The judgment in Keira Bell's case will be given tomorrow

[MaudTheInvincible]

The judgment of the Tavistock's appeal of the case will be given at 2pm.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/royal-courts-of-justice-cause-list/royal-courts-of-justice-daily-cause-list

Brave Keira. You have done so much to protect children from ideologically driven healthcare around the world. Your integrity and courage is inspiring and rare in this ridiculous day and age. 💚🤍💜

And thanks for posting the other studies which we have also seen.

Again, I point out that regurgitating conclusions drawn from studies such as 2014 Shumer/Spack and 2014 Steensma, while are good foundational reading are out of date because they are not reflecting the numbers of cases that fit the current cohort.

Not sure how many more times it needs to be said.

Even Steensma has stated the cohort currently receiving treatment. And now that we know you know who Steensma is, Butterfly, we know you understand the significance of this statement.

Despite ignoring it the numerous times it has been said.

And if you knew anything, anything at all about the current cohort which I believe you don’t, you would know that the starting point for the teenage females who are trans in this current cohort is very poor and usually combined with co-morbities.

Indeed.

This is from Sweden.
extract
In the group of 13–17-year-old natal females, the Swedish NBHW report states that the comorbidity is greatest.In this unprecedented cohort of teenaged girls seeking gender transition the following co-morbidities were found:

32.4 percent anxiety disorder
28.9 percent some form of depressive disorder
19.4 percent ADHD
15.2 percent autism

The report also raises important questions about causation and suicide risk for people with gender dysphoria given the “very high rate of concomitant difficult psychiatric diagnosis”. This makes it difficult to distinguish one from the other with regard to suicide risk, said an investigator at the National Board of Health and Welfare.

Continues genderreport.ca/the-swedish-u-turn-on-gender-transitioning/

That conclusion you have also pasted from the study from 2020 that Steensma was a co-author for, also acknowledges there is not enough evidence of the long term effects as related to female transitioners.

However, we know there are now study after study and case after case of evidence of the effects of the side effects as experienced by females having the same drugs and the same surgeries.

So, Butterfly, to post something states there is not enough evidence so far, is very much sleight of hand. And you are attempting this on a forum called Mumsnet, on a board with many female posters who discuss health issues (and on other MN boards).

Or are you trying to tell us that the damage sustained during double mastectomies is not applicable to females when it is for transition?

Are you trying to tell us that vaginal atrophy (which may appear as a later symptom that Steensma and co tracked) doesn’t occur. That uterine and ovary damage is not sustained meaning hysterectomies.

I am sure as you are interested in women’s health you are up to date with the dementia rates of women having hysterectomies before 30? Yes? Very worrisome.

And that is not including the risks and dangers of hysterectomies themselves.

So, rolling out that Steensma (which is actually correctly Hedi Claahsen - van der Grinten et al) is not actually all that useful. I note also they reported back after only a year after surgery and not longer.

And that their bone density figures do not match other studies and while they provide data for males, they seem to gloss over females and provide no data. Yet we have data on bone density from other studies that show there is an issue.

We have data also from the thousands of Lupron patients to work with. Combined with a bone density study that showed there was little reversal of the deficit of female patients receiving puberty blockers are CSH with the introduction of testosterone treatment.

And lastly, it seems that the Dutch still are able to focus on extensive psychotherapy and we know that GIDS is not able to provide as extensive a service due to demand. And has not done for quite a few years.

So, thank you for the studies. I am rather disappointed though that you don’t seem to interrogate them very deeply at all.

You certainly don’t seem to have interrogated them in regards to their ability to describe the current situation for young female transitioners in the UK.

And thank you purgatory for this links.

A 40% chance of having a vaginal prolapse post elective hysterectomy looks a tad shite to me. www.oxfordgynaecology.com/conditions-we-treat/vaginal-prolapse/post-hysterectomy-vault-prolapse/

Then there's the brittle bones from the puberty blockers. www.statnews.com/2017/02/02/lupron-puberty-children-health-problems/

Prolapse is just another side effect of hysterectomies Butterfly. And we certainly don’t need a tailored study of only females who transition’s long term health to not know to know about it.

