Javid compares fears over trans issues to fears of racism in Rotherham

[Magenta82]

He is launching an inquiry into the treatment of children and is concerned that other issues are ignored once gender identity is mentioned.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0fea92e4-c265-11ec-8413-422ef6319ad0?shareToken=f3b10324b4fd398ce341189a72a727dc

It looks like things are changing!

I'm cautious about this is there an election they need brownie points for?

Omg have we just won

I actually think that's quite astute. The feeling that 'you can't say that' and 'we know it's a problem but we daren't say so' is the common ground.
I think BJ plays to the gallery and thinks this is a way to hold on to the non traditional tory vote. It might work, I don't know. But anyone would be crazy to place any faith in what BJ says as he's a liar. But Javid here is going a bit deeper than the soundbite 'what is a woman' stuff, I don't think what he is saying here is an obvious vote winner. He just may have looked at the evidence and thought about it.

Is the Tavi not complying with the Cass review? “While the trust accepts the need for changes, it insists that doctors already take children’s wider social and mental health issues into account. Javid is understood to be preparing legal changes that would give Cass access to an NHS database of children treated by the service to see how many later regretted taking puberty-blockers and less reversible cross-sex hormones.”

Good article. Interesting it's by the Whitehall rather than Health Editor. Re: this comment:

Javid is understood to be preparing legal changes that would give Cass access to an NHS database of children treated by the service to see how many later regretted taking puberty-blockers and less reversible cross-sex hormones.

I had picked up the (erroneous?) impression from previous discussions of research findings/data collection related to patient outcomes and GIDS (remember the delayed publication of the paper) that no such research database existed.

This is big. In particular the plans to open up NHS databases and find out what happened to children "even if it means changing the law":

"Javid is understood to be preparing legal changes that would give Cass access to an NHS database of children treated by the service to see how many later regretted taking puberty-blockers and less reversible cross-sex hormones."

It also seems that the interim report has caused alarm:

"“This has been a growing issue for years and it’s clear we’re not taking this seriously enough,” an ally of the health secretary said. “If you look at Hilary Cass’s interim report, the findings are deeply concerning and it’s clear from that report that we’re failing children.”

The ally said services should have a holistic view of what might be causing problems for that child: a mental health issue, bullying or sexual abuse."

Opening up databases would seem to mean the jigsaw could be pieced together. Perhaps this is changing the review into an inquiry or it's a new inquiry separate to Cass?

This is fantastic news.

This is the publication about puberty blockers that I meant:

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4104122-Tavistock-puberty-blocker-study-published

Interesting @EmbarrassingHadrosaurus

My understanding is GIDS has done no research as you say. But by accessing the database of children treated it should be possible either to do a retrospective study or to simply look at their current health records and see what treatment they are on now. Or possibly make contact and interview them?

I had picked up the (erroneous?) impression from previous discussions of research findings/data collection related to patient outcomes and GIDS (remember the delayed publication of the paper) that no such research database existed.

Surely that's a ploy to ask for information that any properly functioning system would be expected to gather and have available meaning that when they say "we don't have that information" the question can then be asked: Are you telling the government that you've been carrying out experimental treatments on children while making sure that no evidence is gathered?

That looks like a prelude to declaring a scandal of medical malpractice.

Why is it all from an "ally" of Javid?

Why have am inquiry when the cass review is still ongoing? It's good that he's taking the problems seriously, but I'm not sure it's sensible for him to go stomping in before the full report is in in a few months. After allowing the service to operate in its own bizarre environment for so long and taking years to make the review happen, it will be bloody typical if he goes messing without the full info in a way that causes different problems. It doesn't sound careful or precise.

But there isn't much info so I could be wrong.

The best thing he could do would be to properly invest in mental health services for children.

My understanding is GIDS has done no research as you say. But by accessing the database of children treated it should be possible either to do a retrospective study or to simply look at their current health records and see what treatment they are on now. Or possibly make contact and interview them?

