Harrop MPTS Thread 3

[BoreOfWhabylon]

For when the last one fills up

Louise, I hope the witnesses affected do complain. According the email I received from MPTS, the panel are aware of the Vice article's existence but did not read it.

There is a lot of scope for fresh complaints about this. Even AH's witness wasn't impressed with it. As @BreadInCaptivity suggests, I doubt AH's own barrister was either.

This is the response I received from the MPTS re the Vice article. Annoyingly the last paragraph was frustrating as I felt the panel should see the article and it was very relevant , although I understand the procedure now as Motorina has explained it so well. (Oh, also pronouns were helpfully provided in the sign off of the response!)

"The MPTS makes every effort to maintain the anonymity of witnesses in its proceedings. In Dr Harrop’s hearing, all witnesses are being referred to by a single letter, which will be the case in all written decisions the Tribunal produces.

I understand that the article you refer to was discussed with the Tribunal in the hearing yesterday.

All of our tribunal members are very aware that they should not read media coverage of cases they are currently involved in. As professional decision-makers, they are able to put aside any information that is not relevant"

Louise, I hope the witnesses affected do complain

So do I.

Random thought. Although Harrop has no criminal convictions wouldn't it be ironic if as a result of these tweets Harrop now has hate incidents recorded against him.

Same email as I received, @WeBuiltCisCityOnSexistRoles. Word for word.

Begs rather a few questions.

@FannyCann

Checking in.

Re DE evidence - Patients ask for him - I don't know the demographics of the Brownlow locality but I expect he can turn on the charm with the elderly and of course any younger patients with gender dysphoria can expect an affirmative welcome. He was quick to tweet a compliment that a receptionist passed on to him from a patient he had just seen (think he was at a different practice then).
So there's no reason why she shouldn't give a positive report on him if she doesn't use Twitter.

I know the Brownlow locality - its a city central area primarily populated by students. Not 100% sure but I think the practice is actually located on campus.

I think the Practice has several branches, including an on-campus one.

The practice is spread over four city centre sites torquewrench

The student health site has a score of 2 /5 on google.

@BoreOfWhabylon

I think the Practice has several branches, including an on-campus one.

The practice have some positive threads on reddit including for cross sex hormone treatment which name check Harrop and also his witness today

It was rather more than just a speculative, independent media article, though. Someone appears to have shared possibly confidential information (certainly sensitive) with the media, even while the tribunal was yet unfinished.

There was a breach of confidence with sensitive documents. There was collusion by AH with said media in giving a highly selective (if even any of it is true) and ideologically driven account in an interview. To be published before the tribunal was finished.

This is someone who in his/her/furry professional role is supposed to be trusted with highly personal and confidential information. Again, it would worry me if someone like that had access to my personal information. Certainly in view of past actions, the interview and what his badge seems to endorse. I would personally be concerned with issues like trustworthiness and judgement.

The practice have some positive threads on reddit including for cross sex hormone treatment which name check Harrop and also his witness today

Could there be a parallel with patients his witness said were asking for him by name perhaps?

Just a random thought......

@PronounssheRa The practice have some positive threads on reddit including for cross sex hormone treatment which name check Harrop and also his witness today

I'm not surprised. However, is the 'first do no harm' element even considered before sending someone down that route. I wonder what avenues are explored and what counselling and emotional/psychological support is given before setting someone on a possibly life altering course.

I am watching 'Dopesick' (about the Oxycontin, Opioid crisis in the US). Quite a few things strike me as similar to the move to uncritically offering (if not downright promoting) the medicalisation and surgical interventions. Without a scientific evidence base.

It is really good. Reminds me a little of 'The Big Short'. Regulators being slightly suspect and self regulation. Claims and marketing being viewed as objective, sound expert evidence.

if not downright promoting

That is one big difference in America - they can promote prescription drugs direct to the public

Have Drs H and E had specialist training in prescribing cross-sex hormones to 18 and 19 year olds? What referrals do they make to mental health services and endocrinologists?

I know these are adult students involved but the physiology of a still-growing 18 year old male is very different from that of a 50 year old, so surely specialist training is needed? And because: do no harm.

Does this GP practice report on this to its CCG in publicly accessible form?

I think BreadInCaptivity has nailed the defence strategy/implosion

@DrLouiseJMoody

The orchestrated campaign remark over the VICE article was bizarre. The fact is that a GP disclosed confidential case files to both a major publication and others who were not parties to the case whilst awaiting their own tribunal. That's a profound violation of the witnesses information, and a violation I imagine they have strong grounds to complain about.

Turn it around and imagine if the witnesses had spoken to the media to talk about their experiences with Dr Harrop and, in doing so, disclosed all their GMC dealings? There are some things you just don't do.

Interesting, isn't it?

The problem with the article, the problem with the tribunal, isn't that he did something wrong, it's that other people drew attention to it .

Doesn't wash. If they were not without substance the GMC would not have taken it to tribunal, they'd have dismissed it. The whole 'it's fine to do it, it's the fault of whoever tells on you' really is something grown out of around mid childhood for most.

One difference yes. They were able to get a unique approval from the FDA as well. And then use off label without good evidence for their claims.

So, even without being able to advertise, there is widespread use although there is a paucity of credible, peer reviewed evidence about things like hormone blockers, cross sex hormones, and desirability or outcome in surgical interventions on secondary sex characteristics.

Indeed it had to be clarified that the professional body WPATH only have guidelines rather that Standards of Care.

Thread in which Harrop expounds on cross-sex hormones. Including arguing with a (female) consultant obstetrician
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3636242-Dr-H-Again-Prescribing-Estradiol-Is-No-Pain-5th-thread-its-said#prettyPhoto

Actually, he doesn't argue withnthe obstetrician. He dismisses her as transphobic.

I was looking at the Trans Reddit thread a few days ago and Harrop's name comes up a lot.
Such a depressing forum, so many confused kids who aren't getting the mental health support they should.

To the posters there he's something of a hero.
Can't imagine how I'd feel as a parent if my child was under him. I would have no faith he would have their best interest at heart, just pushing his ideological agenda.

I was very interested in this tweet from TribunalTweets earlier.

The Adrian Harrop Tribunal
@tribunaltweets**
·
1m
GP referring to something noted in a private session. [GP alluding to mental health of AH]. Because of AH’a mindset, he didn’t pay attention to the document sent to him in 2018, GP is saying.

Yet by 2019 he's prescribing cross-sex hormones to young people, shortly after becoming a GP?

I think there's a lot more for the GMC to look at now, frankly.

Thanks for that link, @BoreOfWhabylon btw.

It was interesting that harrop's witness said that patients probably don't know about harrop's twittering, or the complaints against him because they ask for him by name. She didn't say it obviously doesn't effect how the public see him because patients still ask, her go to thought was that meant they probably don't know.

@SpindlesWhorl

He at least admitted to poor behaviour, and that he should not have been sending those tweeted messages as a doctor.

That'll hurt, if he's advised by MPTS panel to drop the doctor status on Twitter if he wishes to continue to practise in the UK. Dilemma for AH.

But even if he did start tweeting as ‘plain Adrian Harrop’ surely enough people know he’s a doctor for that not to be sufficient? Would he need a new anonymous account?

The practice have some positive threads on reddit including for cross sex hormone treatment which name check Harrop and also his witness today

Which, to be fair, anyone (cough, cough) could have posted.

Usual suspects were crowing on Twitter last night and earlier this morning about yesterday's hearing.

Not a peep about today.