the court ruled Stonewall were not granted permission to intervene

[stumbledin]

This morning there was a preliminary hearing of the Bell v Tavistock appeal (re: whether young people can give informed consent to treatment with puberty blockers), where the court decided whether there could be any new interveners in the case 1/

The hearing confirmed that those who intervened in the original case – University College London Hospitals Trust, Leeds Teaching Hospitals Trust, and Transgender Trend – would all be allowed to do so again in the appeal. 2/

In response to a joint application made by Stonewall, Gendered Intelligence, the Endocrine Society and Brook – the court ruled Stonewall were not granted permission to intervene, but the remaining three have been. Association of Lawyers for Children will also be interveners. 3/

Dr David Bell – adult psychiatrist and former Tavistock staff governor - has also been granted permission to intervene. Dr Bell submitted a report to the Trust in 2018, after being approached by 10 members of GIDS staff who had concerns about the way the service was operating. 4/

None of the new interveners will be allowed to make oral submissions nor submit any fresh evidence. The court made the point that all of these parties could have sought permission to intervene in the original case, and that this was an appeal – not a fresh hearing. 5/

The court said that Liberty and the BMA were considering whether to apply to intervene, and they have until 12th February to submit their applications. 6/

In terms of timings, no date has been set for the actual appeal hearing yet, but there was an acknowledgment that this is a ‘very important matter’ that needed to be heard. It was hoped a hearing could take place in May/June/July. Two days will be set aside for the hearing. 7/7

twitter.com/hannahsbee/status/1355127683491917834

Thank you. And bwah hahahaha

Thanks. That's an interesting update, not just on the Stonewall aspect.

Bwahahahaha indeed!

And good on Transgender Trend. It being payday, I have just done some gardening on their behalf. Thank you, Stephanie, for all that you do.

Credit due to Hannah Barnes who I now see is from the BBC! There must a secret core of journalists working on this issue or is it just newsnight?

Hannah Barnes @hannahsbee
Senior Journalist at @BBCNewsnight, formerly @BBCRadioCA
Retweets aren’t endorsements.
Get in touch with stories - [email protected]

Liberty I'm not surprised at but the fucking BMA intervening for the gender loonies. Fuckers.

Why do they always try to reframe it?

The BMA...? If the doctors want to embroil themselves in this when any objective and informed observer can see it is a medical scandal, not healthcare - then they deserve our contempt.

Liberty - what - it’s a human right for a child - mainly girls, with complex issues - to be able to agree to be sterilised and have no sexual function before they have capacity to understand?

Keira Bell is a shining light against these bullies - who should be protecting children.

What were the grounds for SW to be rejected?

Do we know that the BMA wants to intervene on the side of the gender loonies rather than the side of sanity?

What were the grounds for SW to be rejected?

I assumed it was to do with this point:
None of the new interveners will be allowed to make oral submissions nor submit any fresh evidence. The court made the point that all of these parties could have sought permission to intervene in the original case, and that this was an appeal – not a fresh hearing. 5/

Stonewall did seek permission to intervene in the original case, and were refused, so that refusal still stands.

Just out of interest, if they cant make oral submissions or submit any fresh evidence, what’s the point of them attending? Are they just going to sit there looking pretty?

@RoyalCorgi

Do we know that the BMA wants to intervene on the side of the gender loonies rather than the side of sanity?

I want to find out about this too.

Aw, that's a shame for Stonewall.

Is the Endocrine society not a US based thing?

I agree with PPs that this is raising more questions than it seems to answer. In particular, how can there be new interveners if there can be no new evidence?

'The Association for the Study of Internal Secretions.' - I think I prefer their original name. Looks pretty US based to me, though it says it's 'international'.

Exactly Doyoumind

for TT

I didn't know what Brook was.

Look to be pro-puberty blockers.

www.brook.org.uk/your-life/transitioning/

Just out of interest, if they cant make oral submissions or submit any fresh evidence, what’s the point of them attending? Are they just going to sit there looking pretty?

They can make brief written legal submissions. I am not sure if it will add much though.

I can see the point in Brook making written legal submissions on the interpretation of Gillick, but I'm a bit mystified as to what eg the Endocrine Society would submit...

Are Brook the abortion charity?

Has someone told them this doesn't affect Gillick?

@Aha85

I can see the point in Brook making written legal submissions on the interpretation of Gillick, but I'm a bit mystified as to what eg the Endocrine Society would submit...

Indeed, or why they would feel the need to intervene. Another current thread here:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4147148-NEW-Grounds-in-support-of-intervention-in-the-Bell-v-Tavistock-JR-appeal-published

I thought it was Brook Advisory Service, abortion provider, Vegetable, but maybe it's a different organisation?

For those doubting which side of the fence the BMA has come down on. They are totally captured.
www.bma.org.uk/news-and-opinion/push-for-progress-on-transgender-rights-in-healthcare

Why on earth has the US based endocrine society been allowed to intervene? Can anyone hazard a guess, I'm truly mystified.

YY to the BMA being (recently) captured.

It is important to remember that they are in effect the trade union for doctors and therefore not an academic or medical research body per se, so it is hard to see what, if anything, they can bring to the appeal.

Might be a good idea if any other current BMA members get in touch with them in the next few days if they too are disquieted by this direction of travel, considering that it is funded by doctors paying their subs...