Or are we still not acknowledging the higher risk of significantly life limiting and life shortening associated with female transition? Particularly for those starting as adolescents.

More good links there purgatory.

Even Steensma has stated the cohort currently receiving treatment.

Sorry. Deleted half my sentence because I am on my phone.

Even Steensma has stated the cohort currently receiving treatment is different to historic patient profiles and that their advised treatment of affirming only is not going to suit all this cohort.

Is what I meant to type. But then, I have mentioned this is a few previous posts by now, so everyone probably already knew what I meant.

I think most of your theorising about the psychological positioning of trans people and those who advocate for their acceptance is fanciful, patronising nonsense, but I do strongly agree with the following

I wonder if you understood what I was saying, @Helen8220, before you went straight for the insult? When I’m referring to the Child ego state, I’m not calling people childish. Child state is a crucial part of everyone’s psychological functioning - “free child” is what we are being when we are playful, curious, living in the moment. It’s where our authenticity lives. I’m guessing you’re not at all familiar with transactional analysis. I do recommend it. The insult bounces right off me, by the way - have a read of The Games People Play and you’ll find out why!

Thanks to the posters going through the research above, that’s thorough stuff.

The key takeaway is that the research, particularly the summaries are not sex disaggregated, and as anyone who has read “invisible women” knows, that’s almost always bad news for women.

Gah.... my eyes were obviously not working well this morning.

Prolapse is just another side effect of hysterectomies Butterfly. And we certainly don’t need a tailored study of only females who transition’s long term health to not know to know about it.

Should be:

Prolapse is just another side effect of hysterectomies Butterfly. And we certainly don’t need a tailored study of females who have transitioned long term health to know about the risks, and the long term outcomes for hysterectomy patients. Transitioned or not.

Taking a cocktail of chemicals that are required for transition is not likely to have a more positive outcome on a female having such a risky surgery.

@Helleofabore

This link is regarding surgery. Not adolescents but may be interesting for those reading along.

www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2020/09/71296/?fbclid=IwAR1qhY36S81bxLIL-Gm04MemcwA8R0OBpG5iCy_CrUM6tGttrO98Un-WLTE

Correction: Transgender Surgery Provides No Mental Health Benefit

SEPTEMBER 13, 2020

ANDRE VAN MOL, MICHAEL K. LAIDLAW, MIRIAM GROSSMAN AND PAUL MCHUGH

The American Journal of Psychiatry has issued a major correction to a recent study. The Bränström study reanalysis demonstrated that neither “gender-affirming hormone treatment” nor “gender-affirming surgery” reduced the need of transgender-identifying people for mental health services. Fad medicine is bad medicine, and gender-anxious people deserve better.

That one was the one that lept out for me. And is the reason I repsonded to Helen's table of studies as I did. Some of them fed into Van Mol, Laidlaw etal.

For all the cries of "respect my authenticity" and the utter mangling of scientific analysis we are only too aware that there is a concerted effort to misrepresent gender affirming studies. Yes, there are cries of Big Pharma but there are a myriad of individuals all of whom stand to gain if the current push for affirmation, acceptance without question becomes the norm. Lining their pockets on the misery of many others, children included.

'May' does not mean 'does', of course. It means 'positive or neutral' in this case. A negative conclusion is not supported by the evidence at all, other than in the case of suicide, in which case there is no conclusion.

Erm, no Butterfy, just no! None of those terms mean what you say they mean, they just don't! Your interpretation is incorrect and you conclusion re suicide is dangerously wrong! And that seems to have led you to an equally false understanding of the ramifications of the results, of those and many, many more extant studies.

The results show, quite overwhelmingly in each small cohort, that hormone intervention has little effect on the gender anxietyies, uptake of mental health services in users. People with gender anxiety deserve better - something every poster here would agree with and have been discussing for years, some even lobbying, marching for and working towards finding and funding those better services.

