Times: Chemist sells hormones for kids online

[Malahaha]

I don't think this is a share token. Still haven't mastered the art.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/chemist-sells-hormones-for-trans-children-online-cbgtxlbdr?fbclid=IwAR0ocQdGvaFBfucRwkSlnanlQlhiOi6eH8X3uVprlH7fj8Y-WOSCdoXeOSY

I'd be inclined to give a little more credibility to the 'we care about our patients' claims of Gender GP, Mermaids etc if they had taken even one tiny opportunity to further the understanding of trans.

They have perfect access to people who can give them the answers and they are not just not doing the studies themselves, but they are actively preventing others from doing them. Why are they not strengthening the diagnostic process with the aim of 0% regret/detransitioners, why are they not looking at the long term effects so that people have a proper idea of what they are signing up for? It might help people make a different decision about treatment options if they had truthful,information about the consequences of the medical route.

These organisations have so much funding - why are they not using it for the good of their 'community'? They have spent £100s of thousands on 'education' to 'prevent bullying' - but none of what they are doing seems to be materially improving life and outcomes for the trans community.

I would suggest that these orgs are not remotely interested in the wellbeing of trans people. As someone wise said, 'follow the money'.

I agree with gardenbird . Why do these organisations immediately jump to affirmation and the medical path? Why did the defence yesterday say (according to one of the live tweeters) the only treatment for a GD 10 year old is the medical path? If any of these people really cared about these children, particularly as we have seen the recent swing to adolescent girls who did not show signs of gender distress in childhood, they would be pushing for the medical path to be the absolute last resort.

Why don’t they push for better overall mental health care, for exploring any underlying issues before affirmation to see if alleviating those alleviates the gender distress/dysphoria? Why don’t they explore coping mechanisms for gender distress/dysphoria? Why are GIDS sessions focussed on assessment rather than therapy? How many of these children have their gender distress made worse because they have self diagnosed and have decided that PBs and/or cross sex hormones are the only solution- because they’ve been told this on social media?

We all know why- it’s because anything other than unquestioning affirmation is considered conversion therapy in this absolutely messed up situation we’ve ended up in so most therapist won’t work from a place of curiosity, but instead affirm.

It’s an utter disgrace how these charities have behaved, pushing one approach, one solution as the only acceptable path while scaring the living daylights out of parents with warnings of suicide risk if they don’t affirm without question.

In Mermaids case I assume it's because if SG ever paused and thought for one minute that there had been an alternative path to the one she purused, it would be hard to live with yourself.

They're not different children. They're the same children. Keira Bell was a trans child. She has said that nothing would have convinced her otherwise. And the doctors who treated her were also convinced she was a trans child. But now, you'd say she wasn't a trans child because she's detransitioned.

There are probably many others who remain 'transitioned' and submit to the sunken costs fallacy.

None of this solves the fundamental problem of "How do we know this child is really trans?" but this question is being dragged away from the medical profession, who have been largely successful in answering it when they have the time and resources

And it has been 'dragged' away from the scientific profession who would also like to bring light to the subject by having their research shut down and defunded. Why? In case the research provides facts that will create discussion and challenge that which has been deemed as unchallengeable. As has robust and repeatable medical studies.

I am all for supporting any initiative by anyone who is keen for this to happen with the view of providing improved care knowing that that care may involve a greater focus on watch and wait rather than increasing the pressure to transition teenagers based on mature aged transitioner experiences (and frankly, who may have a very biased view of what transition means as they may be a totally different demographic and have significantly different experiences causing their own GD).

Are you?

and into the dreaded Court of Public Opinion, for fair reasons or foul, which is creating more problems than it solves. yes and without having allowed proper debate and research, it now seems that in all the reverse ferreting and 'we didn't actually mean that!' an even more confused cohort of young teenagers are being left behind. What would you solution be here? Since you are a 'Daddy', what do you propose?

I am open to suggestions.

Excellent. Let's have them instead of being a constant pusher of shame.

@Signalbox

How come the GMC hasn't just struck her off on account of being a danger and acting beyond her scope of practice?

Helen Webberley is currently on an interim suspension and her substantive case has not yet been heard. I believe it was due to be heard this year at some point but what with COVID I imagine there is now a massive backlog of cases waiting. She could well be struck off when her case is finally heard since she is utterly unrepentant, has no insight or recognition that she has done anything wrong.

