment, the BNSSG CCG said the use of its logo had been “welcomed in principle” but with edits to be made before any formal endorsement or use of its branding.

They later added that they will now “look again at the toolkit” following the outcome of the national review into hormone blockers. Devon Partnership NHS Trust and North Bristol NHS Trust declined to comment.

Sari said that despite the endorsements by the trusts the toolkit was “still in the development phase and not yet published”.

OP posts:
Kit19 · 15/02/2020 10:23

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

TheShoesa · 15/02/2020 10:27

Thank you for sharing this - I noticed the article via another thread and was frustrated to not be able to read the whole thing.

The toolkit has also been criticised for saying that trans patients “need to be given priority” when it comes to provision on single sex wards and that “forcing a trans person to use a single sex ward that does not conform to their gender identity is likely to have a catastrophic effect on their emotional wellbeing

But never mind the emotional wellbeing of the people of the sex for which the ward is intended, eh?

and

The toolkit was not put to public or patient consultation. After complaints made by several women who learnt about the toolkit, the governing body has now asked for an equality impact assessment to see if it is compatible with its own safeguarding policies

I thought that EIAs were meant to be done BEFORE approving and endorsing such policies?

jadefinch · 15/02/2020 10:31

There's a story today of a girl being sexually assaulted on a hospital ward:
www.thejournal.ie/cork-university-hospital-admission-protocol-sexual-assault-ward-5004600-Feb2020/?amp=1&__twitter_impression=true

And there's more on Cheryl Morgan here

medium.com/@elsaegret/abusive-misogynist-activist-writes-nhs-policy-in-bristol-21dd02cc4c9c

OP posts:
Newuser123123 · 15/02/2020 10:33

Op did I speak to you at the wpuk conference re EIAs? If so do you know if they've done one yet? If not we should put in an FOI to see the EIA and how they propose to mitigate the impact on women. I remember talking JRs and timescales too....

Newuser123123 · 15/02/2020 10:34

Sorry for all the acronyms!

Newuser123123 · 15/02/2020 10:35

Also sorry didn't read full thread, ignore me

ArranUpsideDown · 15/02/2020 12:45

I said this at #WomensLib2020 - but do we need a Bluestocking Letter Writing Club to write to relevant authorities and protest about this?

Michelleoftheresistance · 15/02/2020 13:18

'women are an infestation' - the extreme misogyny is hardly a surprise but thank you, that's a quote I'll be keeping to demonstrate it.

The whole 'anatomy is not always a good guide to determining a child's sex' is bonkers, a flat out lie. If the child or anyone at all needs a blood test or a transplant then no doctor is going to do anything but act wholly on the person's biological sex, regardless of whether the person likes to be known as that sex or not. Otherwise they're going to kill their patient.

They're saying social lies for social approbation against their own knowledge, judgement and social responsibility, and it's ridiculous.

Some children may present with gender identity needs, or the medical condition of DSD. They are not 'a different sex' to their anatomy.

Mockersisrightasusual · 15/02/2020 13:20

If the child or anyone at all needs a blood test or a transplant then no doctor is going to do anything but act wholly on the person's biological sex

Is Sarah Woolastone back in the day-job now?

Michelleoftheresistance · 15/02/2020 13:22

The toolkit has also been criticised for saying that trans patients “need to be given priority” when it comes to...

Everything.

I am so tired and fed up with this emotional blackmail that women must never matter as much, nor be considered as much, and can never be as distressed or affected as much. It reminds me of past times in history where it was considered that certain types of people didn't have real feelings, or feel as much pain, or need the quality of food that their betters needed.

It's pure elitist misogyny, it's dehumanising women and creating different standards according to the perceived importance of the person instead of equality. There is nothing good about this, society has no excuse for indulging it.

OldCrone · 15/02/2020 13:38

There's a sharetoken for the Times article about the NHS on this thread (also sharetokens for other Times articles today).

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3823385-The-Times-View-on-Harry-Miller-Twitter-the-trans-debates-Thought-Police-15-2-20

HerFemaleness · 15/02/2020 13:57

This Cheryl Morgan?

twitter.com/CherylMorgan/status/1228655272287178752

''Personally I find it worrying that women should be reduced to a bunch of biological characteristics. I thought that not doing that was one of the points of feminism.''

You would only think it reduces women for us to be defined as a biological sex class if you think there is something inherently inferior about the sex characteristics typical of that sex class.

HerFemaleness · 15/02/2020 13:58

I wish I could edit posts here Sad

I'm referring to the Cheryl Morgan mentioned in the article as the person who wrote the guides.

HandsOffMyLangCleg · 15/02/2020 13:59

I've added this to the 'It Will Never Happen Resource Thread'

So many organisations are captured. The NHS fell a long time ago when the likes of Tara Hewitt became involved in dictating policy.

This is so dangerous and irresponsible. I hope the women who will be impacted by this dangerous environment in those trusts speak up. But by then it's too late.

HandsOffMyLangCleg · 15/02/2020 14:04

More on TW Hewitt's influence here. What's startling is when advocates like Bergdorf or Hewitt are given prominent positions without any qualifications, skills or expertise. Yet their reach is causing catastrophic consequences for women and informing policy - Stonewall steering group also being a key example of this.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3385533-Prominant-campaigning-role-of-Tara-Hewitt-NHS-TELI-Social-work-universities-etc?pg=1&order=

anotherFOIrequester · 29/11/2020 12:27

Update on this story - one of the three trusts has now completed an Equality Impact Assessment which you can read here:

bnssgccg.nhs.uk/library/governing-body-paper-1-december-2020-item-61/

Clymene · 29/11/2020 12:43

Thanks for that anotherFOIrequester

From the paper (for anyone who can't open it):

A series of edits are recommended to mitigate against identified risks, which include:
 Amending the ‘Treatment works’ section; including removing references to the use of hormone blockers in young people pending the outcome of the nationally commissioned Hilary Cass review.
 Amending the treatment pathways section; being clear that this section is intended to illustrate a typical patient journey rather than define a single pathway.
 Acknowledging sex as a protected characteristic under law in the crisis management section, and making stronger reference to national guidance in this area.
 Removing reference to suicidality in young people and improving the use of statistics throughout the document; contextualising with sample sizes.
 Including more case studies to bring people’s experiences of accessing local health and care services to life.

Very positive.

Thelnebriati · 29/11/2020 12:49

Calling a group of humans 'an infestation' is an interesting take on human rights.

Thelnebriati · 29/11/2020 12:53

Heres the link to the impact assessment, if you dont want to download it;

The assessment shows the toolkit has a positive impact for the group with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, and a negative impact on 4 other groups.
bnssgccg-media.ams3.cdn.digitaloceanspaces.com/attachments/govbody_1Dec20_item6.1.pdf

anotherFOIrequester · 29/11/2020 12:57

Yes there are lots of positives - but they should have recognised the negative impact on ppl with PC of sexual orientation, most obviously young lesbians.