Keira Bell and Mrs A vs. Tavistock - Court of Appeal hearing 23 & 24 June 2021

[FindTheTruth]

The appeal hearing will be live streamed this Wednesday 23 & Thursday 24 June, 10:30am

Background

1. The High Court decided in Mrs A and Keira Bell’s favour on 1st December 2020 that puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones are experimental treatments which cannot be given to children in most cases without application to the court. Full details of the original case:

www.transgendertrend.com/keira-bell-high-court-historic-judgment-protect-vulnerable-children/

1. The High Court decided in the case of AB on 26 March 2021 thatPARENTScan consent to their children receiving puberty blocking treatment when their children lack the capacity to consent.

1. Court of Appeal 23 & 24 June 2021 Keira Bell and Mrs A’s legal team is dealing with legal submissions from 7 intervenors who want to see the judgement of the Divisional Court overturned. “A significant task in defending the judgement of the Divisional Court. We are facing very well resourced opponents – the Tavistock being funded by the State and the other intervenors”.

That is terrifying, Rabbitwoman.

it really does seem to me that this is a very complex issue that has been reduced to childlike logic.

and then for some reason, we have allowed to children to drive it.

And for some reason all of our tools to inform them have been taken away from us.

@rabbitwoman

Oh, I don't think they were confused about whether or not someone was male or female.

They were confused over whether or not someone was 'trans'. Wearing certain clothes makes someone 'trans'.

And of course, this is concerning if being 'trans' confers the same rights as someone who is that sex. Harry Styles wearing a skirt makes him 'trans', therefore gives him the same rights as a woman.

Of course, they might have been winding me up......

But when they said people were trans, did they mean transgender or transsexual or just 'under the trans umbrella'?

According to Stonewall, crossdressers are under the trans umbrella, which means men in dresses and women wearing men's suits are 'trans', even though they might not be transgender or transsexual.

@NewlyGranny

It's the reversibility lie that is at the heart of this case, I think. Puberty blockers are reversible if used appropriately and for a limited time, say on a 6 or 7yo who is showing signs of going into a precocious puberty. The child comes off at 11 or so and a normal puberty follows, as I understand it.

But trans children in these clinics almost invariably go straight from PB to cross sex hormones, meaning they get no pubertal growth spurt or sexual maturation at all, just some secondary characteristics induced by the artificial hormones, like breasts for the boys or facial hair and a deep voice for the girls.

I think it's also whether someone believes in the faith-based position "trans kids are born trans".

If you believe you are just helping children become their "true selves" then it's easier to ignore concerns about pushing DC onto a medical path unnecessarily. But if you accept that children and young people may be influenced into identifying as trans then the whole thing falls apart.

But, if you accept that, then you need to reassess your position from "good person who's helping trans kids against a backdrop of adversity" to "ill-informed person whose intervention is making life harder for DC who already have a load of issues to deal with". I guess lots of people prefer to identify as the former.

Even at GIDS, the problem seems to be that people are split into believers and non-believers. It's mind boggling that people who are meant to be delivering evidence-based care would not see that the lack of evidence of any long term benefit underpinning medical transition is a problem, but their faith seems to be blinding them to this.

It's looks like senior management at GIDS see a psychoanalytic approach to children presenting as trans as problematic, and have taken the ideological position that people who want to look for underlying causes, just don't understand trans kids.

It's a shift isn't it? According to gender identity ideology as of last month, trans meant "someone who says they're trans". Now that's being developed further to be "assume trans until they tell you otherwise".

Is this going to get to the point where everyone is "trans", "trans" stops meaning anything really, and somehow we get back to the original concept attaching just to people who are perceived to be "tru trans"?

Oldcrone, you cannot even explain that to many adults without being called names! I cannot explain cross dressers to children!

@rabbitwoman

Oldcrone, you cannot even explain that to many adults without being called names! I cannot explain cross dressers to children!

I was just wondering if those children meant something other than transgender/transsexual when they say 'trans'.

Perhaps they are just using it as shorthand for gender non-conforming. Do they really think all those people you mentioned are/were transgender? Including Princess Diana?

Ah yes, I see what you mean.

But trying to talk to teenagers about this in particular is really hard. They feel like this is theirs... Harry Styles is one of them, and i am so much older and out of touch so I can I possibly understand.

And they don't want to ever back down.

I am sure if a therapist started showing them pictures of princess Diana and David Bowie they would reveal that what they believe is a fantasy, full of flawed logic, and perhaps treatment would not be appropriate , but that step of the process has been removed, hasn't it? It's immediate affirmation now without really establishing what a child believes being transgender is.