Whereas you, and many like you, seem to prefer to shout that we are ignoring you, are denying you, are literally killing you. The truth is we have a far more detached and clinical view and can see that what is being done now is wrong. Short term gain, long term pain, pick your aphorism. But the current state of medicine for all trans people is inadequate, based on the posturing of the few, desperation of many and the fear of many more.

THAT CANNOT STAND!

@Sophoclesthefox

I wonder if you understood what I was saying, @Helen8220, before you went straight for the insult? When I’m referring to the Child ego state, I’m not calling people childish. Child state is a crucial part of everyone’s psychological functioning - “free child” is what we are being when we are playful, curious, living in the moment. It’s where our authenticity lives. I’m guessing you’re not at all familiar with transactional analysis. I do recommend it. The insult bounces right off me, by the way smile - have a read of The Games People Play and you’ll find out why!

You make a lot of assumptions. I am indeed familiar with transactional analysis (it was covered as part of my MA in Psychosocial Studies), and I agree it can be a useful tool in looking at specific interpersonal interactions. What I think is nonsense is suggesting that a diverse range of individuals in very different circumstances are operating in a particular mode purely by virtue of a particular aspect of their identity and their relationship to societal norms about gender.

I find it hard to believe that a treatment that has been in use for this length of time is so clearly the wrong choice for the majority of people being prescribed it.

You know, I, too, find this hard to believe. But here we are. How on earth did it happen?

What I think is nonsense is suggesting that a diverse range of individuals in very different circumstances are operating in a particular mode purely by virtue of a particular aspect of their identity and their relationship to societal norms about gender. Interesting, to dismiss it so easily. Social contagion being a well known phenomenon!

I find it hard to believe that a treatment that has been in use for this length of time is so clearly the wrong choice for the majority of people being prescribed it. Yes. It beggars belief that there are so many crocheting around the edges when there is some very real research to be done.

As part of affirming only, we also have nurtured a culture where young females are also being encouraged to bind their breasts.

There are surgeons in the USA that have stated that that damage doesn't matter in the end, but those breasts destined to come off anyway...

Let's look at that. They are saying doesn't matter - the pain, the lack of ability to breathe properly, to play sport, to walk around in warm weather, the skin disorders, and on and on and on. I am very happy to post the list of side effects to wearing binders.

This is nothing like wearing a bra.

The degree of misinformation being spread is simply overwhelming. My teen was constantly telling me that it was 'nothing' until she started to see the effects with her friends.

How is encouraging this decision being made by these young females a progressive thing? What specifically ?

And what is the reason why we should be ignoring even the often permanent damage being caused wearing a binder for these young females in the prioritising male treatment protocols?

And no appointment is necessary for getting a binder... in fact, some kind charities will even send children one for free to their friends places to hide it from their parents.

All hand in hand with affirming only treatment!

[quote Helen8220]@Sophoclesthefox

I wonder if you understood what I was saying, @Helen8220, before you went straight for the insult? When I’m referring to the Child ego state, I’m not calling people childish. Child state is a crucial part of everyone’s psychological functioning - “free child” is what we are being when we are playful, curious, living in the moment. It’s where our authenticity lives. I’m guessing you’re not at all familiar with transactional analysis. I do recommend it. The insult bounces right off me, by the way smile - have a read of The Games People Play and you’ll find out why!

You make a lot of assumptions. I am indeed familiar with transactional analysis (it was covered as part of my MA in Psychosocial Studies), and I agree it can be a useful tool in looking at specific interpersonal interactions. What I think is nonsense is suggesting that a diverse range of individuals in very different circumstances are operating in a particular mode purely by virtue of a particular aspect of their identity and their relationship to societal norms about gender.[/quote]
Actually, I agree with you there. It’s not “nonsense”, but it’s not complete.

There’s something else going on that is encouraging the championing of this hyper individualistic approach at a societal level. I think there’s a perfect storm of a number of things happening: late stage capitalism and the sense of self as something that can be constructed through consumption, a move away from collectivism as a social force, the fracturing of classes of population into ever more niche identities, the intentional destabilising or “queering” of foundational organisational principles (like adherence to scientific rigour, class analysis, the importance of material reality), the changes that are being wrought through the amount of interaction people have online instead of in the flesh, this odd reversion to a Cartesian dualism that went out of fashion hundreds of years ago…so many things.

