GIDS rated ‘inadequate’ by CQC

[TheFleegleHasLanded]

www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/20/gender-identity-development-service-for-children-rated-inadequate

Yes the news night analysis is interesting.

We also have to hold on to the fact that the bbc has removed mermaids from its site too.

It interesting that the bbc seem to be able to get certain messages out under a specific programme's heading. I wonder how that works.

@Doyoumind

The BBC article is interesting in that it includes reporting by Ben Hunte and analysis by the Newsnight team. It feels like there has been a shift in how they are reporting on the issue, particularly after that awful piece from BH recently that had to be amended.

Maybe Ben is now only allowed to publish an article once the grown ups have reviewed it first.

The BBC article is better. This is great news. I just feel so sorry for all those parents and children that have already received treatment. I wonder if they will now sue.

Yes, I read the BBC article imagining Ben sitting there typing with gritted teeth about failures to check on informed consent while someone from the BBC editorial team stood by his shoulder saying "no Ben you can't just write about long waiting lists, you have to mention all of the findings."

Sounds like my home learning experience with DS yesterday Cara

It didn’t fail due to waiting times.

Does anyone remember all those Mumsnet webchats with senior politicians - from various political parties - who absolutely refused to engaged in questions about this ineadequate NHS service?

It didn’t fail due to waiting times

It is so frustrating that no one seems to ever make the connection between increased demand now that gender non conformity /gender diverse has been added to the mix and covers near enough any normal child and the waiting times.

You cant on one hand fight for any thing besides strict conformity to stereotypes to be included them act surprised when kids who wouldn't normally be there show up at the door.

But then I guess we shouldn't be surprised when the right to change sex markwrs on medical records was also granted.

Its like constant stream of self sabotage. Why keep creating the situations you then have to fight against?

Does this call into question the previous inspection report at all? On the CQC website it (the previous report) is dated 2018, overall 'Good', and 'effectiveness' was 'Outstanding'.

Suddenly after the recent Dec 2020 court ruling its inadequacies, long pointed out on MN to much vicious backlash, have been formally recognised.

Funny, that.

Suddenly after the recent Dec 2020 court ruling its inadequacies, long pointed out on MN to much vicious backlash, have been formally recognised

Ironically we all want the same thing don't we. Good, evidence based health care complete with records, research etc so much time spent fighting against us which could be used to actually work with us to fight the real problems.

Hannah Barnes has also done a very good lengthy thread on Twitter:

twitter.com/hannahsbee/status/1351793414812086274?s=21

Includes:

“ GIDS carried out audits of compliance with their procedure for consent and capacity in March and September 2020. The March audit reviewed 10 records of young people referred for hormone blockers: “only three contained a completed consent form and checklist for referral.

CQC: “we found no evidence that staff had completed an assessment after the documentation was found to be missing...this meant that staff had still not assessed the capacity and competency of young people receiving treatment, despite being aware that they had not done so.”

Absolutely. Always, always, children's safeguarding is paramount.

Bloody hell the record keeping bit is absolutely atrocious. I used to be an advice worker with a charity & it was drummed into that you write everything down! What the hell were they thinking? And yes I’m sure they were busy but these are clinical records recording clinical decisions! How can they not have recorded this stuff?

That is an atrocious report and absolutely not just about waiting times. I found it interesting that the dispassionate outsiders (CQC) found the service to be generally terrible but those in the bubble (children/parents) thought it was amazing.

Kind of echoes the whole give me what I want and everyone who highlights concerns is a hateful transphobe.

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

That is an atrocious report and absolutely not just about waiting times. I found it interesting that the dispassionate outsiders (CQC) found the service to be generally terrible but those in the bubble (children/parents) thought it was amazing.

Kind of echoes the whole give me what I want and everyone who highlights concerns is a hateful transphobe.

Yep - it’s very common in health & care services. I’ve never read an internal report or self commissioned evaluation from a charity that didn’t rave about how good the service was from a client perspective. My question was always the same - “if they didn’t use your service, could they go elsewhere?” To which the answer was 99% “no”. So people with no choice or control over which service they use, like the only one they can have.

Hannah Barnes’ thread is great for pulling out the details. I also find the idea of someone standing over Ben Hunte’s shoulder while he writes amusing. I think it’s interesting that the detail has come from the Newsnight team and Ben has basically written an intro. I suppose they have to find him something to do.

Awaits impatiently for Newnignt tonight and Don Kimono’s Twitter update.

There are so many red flags. From Hannah's thread:

The report highlights how vulnerable some patients were, including: “young people who had made suicide attempts, young people who were vulnerable to sexual exploitation and young people who had a history of inappropriate or high-risk sexual behaviour.”

From Hannah Barnes’ twitter thread:

‘CQC notes there is still wide variation in practice with assessments ranging from “two or three sessions to over 25 sessions, with some young people receiving more than 50 sessions.” The CQC confirm staff reports seen by NN that some assessments consisted of two sessions’

I’ve read countless social media comments from
people accusing Keira Bell about lying re: how few appointments she had before being prescribed blockers. It’s now there for everyone to see, some patients are referred to endocrinology after just 2 GIDS appointments.

The CQC report also confirms the rumours we’ve heard about how the assessment process at GIDS varies enormously dependent on which clinicians you are assigned.

Wonder how come the wait time vary so much? Do they triage the waiting list?

That Thread by Hannah is good.

I like others feel saddened by the fact the loss of information that could be reviewed to improve the effectiveness of actually helping these kids. How can any longitudinal study be done without even more effort now?

And shouldn’t there be a change in the top job? People like Polly Carmichael need to acknowledge they have failed here and unless a dramatic and public turnabout is done, they will continue to deliver sub optimal care to a complex group. And yes, there is a lack of resources (and studies). But there also seemed to be a lack of curiosity when people started pointing out the dramatic changes.

So much lost time. So many children harmed through care deemed inadequate.

I wonder if this was a routine inspection or triggered by Bell case information being put into the public domain?

*Winesalot

So much lost time. So many children harmed through care deemed inadequate.*

This is the crux of it. It is so sad and so unnecessary. I want all children to have access to excellent, caring and objective care. The lack of intellectual and medical rigour is astonishing and the children deserve better.

Hannah Barnes’ Twitter thread is brilliant for detail.

It’s odd that the BBC news aren’t reporting anything about this. I hope Newsnight do something but it needs to be more mainstream.

I wonder if JK will get an apology?