And of course, they are adamant and sure and we know nothing and we are just bigots and as soon as we start making too much sense, as soon as it looks like they might have to admit they might be wrong, they say 'I am not comfortable talking about this any more' or words to that effect.

And its not just kids who do that....

A number of times now I've seen grown-ups say that this belongs to the kids, we can't possibly understand it, and so we have to shut up and take our lead from the kids. It is essential that we learn more and to do this we should read the sacred texts and watch Contrapoints videos. We'll never get there but with enough listening in silence we'll learn how to follow respectfully.

Meanwhile there are Pied Pipers all over the place, such as the thoroughly depressing Diane Ehrensaft.

Do they really think all those people you mentioned are/were transgender? Including Princess Diana?

Even if they are/were they have happily managed ?social transition without needing to resort to medical/surgical treatment.

So why not change your clothes, your name and off you go, without needing any other interventions?

I saw a post on social media about Laurel Hubbard the other day and a woman said that she was struggling with it but "clearly I have to do more listening". I suggested that she might listen to her intuition. People seem to think that if they have a problem with something then they must be the problem and need to keep working on it until they're happy with it.

@nauticant

A number of times now I've seen grown-ups say that this belongs to the kids, we can't possibly understand it, and so we have to shut up and take our lead from the kids. It is essential that we learn more and to do this we should read the sacred texts and watch Contrapoints videos. We'll never get there but with enough listening in silence we'll learn how to follow respectfully.

Meanwhile there are Pied Pipers all over the place, such as the thoroughly depressing Diane Ehrensaft.

What I don't understand is why they think that on this particular issue children know more than adults, when it's usually acknowledged that adults with their greater experience of the world and more education know more than children.

We know that children often get very enthusiastic about various causes and also that young people can sometimes offer a different perspective from jaded adults, but the idea that adults can't possibly understand is not a view which is normally taken on by those adults, although the younger people might think that.

How have otherwise rational adults been hoodwinked into thinking that 'children know best'? Where do they think the children came by this superior knowledge and why do they think it's impossible for adults to understand? If the children can understand it, why can't adults?

People seem to think that if they have a problem with something then they must be the problem and need to keep working on it until they're happy with it.

This is the result of mass gaslighting of all and sundry. It’s part of the structural emotional/psychological abuse, particularly of women and girls and obviously also of children and young people, which has been going on for some years now.

People have been told they can’t trust the evidence of their own senses, their own life experience or knowledge of the world around them. That to do so is bigoted, harmful and “literal violence”, and means they are oppressing a vulnerable group who are terribly marginalised already.

It’s straight from the abusers’ handbook. No, how can you say I’m abusing you, you’re the one abusing me, you bad person, I’m the victim here. DARVO all the way.

Those who don’t have the critical thinking skills or the basic understanding of this kind of abuse, who are heavily invested in “being kind” for whatever reason, or those who can’t face the realisation that they could be being taken for a ride this badly, are wide open and defenceless in the face of this gaslighting, especially when you look at just how many official bodies and institutions have been and are complicit with it.

It’s the same dynamic as a woman being gaslit by her abusive partner to the point she can’t trust any of her own feelings and will even be hostile to those who see the abuse and try to reach out to her. But on a mass scale.

@NewlyGranny

It's the reversibility lie that is at the heart of this case, I think. Puberty blockers are reversible if used appropriately and for a limited time, say on a 6 or 7yo who is showing signs of going into a precocious puberty. The child comes off at 11 or so and a normal puberty follows, as I understand it.

But trans children in these clinics almost invariably go straight from PB to cross sex hormones, meaning they get no pubertal growth spurt or sexual maturation at all, just some secondary characteristics induced by the artificial hormones, like breasts for the boys or facial hair and a deep voice for the girls.

Exactly. The lie being repeated all over makes me feel there is something quite sinister going on sometimes. Some refuse to see the issues. In theory, reversible. In practise, including by the tavis own figures I believe, not reversible. And pretty much always leads to medical treatments that leave one infertile (Along other side effects), so to me..this part needs to be understood before commencing the "harmless blockers". Hormones are not really a separate treatment, it's one and the same if they always follow each other surely..

I'm so pleased that the courts are taking a second look at this. Having had experience of everyone from my Mum to the local priest trying to sort me out, I see hope. I can't begin to experience Keira's feelings but I'm more than sure that the answer lies in a claim of medical negligence rather than forcing hurt aǹd distress on others who do benefit from treatment based on one singular outcome.

Are you referring to conversion therapy Steph751? If so, would that be conversion therapy for your same sex attraction or for your gender identity?