I certainly don’t mean to say that transactional analysis explains everything, so thanks for giving me the chance to further explore that.

@Sophoclesthefox
Actually, I agree with you there. It’s not “nonsense”, but it’s not complete.

There’s something else going on that is encouraging the championing of this hyper individualistic approach at a societal level. I think there’s a perfect storm of a number of things happening: late stage capitalism and the sense of self as something that can be constructed through consumption, a move away from collectivism as a social force, the fracturing of classes of population into ever more niche identities, the intentional destabilising or “queering” of foundational organisational principles (like adherence to scientific rigour, class analysis, the importance of material reality ), the changes that are being wrought through the amount of interaction people have online instead of in the flesh, this odd reversion to a Cartesian dualism that went out of fashion hundreds of years ago…so many things.

I certainly don’t mean to say that transactional analysis explains everything, so thanks for giving me the chance to further explore that.

You’re welcome.

I’m not conscious of having come across the concept of ‘queering’ in relation to things like scientific rigour, class analysis, or the importance of material reality (unless you mean specifically the ‘material reality’ of sex categories).

I’m quite interested in the idea about “fracturing of classes of population into ever more niche identities”. This is something I think about quite a lot - how to recognise and respect differences and diversity among those in a minority group, while not fracturing the group to a point where you lose any sense of cohesion or campaigning force. I went to an event the other day for people with non-binary sexualities or gender identities (eg bisexual, pansexual, non-binary, gender fluid, asexual). I suggested that, rather than continually proliferating ever more specific and narrow new categories, ultimately our aim should be to render all of these labels redundant - to no longer have to fit ourselves into a category of identity on the basis of our biology, our acceptance or rejection of gender norms, or the identity categories into which those we are attracted to fit. Others didn’t seem very keen on this suggestion; I think many people are very attached to their labels.

@FlyingOink

I find it hard to believe that a treatment that has been in use for this length of time is so clearly the wrong choice for the majority of people being prescribed it.

Thalidomide was about for nine years, wasn't it?

4 years in the UK.

@NotBadConsidering
This is a fair assessment. But then surely the last thing we should be doing is to medically contrive children into mould that is the complete opposite of what they are, using drugs and surgery?

How does trying to mould a female into male renegotiate those expectations? You’re just replacing one entrenched mould with another.

A person with XX chromosomes and a vagina, uterus etc, who has a square jaw, short hair in a typically ‘men’s’ style, and facial hair, requires society to renegotiate its usual expectations of sex and gender whether their name is Helen, they are happy with people referring to them as ‘she’ and ‘her’, and they want to use the women’s toilets, or whether their name is Bob, they want people to refer to them as ‘he’ and ‘him’, and they want to use the men’s toilets. Ok, if they have surgery and hormone treatment which means they are believed by most people they interact with to have been born biologically male then they will not be obviously gender-non-conforming, but they still are confounding the standard idea of what a person with XX chromosomes and accompanying primary sex characteristics is like.

A person with XX chromosomes and a vagina, uterus etc, who has a square jaw, short hair in a typically ‘men’s’ style, and facial hair

What sort of person are you referring to here? A woman who has taken testosterone?

requires society to renegotiate its usual expectations of sex and gender whether their name is Helen, they are happy with people referring to them as ‘she’ and ‘her’, and they want to use the women’s toilets, or whether their name is Bob, they want people to refer to them as ‘he’ and ‘him’, and they want to use the men’s toilets.

So you're saying that this person who has chosen to modify their body to make it stand out as different from the norm 'requires society to renegotiate...'? A bit like hippies 'required society' to accept men with long hair and punks 'required society' to accept people with crazy hairstyles and lots of piercings? So this is the new 'shock' factor to give the old people a bit of a jolt? The main difference here is that in past youth movements everyone knew what toilet they should use and when people were in the wrong one (and could say so).