I wondered that. Is it a case of getting access to the patient database, with patient records going back years, and do a new research project to find out what's happened since?

Regardless of whether this is part of a government strategy to exploit the so-called culture wars - and personally, Javid's apparent intervention seems too thoughtful to be dismissed in that way - it certainly seems that the tide is starting to turn on this issue. And not before time.

An encouraging intervention by Javid. It does seem as though this Gov is taking the issues seriously, one by one. At last!

I wondered that. Is it a case of getting access to the patient database, with patient records going back years, and do a new research project to find out what's happened since?

As PPs suggest, privacy advisors are very wary of data linkage of healthcare records. It's plausible that some of the trial participants or former patients are now pursuing a mix of private and NHS care for which the former is not necessarily recorded in their electronic healthcare record nor available for sharing.

The ethics of this would be very difficult. It would be necessary to see the agreements that people signed for the sharing of their data and whether they consented to follow-up and re-contact. Not least of which, given the numbers who are already lost to follow-up in that very delayed study, I wouldn't be sanguine about consent or tracking where all of these children (now adults) are now (presuming that they switched GP practices to go away to study or for work).

I would need to know a lot more about any legal changes that Javid is proposing and which data are being sort with what level of anonymisation.

I don't think it's being done on 'culture wars' grounds - this looks like genuine concern over a situation that has grown in the health service during the years the Tories have been in power. As we've seen, government departments have been as Stonewalled as everywhere else. Maybe Blunt's fall last week has played a role too. There have been lots of things in recent weeks that really feel like they have opened people's eyes, the whole house of cards is falling.

I suspect that the interim Cass report, despite using very measured language, has raised so many red flags that the government has to act. The law suits will be unchallengeable given the evidence about experimental treatment, lack of data and evidenced pressure from activist groups.
Add to that the exposes of individuals at the heart of all this, including at the Tavistock, the open defence of paedophilia from numerous flag wavers, the damning evidence against the Webberleys and the bawling refusal of all the trans groups to recognise any issues with vulnerable children, the government has to act. For too long this toxic ideology has been allowed to meddle with children's minds and bodies and it has to stop. Parents and responsible adults must be put back in charge as we try to undo some of the terrible damage that has been done to children.

Well knock me down with a feather. There will be an awful lot of screaming and fake stats flying around when they wake up…

omg I'm trying not to get excited...

I think we also have to bear in mind the wider context of information coming out of other countries. Sweden, for example, who quite possibly hold more data than we do and have been rowing back where children are concerned.

I would hope and assume that conversations are happening across countries and research shared. Javid must be reasonably confident in the direction of travel to make such a move.

I think he's right and probably astute enough to recognise a massive medical scandal brewing, much of which has happened on their watch even if they were largely unaware. So a course correction is the only viable option to get in front of it. Otherwise 5 years down the line it's going to be a case of we knew this was a problem years back but did nothing.

All the way through that article all I could think was that posters on here have been saying these things for years.

Am I right in thinking though that the GIDS statement seemed a little back peddly, I'm not sure in the past it has been so ... errm.... wishy washy?

I'm cautious about this is there an election they need brownie points for?

Might just have to give the Tories credit for doing the right thing for once.

Wow I think Javid actually gets it.

Maybe Blunt's fall last week has played a role too.

I was very confused for a while James Blunt? Emily Blunt? It made no sense in my head.

Thankfully it then dawned on me that it was ol' Crispin. I think I need to sleep. 😴

I'd like to quote part of a classic and (I hope) prescient Barracker post:

The landscape is changing. I can't say how long it will take, but people are starting to assert absolute boundaries and reject the legal and ethical principle that a person can change from male to female and vice versa. This will not reverse. It will grow, and it will reach an inevitable conclusion. The UK is looking very likely to be the fulcrum of change, and then the balance will shift back everywhere.

I hope this is true for the ethical clinical treatment of children and young people. I trust that alongside the provisions for an inquiry, Javid will also find appropriate resources to provide the necessary scale of CAMHS that children and young people need.