If this is intrusive questioning then I apologise in advance.

Even if someone did spend a couple of years on blockers, to then come off them and not proceed to cross sex hormones, and even though puberty would then resume, that child/teenager has still missed out those years of pubertal development.

Has anyone done research into outcomes for such youngsters? Is it known at all how brain maturation is affected by missing several years? Our bodies know how old they are, and the brain ends the maturation process at around 25 years of age. Which capacities will be affected by having a break of several years during which the brain should have developed, but didn’t? Does the maturation just pick up where it left off, and it will be the last couple of years of normal brain development that will never happen? Does research into this even exist?

@nauticant

Are you referring to conversion therapy Steph751? If so, would that be conversion therapy for your same sex attraction or for your gender identity?

If this is intrusive questioning then I apologise in advance.

I'm referring to conversion therapy for both. That said, my so called parent did soften slightly in later years believing that 'nobody had to know' about being gay. If you ask me, straight people, especially those shielding their intolerance with religion (imagine the hypocrisy of that if you're RC after very recent scandals) should just mind their own business.

Has anyone done research into outcomes for such youngsters? Is it known at all how brain maturation is affected by missing several years? Our bodies know how old they are, and the brain ends the maturation process at around 25 years of age. Which capacities will be affected by having a break of several years during which the brain should have developed, but didn’t? Does the maturation just pick up where it left off, and it will be the last couple of years of normal brain development that will never happen? Does research into this even exist?

No, I don't think it does, which is why the NHS changed the text on its page a couple of years ago to be more cautious.

And yet, even with all of the unknowns, and the fact that there have been no proper studies to establish and evidence base, a barrister for the Tavistock can stand up in court and say that it's not an experimental treatment. (That's because they found an expert who was willing to assert that which means that the barrister was able simply to parrot the words.)

Steph751 'If you ask me, straight people, especially those shielding their intolerance with religion (imagine the hypocrisy of that if you're RC after very recent scandals) should just mind their own business.'

To be clear, I have no problem at all with anyone getting medical intervention for gender dysphoria. This treatment has been available for decades and has obviously been successful for many people - including children.

My problem is that now, suddenly, a lot of people are getting this treatment when they don't have gender dysphoria. It does seem the treatment pathway has changed recently to remove the crucial early stage where patients would receive careful counselling and therapy to ensure it is right for them - this is not in the best interests of patients, this is a political choice. Lobbying groups - such as Stonewall - pushed for gender dysphoria to removed from the list of recognised mental health disorders to the extent that patients no longer get sufficient mental health support - to do so has been labelled conversion therapy.

It used to be that mental health support would include making sure the patient understood that they would never actually be the opposite sex. The treatment only made them look more masculine or more feminine. Many patients dropped out at this stage, even if they did have genuine gender dysphoria, having been able to recognise that the key thing they wanted, to actually BE the opposite sex, not just look like it, was not possible. But as lobbying groups have pushed so hard for the idea that trans men ARE actually men and TWAW, not only is this something that society is no longer allowed to point out, but it's something professionals are no longer allowed to point out. Again, this is a political choice, not in the best interests of the patients....

And somewhere along the line, there was a positive explosion of teenage girls wanting this treatment. The scrutiny as to why, the role of the Internet, the role of social contagion, other existing issues, etc, because of the above political ideology, has been framed as bigotry, transphobic, and anyone trying to raise awareness of it does so at huge personal risk.

So you now have a treatment that doesn't seem to work. A treatment that is not even always an effective cure for gender dysphoria being given to many people who don't even have gender dysphoria, and noone can ask why.

And you tell us, mothers and teachers and doctors and therapists and everyone else, that this is none of our business?!

I can see that you've bought into some of the more common misrepresenations perpetuated by some poor journalism and on line rhetoric in the UK. All I can suggest is that you speak to some trans men and women in good faith with an open mind and you may see things differently. But, yes, I don't think the two penneth of straight people with regards to support for conversion therapy adds much to the conversation.

@Steph751
Do you believe that people can change sex?

@Steph751

I can see that you've bought into some of the more common misrepresenations perpetuated by some poor journalism and on line rhetoric in the UK. All I can suggest is that you speak to some trans men and women in good faith with an open mind and you may see things differently. But, yes, I don't think the two penneth of straight people with regards to support for conversion therapy adds much to the conversation.

What if I did go into this with good faith and an open mind, what if I did talk to trans men and women?

You are making an assumption that this is all misrepresentation, poor journalism, on line rhetoric AND the assumption that it is UK only, I don't think I am the one with the closed mind.

Does it sound to you as if I haven't done my research, as if I don't know what I am talking about?