You use the word renegotiate, but there doesn't seem to be much negotiation going on in what you describe. What about if the other people using the toilets don't want someone of the opposite sex in there? Don't they get a say? Or rather than renegotiate do you mean they require society to submit to their desires?

[quote Helen8220]@FlyingOink

I find it hard to believe that a treatment that has been in use for this length of time is so clearly the wrong choice for the majority of people being prescribed it.

Thalidomide was about for nine years, wasn't it?

4 years in the UK.[/quote]
Lobotomies were popular for a bit longer than that.

@OldCrone

Since the belief that people can be born in the wrong body has now been rejected as an explanation of why some people identify as transgender, the only real difference between a gender non-conforming person and a trans person is in their own self-description, and in some cases whether or not they take steps to alter their body using hormones and/or surgery. But in both cases there is a negotiation with society.

Agreed.

A gender non-conforming person just needs people to accept that some people don't follow the rules of 'gender'. 20 or 30 years ago, before the recent explosion in the numbers of people identifying as trans we were getting more and more tolerant of people who didn't follow the rules.

I’m not sure if you’re suggesting a causal link between the increase in trans people and the regression in terms of acceptance of gender non-conformity, and if so, in which direction?

A trans person asks a lot more of society than a gender non-conforming person. They are demanding that people believe that they have actually changed sex, so that they can be accepted as gender conformists of the opposite sex.

Perhaps, although I suspect that different trans people probably frame what they are asking others to see them as in a variety of ways. That aside, it isn’t my impression that in most cases a person makes a simple conscious choice as the whether to be trans or gender non-conforming, on the basis of a calculation of which is easier or more likely to be accepted by others.

@Helleofabore

As part of affirming only, we also have nurtured a culture where young females are also being encouraged to bind their breasts.

There are surgeons in the USA that have stated that that damage doesn't matter in the end, but those breasts destined to come off anyway...

Let's look at that. They are saying doesn't matter - the pain, the lack of ability to breathe properly, to play sport, to walk around in warm weather, the skin disorders, and on and on and on. I am very happy to post the list of side effects to wearing binders.

This is nothing like wearing a bra.

The degree of misinformation being spread is simply overwhelming. My teen was constantly telling me that it was 'nothing' until she started to see the effects with her friends.

How is encouraging this decision being made by these young females a progressive thing? What specifically ?

And what is the reason why we should be ignoring even the often permanent damage being caused wearing a binder for these young females in the prioritising male treatment protocols?

Helobore I'd be grateful to see the list of side effects from binders. I'm trying to convince my teenagers school they shouldn't be supporting this ideology.

This thread has been really useful.

confounding the standard idea of what a person with XX chromosomes and accompanying primary sex characteristics is like

This is where feminism and genderism comes quite close to agreeing, but there is a very crucial difference.

Feminism locates gender in societal norms and asks those norms to change. Genderism locates gender within the individual, and asks the individual to change their body.

I wonder if it's a matter of where we locate the self and the boundary between the self and the 'other ' ?

Feminism locates the self in the body, its an embodied self. Genderism seems to me to locate the body in the mind/soul/heart or an idea of one.

I'm not a philosopher, does anyone have more to say on queer and post modern theories of the self?

This is a link just posted on another thread from a mother, who is actually a trained clinical psychologist herself, that sums up the situation in the US.

pitt.substack.com/p/to-my-daughters-therapist-you-were

I note here however, that this referral that was going to be forthcoming would have been after 4 sessions.

From the evidence that was presented at Keira’s hearing, I don’t think some patients even got four sessions before referring to endocrinology. Some did, I think one had nine sessions.

Plus, we know from the sting that one of the journalists did over the past 12 months where GenderGP didn’t wait even for four for a supposed under 18 patient. And with the Bell case decision, there was significant support provided to encourage children and teens to go to GenderGP instead of GIDS.

The article brings up the crux of the matter. What so many posters over so many threads are discussing, the interaction of comorbidities within the majority of this current cohort. FEMALES. And how these girls are being let down.

