Debate on Parliament TV now on trans conversion therapy

[chilling19]

On now. Already had hate from both sides comment.

Yep, that's exactly what she said. I really can't take any more of this, it's painful to see the level of speeches. Not to mention Jeremy Corbyn popping up.

So far:
Twice as likely
Suicide
Higher level of sexual violence
Most marginalised
Corrective Rape
Religious organisations
LGB examples

Ok lost sound

Anyone one else lost sound?

What are the chances of the government changing course based on this, though?

(Now we’re on to corrective rape. Rape is illegal! Already distinctly illegal.)

Yes, sound definitely gone

Interesting

Almost as if the debate is not of interest and should not be listened to...

How annoying

How convenient lost sound 🤔

Has anyone actually bothered to define what is meant by "gender identity" or "transgender" yet? If not why not - these terms mean different things to different people

Ok sound back

No

No, and Alicia Kearns specifically went out of her way to say gender identity won’t be defined in the bill, so nobody need worry about that. 🙄

I still do not have sound and one of the people I wanted to hear from has left..

Why are they suddenly talking about kids and cancer and puberty blockers?

How do you make a law not to affect someone's gender identity, if you can't define it?

Someone else - mention of not affirming anorexia.

Clinical practice and academic research - maximise who they are and supporting journey. Informed consent (big sigh from someone) important. (Someone laughing). Young people are absolutely able to deal with complex information. Should look at this in relation to . Looking at when consent is not possible...

Sound - suspend per sitting to reconnect sound.

I thought the proposed ban wasn’t going to cover under 18s.

‘How do you make a law not to affect someone's gender identity, if you can't define it?’

I don’t know.

He is trying to make the case that children who have cancer may have fertility issues and that lessons can be learned about the preservation of sperm and ova for children on puberty blockers i.e. if children with cancer are given this option then children who are prescribed puberty blockers should also have this option - I think that is what he was trying to say...

And yes, some young people can deal with the dreadful news that they are likely to or definitely going to die. That’s because that news is emotionally complex but not factually complex. It’s also not a choice, so some will deal with it well and some won’t, but it won’t make a difference to the outcome. It does make a difference in the case of puberty blockers, because if they don’t understand, they can’t legally consent.

Just to confirm - this debate is happening despite no definition of trans, conversion therapy or harmful practices.

Only JDP has said that the definition of therapy needs to be carefully looked at as a response to a consensus around the table that there is a raft of quacks and charlatans currently forcing trans people into harmful pathways.

The latest speaker was trying to make a point about not affirming anorexics, but then the proceedings were suspended due to sound issues.

Indeed, it was a crass comparison

OK we are back.

I see. But in the case of cancer treatment, it’s have the treatment (and risk infertility) or lose your life, isn’t it? No child is denied cancer treatment because they can’t absorb the implications of a decision about being rendered infertile. If they can’t understand the content properly, their parents make the decision because the illness will kill them otherwise. It’s not comparable at all.