One would certainly hope the fact that she seems to be just seeking out loophole after loophole to continue, would go very much against her when the case is heard.

In Mermaids case I assume it's because if SG ever paused and thought for one minute that there had been an alternative path to the one she purused, it would be hard to live with yourself

And Mermaids would have no reason to exist, at least not in their current incarnation. Perhaps they would have to re-brand as “helping GNC children to be happy in their sex”
But this doesn’t require any drugs does it?

First of all I'd like to apologize in advance for voicing my opinion in a place that is not really the place to do so, but things are a little tense at the moment and I'd like to just add a couple of ideas for thought.

I understand that the negativity here directed at GengerGP is with children's best interest at heart and fully agree that GenderGP as a whole has made a lot of decisions that call into question its credibility.

As a counterpoint though, the only reason this company is relevant (and regardless of its motive, whether money or helping), is because of the fact that the services run by the NHS have fallen short of its own regulations.

"Provide a timely and sustainable service for adults with gender dysphoria that
meets the needs of the population, and incorporates the views of individuals."

Taken directly from the NHS services. If they can't even follow their own regulations, what else could be expected but for desperate people AND parents to seek alternate means.

Rather than attacking the company, the boards should have been encouraged to work with them as an alternative means, as this would not only provide a private (and very affordable) option for people, but would have relieved some of the pressure off the NHS services AND could have been monitored more closely. This cooperation could have also ensured a more secure and reliable screening process which means that children who needed the service would have more options and those who didn't could have had safety nets to catch it before hand.

Sorry about the wall of text, I just really needed to say my piece. Thanks if you read it.

I realized that I quoted from the adult services.

"NHS England has explored whether it would be appropriate to prescribe cross sex
hormones to gender variant young people below 16 years of age. Given the very limited
evidence (including from other countries) about the effects and harms of prescribing
cross sex hormones to young people under 16 years, the policy stipulates that young
people should be aged around 16 years to receive a prescription for these drugs. "

Quite right that GenderGP should follow regulations such as these... however I would also point out that, given how distressing Gender dysphoria is, that more research should be done in regards to this so that help can be given (EFFICIENTLY AND IN A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME!!) whether with medications or help with their mental health.

Edit: my next paragraph got a little over the top 'guilt trip' and 'preachy' so I deleted it. I'm done this time sorry.

I am always up for considering the opposing points of view Fardalen but I can't help wondering in this case, if there hadn't been such a sustained recruitment drive from certain organisations over recent years. Followed by encouraging children (and adults) to self-diagnose into medical treatment without considering any alternative, there might not be such demand for the NHS services and then the current capacity would be acceptable.

Many of GenderGP's patients (as I understand) are there because their GPs have refused to give them powerful life changing drugs on demand. There appears to be a sensible reason for that.

As a counterpoint though, the only reason this company is relevant (and regardless of its motive, whether money or helping), is because of the fact that the services run by the NHS have fallen short of its own regulations.

The demand has has increased faster than the NHS, research, and safe methods can ever have hoped to have matched, and they have also been restricted in what can be researched by the affirmation model.

the services run by the NHS have fallen short of its own regulations.

The waiting lists are appalling, that is true.

Liz Truss announced new clinics. I doubt it'll happen quickly because there are not staff for them. It is interesting that this new, and growing field of medicine has such challenges attracting staff.

I suspect the reason for that is that people trained in critical thinking look at the way GICs operate and opt to work elsewhere.

I suspect the reason for that is that people trained in critical thinking look at the way GICs operate and opt to work elsewhere.

Look at the way the Tavistock has lost staff over the last few years as people decided they couldn't square their conscience with the "affirmation only" model and the various corners being cut.

Unfortunately, waiting lists for every health issue are depressingly long. Its bad, really bad. But the answer is not suspended GPs attempting to keep their gravy train going by finding loopholes to keep doling out drugs with little/no actual assessment of needs.

however I would also point out that, given how distressing Gender dysphoria is, that more research should be done in regards to this so that help can be given

Not sure why you think anyone would disagree with you. Part of the issue is the shutting down of research or data collection. The complete lack of follow up too.. to be able to deny and minimize detransition.

As pp have also stated. The affirmation only model contributes to high demand.

