Janice Turner on Keira's Case in the Times today

[Igneococcus]

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fba6fad2-0a6b-11eb-9ac5-9d2cf4a10c9f?shareToken=f626b4b291808447a875b53cd678f216

thanks @Igneococcus

"“Future me” is the heart of the debate"

"what if your younger self shut doors for ever?"

“a high level of competence” is required, “for a high level of decision” and “autonomy without comprehension is no autonomy at all”.

Thanks for the link. Great comments too on the article.

Does anyone know when the judges will announce their decision?

Every time I read one of Janice’s articles, I’m amazed at how she manages to summarise such complex issues within her word count. No wonder she wins awards. 👏

Great article.

A child will not have a full understanding of the consequences of the treatment

I am not even sure the doctors do

But for now the unintentional legacy of the prudish Mrs Gillick is the legal question: can a child consent to forgo capacity for adult sexual pleasure, before it has even begun?

Wow. What an end to an article. On supreme form - as always - Janice!

I’ll buy the Times today. Though I can’t stand any of the witless lifestyle commentators or that pointless magazine.

@zanahoria

A child will not have a full understanding of the consequences of the treatment

I am not even sure the doctors do

Absolutely.

Excellent and concise article.

I'm gobsmacked by this '..many adults are happily asexual..'. (Tavistock’s QC, Fenella Morris).

So it's ok to castrate and sterilize children then? Aside from the obvious inaccuracy with that because of course asexual people are still capable of experiencing sexual desire and orgasm.

I'm feeling very uneasy about the outcome here. There needs to be many more articles like this to bring the issues to the attention of the general public so the judge knows they aren't operating in a vacuum.

I’ve posted this before, but if anyone wants to see just how little Tavistock’s clinicians know about PBs and how they openly (as suggested in court) put the responsibility for the decision on parents, watch this talk by Aidan Kelly from the Tavi in 2018 (from the 15 minute mark is most relevant):

Some quotes from the talk above:

“ We are putting responsibility back on the family because we don’t have the evidence base to say ‘it’s these kids or it’s these kids’, or how we can pick out which kids should go forward and which kids shouldn’t. “

“The blocker is not a benign thing, it comes with - I don’t mean financial costs- it comes with downsides, especially around energy- if the young person has mood difficulties the blocker can sometimes make that worse- it also takes away those sex hormones, so that whole thing I was talking about, of being attracted to, developing crushes, when all your teens and peers are getting into relationships and developing social connections in that sense- that’ll be gone, well not totally gone, but that drive that interest whether it’s the opposite or same sex or whatever will be greatly reduced.

And we do worry, because we don’t have long term evidence for this. We do worry for what impact that might have on their identity because sexuality is such an important part of your identity,who you’re attracted to.”

“It can often mean you are signing up to be a patient for the rest of your life. In a way you taking what is essentially a physically healthy, you know it’s not got medical- you might say internally in terms of gender it’s not right- but medically it’s a healthy body and you’re introducing medication and making it dependent on medication, so ethically it’s really quite a complicated area, especially for children.”

“We’ve only started talking about fertility in the last 4 to 5 years. Before that, we were putting people down this pathway and actually they were coming back to us 15 years later and going, “oh, you never really said, you know And that’s what I mean about this being such a new area, cos we weren’t even doing hypothalamic blockers under the age of 16 until 5 years ago. We don’t have people who are 40 to 50 to see, you know, how’s your life been, were we right to intervene so early? We don’t know.”

I am really pleased how this case and the World Rugby report are moving the arguments along. The TRA tactic of nodebate will be impotent now genuine scientific and legal points are being discussed in public. It feels like we are leaving twitter and moving into the real world.

Jesus rogdmum, that's difficult to believe.

They're straight up admitting it all.

I'm remembering how almost every thread on here about Jazz Jennings, what they were going through, all the details, and why, was targeted and deleted.

The only child who was publishing, in the full glare of publicity, all the details of their medical transition, was not allowed to be analysed or discussed because the rules suddenly said individual specific people could not be talked about.

What was happening to Jazz Jennings was only to be viewed when filtered through their own reality show.

No bloody wonder.

We’ve only started talking about fertility in the last 4 to 5 years. Before that, we were putting people down this pathway and actually they were coming back to us 15 years later and going, “oh, you never really said, you know And that’s what I mean about this being such a new area, cos we weren’t even doing hypothalamic blockers under the age of 16 until 5 years ago. We don’t have people who are 40 to 50 to see, you know, how’s your life been, were we right to intervene so early? We don’t know.”

How on earth has this been allowed? These are children with mental distress, being turned into whole life medical patients when the medics simply don't know the consequences.

Children with immature brains being given drugs to alter their perfectly healthy bodies and make them sterile and a lifelong medical patient because they are fed lies by adults who wish to push an agenda. Yeah, completely fucking ethical.

They need to take the money being pumped into the trans lobby and put it into teen mental health.

The affirmation only thing needs to stop asap. They need to work on the co morbid mental health issues that won't/don't magically disappear because they have never been dealt with.

Chilling, really terrifying. If I had been offered the opportunity at the age of 12 (when my periods started) to stop my body from growing breasts and pubic hair, and to stop men from ogling me in my school uniform, and to never have to think about "coming on" at a friend's house during a sleepover, I'm sure I would have seized on it without a thought. Some of my friends achieved much the same effect by developing anorexia. If any medical professionals had gone along with this by prescribing diet pills and emetics, they would have been quite rightly struck off.

A good article and awesome comments. The sunlight being shed by this case is fantastic - a quick look at the comments underneath the Mail article show 100% horror at what has ben allowed to happen to children.

the medical professionals involved in this are experimenting on children. they are doing this to children because they can

to see what will happen

to see if you can make a male look like a female if you pause puberty here and cut this off, and put silicone here

to see if you can make a female look like a male if you cut these off, flay this skin from here, use it build this appendage

I'm not normally one for hyperbole, but it's repellent, and it truly does fall into the 'playing god' category. some of them belong in prison in my opinion

Long term, this is going to be another one of those infamous medical disasters, like lobotomies, thalidomide, and infected blood transfusions. Always driven by that odd mix of hubris and blinkered well-meaning that the medical profession can be prone to. No wonder no-win-no-fee solicitors are starting to circle, there’s going to be a lot of compensation down the line.

I agree vermeil.

So much of that article gave me the chills, especially the blithe comment that many adults are happily asexual.

The QC argued that Tavistock patients think more about sex and identity than ordinary children, and an 11-year-old “who did not know what an orgasm or erection was would not be deemed capable of consent”.

Which implies that some of them do know? I mean properly know? Jesus - I know I was maybe a bit of a late starter but are they really saying that there are 11 year olds that are able to give consent on something that will affect their sex life to come?

Some of the younger teens might have masturbatory experiences but feel it as something shameful or disturbing that they think they'd be better off without, perhaps? (So, not properly and maturely know but they might think they do)

@zanahoria

I am really pleased how this case and the World Rugby report are moving the arguments along. The TRA tactic of nodebate will be impotent now genuine scientific and legal points are being discussed in public. It feels like we are leaving twitter and moving into the real world.

^ This - legal and scientific points in public 👌

The poster Disgusted of Manchester is outdoing themself in the comments with their misinformation, smears, and all-round dishonesty.

I was looking forward to their take, nauticant.

I'd characterise it as "mendacious".