I find it hard to believe that a treatment that has been in use for this length of time is so clearly the wrong choice for the majority of people being prescribed it.

I don’t find it hard at all to believe. If you take a view that no coercion to clinicians is taking place, sure. But we have whistleblowers who have also reported the degree of coercion to not raise questions, to not deviate from the path laid by the policy makers for that organisation. To not report, for instance, issue to the safeguarding lead.

Maybe this will help with the timeline.

www.theguardian.com/society/2021/may/02/tavistock-trust-whistleblower-david-bell-transgender-children-gids

Last I heard David Bell had heard from over 50 clinicians from GIDS reporting their concerns. But in 2018, he had about one third of the staff come to him with concerns.

In 2018, 10 GIDS staff brought their worries to him unsolicited, a figure he estimates to be around a third of those then working there.

In 2018… and yet GIDS doubled down regardless. The spike of young females had started to come through by then and clicinians were worried.

There are many more that have come forward with very similar concerns.

It is happening in the USA, in Canada and in Australia. And in some of those countries, conversion therapy legislation has included gender identity therapy too. And that covers anything deviating from Affirming only treatment.

This is not conspiracy theory stuff. This is happening.

Clinicians who see issues don’t speak out because their jobs and their reputations are at stake.

And if you believe it is not happening. Just read the sports council report on the interviews that formed their decision published this week. They stated the majority of those who supported female only sports felt they could not speak unless it was strictly anonymous for fear of losing their jobs and places on teams.

And those behind it all pivot and twist. like Stonewall tweeting how terrible it is that trans people who have changed their sex markers on their medical records (something Stonewall was active in making possible and consulting on) were then not getting appropriate invitations for check ups. The hypocrisy is so thick on this particular issue.

So, if you want to deny that this is a known issue and that clinicians having been trying to make changes to treatment protocols, that is fine. You are free to believe anything you wish.

It is just another version of ‘it never happens, and if it did, it was just the once’.

A flimsy ‘it wouldn’t happen’ won’t stop us continuing to fight to get better treatment options for young female transitioners though.

Or for fair and safe sports. Or for safe single sex provisions to be upheld.

seashells

A study completed in 2015 listed 28 negative outcomes.

Health impact of chest binding among transgender adults: a community-engaged, cross-sectional study.

Sarah Peitzmeier, Ivy Gardner, Jamie Weinand, Alexandra Corbet & Kimberlynn Acevedo
Published online: 14 Jun 2016

97.2% of respondents reported at least one negative outcome from binding. The most common symptoms were:

1. back pain (53.8%)
2. overheating (53.3%)
3. chest pain (48.8%)
4. shortness of breath ((46.6%)
5. itching (44.9%)
6. bad posture (40.3%)
7. shoulder pain (38.9)

Other symptoms included (and some of these are really severe):

1. rib fractures
2. rib or spine changes

10. shoulder joint “popping” 11. muscle wasting 12. numbness 13. headache 14. fatigue 15. weakness 16. lightheadedness/dizziness 17. cough 18. respiratory infections 19. heartburn 20. abdominal pain 21. digestive issues 22. breast changes 23. breast tenderness 24. scarring 25. swelling 26. acne 27. skin changes 28. skin infections

Many many website aimed at informing the young girls and teens about this downplay these.

On the Nonsuch School thread about binders there were PE teachers saying girls were not participating in sport being of their binders.

This might be helpful, I have only skimmed it.

www.transgendertrend.com/breast-binders-in-uk-schools/?fbclid=IwAR20SMpToj5ooBJ64Z56TEl7P4s9F2_cQYBs_c2FKFV64N-VH8t89V_4Hic

It is very hard to find anything on these negative side effects as Google send you to the pro-binding websites. Who complete the cycle by downplaying these effects.

I know quite a few of my teen’s friends wear them. How many of the parents know, I am not sure. They got them sent to a mate’s place where the parents don’t question the deliveries.

They tell each other they are just like corsets. No drama. Only bigots make out they are bad for you. …