Does the ruling affect private clinics?

[Binglebong]

I apologise if this has already been answered on another thread - there are rather a lot of them! I am sure I will have missed some things but anyway....

As the heroic Keira Bell's case was directly against decisions being made by the Taverstock will the ruling have any affect on private clinics, both in the UK and abroad where prescriptions are being filled in the uk? I know the NHS has said they will stop prescribing but we do know that that is not the only route being used to get these drugs. And if that is the case how is it prevented?

Thanks

Yes it does affect private clinics in the UK. If a child within the NHS system can’t consent then neither can a child at a private clinic.

As far as clinics abroad treating UK kids; it depends on whether the UK courts can reach them.

I thought that would be the case but I wasn't sure how it would work. Thank you.

Could an instruction be given to pharmacies not to fill prescriptions for certain drugs if they come from abroad? I realise it may push some to buy them off the internet but coming down hard may also make some parents think twice.

From what I understand of the ruling, clinics may have a work around if they rely on parental consent. The court seemed to say it did not consider whether parental consent was acceptable since GIDS only use PBs with the child’s consent, they do rely on parental consent ever. But I would think the ruling will make it more difficult for private clinics to justify PBs even with parental consent.

*they do NOT rely on parental consent ever.

I really don’t think parental consent would be appropriate though would it? You’re consenting to (potentially) render your child infertile. Obviously not imminently, but with the only available data indicating that 98% of children put on PBs go into CSH, then very likely rendering your child infertile. That data comes from the Netherlands, I believe because the Tavistock have not been recording this kind of information - mostly the reason they’re in this pickle.

For a 6 year old needing chemotherapy to treat cancer that would otherwise kill them? OK, reasonable to rely on parental consent.

For a 12 year old wanting puberty blockers, with a 80% (I believe) chance their gender dysphoria will desist after puberty anyway? Not reasonable to rely on parental consent. Any depression, mood issues, anxiety, suicidal thoughts etc should be properly managed with psychotherapy and mental health support, as not endocrine medications.

That would be my thinking, Cwenthryth but I would also think that about clinicians proposing it’s in the best interests of the child for similar reasons, yet some clearly do and the court didn’t take issue with that.

Imagine you are a private clinic.

You still have to get Medical Indemnity Insurance to cover you whilst you practice in case of malpractice, misdiagnosis or claims made against you for other reasons.

So if you work in an area of health care where there have been a number of legal cases that have highlighted poor practice and illegal practice, if you then carry on ignoring this, you could find that your premiums skyrocket, you are not able to get cover or you find that you are not covered if someone does make a claim against you.

Of course it depends on what the punishment is. If its cheaper to pay fines or pay extra or pay for claims out of your own back pocket, then you might not care anyway.

Of course it depends on what the punishment is. If its cheaper to pay fines or pay extra or pay for claims out of your own back pocket, then you might not care anyway.

The fines don't seem adequate to deter determined private doctors like Webberley. She was fined about £25,000 for running her illegal clinic where she was prescribing cross sex hormones to children (including a 12-year-old girl who was prescribed testosterone). She was also suspended by the GMC, and all she did was move her clinic out of the UK and employ other doctors to write the prescriptions.

If you're making so much money that fines like that are just seen as small change, it's difficult to know how people could be stopped other than putting them in prison.

Webberley can still write prescriptions via their employees but surely this ruling will stop UK pharmacy's from filling them.

Webberley use to have a Liverpool pharmacy fill and post out stuff in the UK.

I know some authority looked into this pharmacy and they stopped posting out Webberley prescriptions.

I assume Webberley found an interim solution to continue up to this point.

But I hope this ruling will prevent all UK pharmacies from filling any puberty blockers prescriptions.

@OldCrone

Of course it depends on what the punishment is. If its cheaper to pay fines or pay extra or pay for claims out of your own back pocket, then you might not care anyway.

The fines don't seem adequate to deter determined private doctors like Webberley. She was fined about £25,000 for running her illegal clinic where she was prescribing cross sex hormones to children (including a 12-year-old girl who was prescribed testosterone). She was also suspended by the GMC, and all she did was move her clinic out of the UK and employ other doctors to write the prescriptions.

If you're making so much money that fines like that are just seen as small change, it's difficult to know how people could be stopped other than putting them in prison.

Precisely my point...

I guess the most effective (although long term) plan would be for the government/GIDS to publicise heavily the extremely compelling reasons for parents NOT to try and find every loophole available to obtain these drugs for their children.

While the parents think that pbs are the best 'treatment' for their children, some will do everything they can to get them - there may well be day trippable European clinics that would be prepared to fulfil the perceived need. If the msm could be persuaded to actually do their jobs and do an expose` that might be a start.

If parents can be relieved from the emotional blackmail from Mermaids/Stonewall et al that their kids are about to commit suicide if they don't get the hormone treatment and then realise that the hormone treatment is so harmful they may be persuaded to seek more appropriate treatment?

Agree with everything you say gardenbird this is why all the noise we can make is valuable and why reversing regulatory capture is essential. It’s also completely unacceptable that organisations that claim to advocate for children have seemingly no concern for evidence based care, consent, safeguarding and so on. They don’t even use proper statistics. They don’t lobby for better mental health support which could change the lives of so many kids.
I saw that Mermaids have been encouraging parents to write to their MPs to protest the Bell decision. We should write to our MPs to support it and mention again the issues that surround the case, and remind them that the job of public services is to protect and care for children, not to allow children to be used politically and the job of MPs is to hold service providers to account. Every child matters.
(This wouldn’t ever have had to go to court if that had been done properly in the first place, but we are where we are with that..). We have a relatively new Parliament who have yet not had a chance to explore these issues so we should keep drawing them to their attention.

Hi @MNHQ I disputed the post removal last night and have heard nothing back.