How come the GMC hasn't just struck her off on account of being a danger and acting beyond her scope of practice?

Unfortunately the GMC aren't the World Police of Medicine. Striking her off would only prevent her working in the U.K. as a doctor. All other countries have their own medical regulator and while the GMC can tell them what's happened they can't prevent another country allowing them to practise. So she could feasibly move to another country, register there and carry on as she was.

If they can't even follow their own regulations, what else could be expected but for desperate people AND parents to seek alternate means.

And why is GD desperation so bad that people turn to internet prescriptions? How does the community work to dispel that desperation? Particularly with constant focus on ‘need to transition, the earlier the better’ without actually advocating to treat any mental health issues first.

There is huge need to improve waiting times (and on ALL NHS services), there is also need for the community to listen to the voices within that are stating there are issues with children transitioning and that the current charities seem to be not listening to anything dissenting trans voices are saying.

I agree the NHS is failing by not providing an adequate CAHMs service.

I also think that women, as a rule, are used to not being listened to and not being taken seriously over their health problems and that this is a facet of a womans lived experience and shapes our expectations.

GenderGP seem to think the article in the Mirror is now going to be published this weekend:

twitter.com/gendergp/status/1314531808814534656?s=21

“ We understand the Mirror are planning on running a story about GenderGP this weekend, after one of their staff contacted us pretending to be a mother of a trans child. Please read our statement about this here,”
www.gendergp.com/gendergp-proud-to-support-trans-community-response-to-journalist/

If the article resembles anything like their response, hopefully even more people will understand why they should not be prescribing to children/adolescents.

Oh, and they are also currently promoting taping as an alternative to binding.

twitter.com/gendergp/status/1314566292083531778?s=21

“ Want an alternative to wearing a binder? Read our blog to discover how you can use tape instead. #TransLives”

www.gendergp.com/chest-binding-a-trans-mans-insights-on-how-to-use-tape-as-an-alternative/

Oo the Mirror? The left wing mirror? Has the mirror covered much on the subject to date?

Interesting they have done some investigating, wonder what prompted it?

Discovered some anti neo-liberalist / ultra-capitalist / anti-private sector bollocks?

comparing GGP to a backroom abortion provider? what you even talking about? i got compassionate, professional care from them.

as for "within the regulations", there are evidence based guidelines eg www.wpath.org/publications/soc and ggp as far as i can tell operate according to those. being trans means my healthcare is heavily politicised. to go back to the abortion analogy, a texan abortion facility will struggle to operate within their legal regulations, as they are patently ridiculous. that doesn't mean that an abortion provider in california is some backroom hellhole!

thanks for those that have offered empathy. i'm obvs not going to be able to keep up with this thread but i will keep coming back on every day or so.

there's a lot of polarisation and demonisation. personally i just want to live my life and if what you believe doesn't effect me, i don't mind what you think about trans identities. but when i see people opposing opening up more GICs that hurts. that's a direct assault on my ability to access what i need to live a healthy, full life.

"there's a lot of polarisation and demonisation"

what i meant to continue with, is that i'm up for genuine discussion if others are about these issues. personally i'm a feminist and i see no contradiction in campaigning on all issues that effect marginalised genders. they don't all effect me, but that doesn't stop me feeling solidarity, compassion and often anger. i've never needed an abortion but i will fight like hell for access for those that do. i am not living with an abusive partner, but i will fight for services for those that need them. i'm white, but that doesn't stop me joining BLM protests and challenging white supremacy. when we stand together against patriarchal oppression we are fucking strong.

comparing GGP to a backroom abortion provider? what you even talking about? i got compassionate, professional care from them.

Good customer service doesn't mean you are acting ethically or have a customers best interests at heart.

they don't all effect me, but that doesn't stop me feeling solidarity, compassion and often anger. i've never needed an abortion but i will fight like hell for access for those that do.

Problem is we aren't being allowed to fight for issues that DO affect us or our children.

And we aren't allowed to raise questions about standards and why people bypass carepath ways and ethics without the criticism of having some sort of extreme view.

Lets spell this out. It is not an extreme view to expect all doctors dealing with British patients whether they practice in person or online to adhere to uk regulations and standards of ethical practice.

Especially when some of those patients are children who have a higher threshold of consent.