Why would the want to be in the same camp as this paedophile? Shouldn't they want to have the medical reports and the panel assess their GRC applications to ensure they are not like this paedophile?
I don't think paedophiles are automatically disqualified?
There was the case of that prisoner who sued the govt when he was denied surgery (and GRC, as I understand it). You can read the judgment here
www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2019/3565.html
The doctors' comments are... interesting.
"Dr Barrett wrote:
"In terms of assessment, it was always difficult to assess prisoners particularly those with sexual offences as there are a variety of motivations behind seeking a social change of gender role in prison, quite apart from the straightforward one of a gender identity disorder. In this case this patient clearly has paraphilia as well and the connection between this and the gender identity disorder, although strongly made by the patient, it isn't something which is seen in the majority of other patients, certainly not in terms of convictions or by their report. I think that this patient is keen for things to move forward but I wouldn't wish to do so until we have had, certainly our customary second part of our usual two-part assessment, but probably also a panel meeting as well as seems usually to be the case with patients who are in prison."
In September 2012 the Claimant saw Dr Stewart Lorimer, Consultant Psychiatrist at the Clinic specialising in the treatment of gender dysphoria. Following that consultation Dr Lorimer wrote on 24 September 2012:
"I reflected that it was not unheard of for male to female transitioners to have masochistic fantasies, but that they tended to involve imagining themselves as adult females rather than children. [The Claimant] found it difficult to say for sure why his sexual fantasies were different."
Dr Lorimer expressed his opinion in the following terms:
"On the basis of this assessment of the previous correspondence available to me, I would agree that there is perhaps an element of gender dysphoria in [the Claimant's] account of growing up and identifying with female peers. He also maintains the cross-dressing did not include an erotic component. As my colleague Dr Barrett points out however, paraphilia seems also to be present, and I think it is by no means straightforward teasing out the gender identity factors from a sort of fetishization of pre-teen girlhood and a degree of sexual masochism."
For reasons that are not entirely clear the Claimant's case was not further considered until she was seen again by Dr Lorimer at the Clinic on 2 April 2015. The Claimant told Dr Lorimer that she would like to start hormone treatment. In his letter dated 7 May 2015 Dr Lorimer wrote:
"I'm weakly supportive of [the Claimant] starting on hormones but I would wish to have the support of my colleagues, including perhaps one further opinion."
Dr Lorimer copied his letter to Dr Barrett.
On 17 August 2015 Dr Barrett saw the Claimant. In a letter dated 2 October 2015 Dr Barrett wrote:
"... This patient next has a parole review in 2017 having had one in January this year and interestingly reports that she wasn't requesting release or a move to a category D prison as she has a considerable amount of anxiety about being released from prison and in some senses feels that she is at least in a stable circumstance where she is at the moment.
… From our point of view the thing that matters most now is whether this patient can sustain a female role in an environment other than prison."
The main concern was whether this paedophile could 'sustain a female role', whatever that means!