Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

What you all said was coming

533 replies

Pippinbird · 23/06/2022 22:24

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10947483/Anguish-young-man-sex-organs-removed-NHS-regretted-day-SUES-NHS

OP posts:
EggRollsForever · 24/06/2022 10:40

and then you have groups like those who complain that the NHS doesn't do enough and are supporting transpeople who have to wait for surgery.

goodlawproject.org/update/trans-healthcare-court-permission/

potniatheron · 24/06/2022 10:41

BellaAmorosa · 24/06/2022 04:22

I feel so sorry for the man in question. I read the original tweet thread, not the DM article, and it was heartbreaking. (As an aside, it has been a big shock to me to realise how much of a comeback homophobia has made in the last decade. So depressing.)
However, I don't think he should be suing the NHS. IANAL, but if the surgical procedure itself wasn't botched, but the outcome was suboptimal that is just unfortunate. His only justified complaint against the NHS would be if they didn't talk him through the risks properly. Iirc, he said that in the original tweets. From what he also said about his state of mind at the time, it's highly unlikely that being informed would have made any difference. He was set on this course. If he sues anyone, it should be the despicable people in the online community which convinced and encouraged him. But when all is said and done, he was an adult. Adults do stupid things, make bad decisions with long lasting repercussions. We can't protect everyone from themselves.
Re the NHS, I agree with the pp who pointed out the pressure it is under to affirm on pain of being sued. And in fairness, this procedure is well established, it's not experimental. A case like this just shows why it was previously always carried out as a last resort, on men who could not live any other way and after extensive therapy.
Publicity about his situation will help others see that "bottom surgery" isn't what it's cracked up to be.

Just want to pick this up and say that this procedure is not 'well established' at all. Different surgeons have different methods and there are no NICE recognised standards for a good outcome. Sometimes the surgery is done by plastics sometimes urology. Some have an orchiectomy some a penectomy. Some get testicles removed first or scrotum and testicles before penectomy. There are a number of ways of constructing the 'vagina'. There is a difference bwteen 'depth' surgery and surgery to just ape the external appearance of the labia (the latter is probably the only version of this prodcedure which is relatively 'safe').

This is not like plastics recon of a pneis damaged by say an IED - there have been huge advances in this type of surgery. But that's not like sex reasignment at all. It's the wild west of surgery - nowhere near as bad as phalloplasty, but still wild west.

OvaHere · 24/06/2022 10:41

rogdmum · 24/06/2022 07:45

Adult GIDS has an affirmation only policy. They do nothing to explore whether there could be underlying reasons for your distress and it is effectively a screening service to rule out physical barriers to medical transition. Tullip would not have had to “forcefully” argue for the surgery- the surgery is seen as the solution for gender dysphoria in an area where patients are effectively viewed as clients.

Look at the language used for the Indigo Pilot Clinics. They talk about informed consent, but it is framed in a client based environment where the individual chooses their “options”:

”Communication is key to helping you understand the services and options available to you. To support you throughout your journey with us, you will be assigned a care navigator. They will have lived experience as a trans or non-binary person as well as an understanding of pathways, services and resources available both within Indigo and more widely across Greater Manchester.

Care navigators are uniquely positioned to make your experience as easy, efficient and relevant to your needs as possible.”

indigogenderservice.uk/our-services/services-we-offer/care-navigation

It’s all warm and fuzzy and completely surface level. Where’s the in depth psychological assessment to ensure the medical pathway is suitable for each individual?

Where is the sense of caution when for hormones, you can be approved on your second visit (from the age of 17):

”We can recommend and support your own GP to start hormone therapy at your second appointment if:

you’re diagnosed with gender incongruence at your second visit;
you feel confident that you’ve understood the information we’ve shown you, including the possible risk and side effects of any treatment options;
you’re feeling ready to start hormones;
it’s medically safe for you to do so.”

indigogenderservice.uk/frequently-asked-questions

This model of acceptance on a vulnerable adult’s say so is utterly irresponsible and it needs changed. The govt is pushing ahead with this approach more strongly than ever due to the long waiting lists for the adult service. There is no will there for change. The Keira Bell case made it clear the courts will not rule for a blanket change, that litigation needs to be carried out at an individual level.

There is much focus on childrens services, but none on the adult service. What is going to happen when thousands of these current adolescents time out of children GIDS and are moved to the adult side? They have been brought up in a world of affirmation by schools, social media, their peer group without any chance to desist. Do they then suddenly become competent to make decisions as young adults when they are moved to a “client” based service?

I don’t think so. I firmly believe the adult GIDS service needs a complete overhaul and that in the current environment the only way to achieve this is through individual litigation. Tullip has been badly faked and I wish him the best of luck.

There's a wider direction of travel at play here which is to do with autonomy, choice and capacity. For example the Mental Capacity Act that came into legislation around a decade ago shifted the direction of travel (it's been updated recently in a white paper).

There's good things about it re the autonomy of vulnerable people to have control over aspects of their lives but in practice it can be a bit fraught. Not enough medics are trained and out of fear or just not seeing it as their job pass the buck to social care who have back logs of assessments or who come in and don't apply the assessment as intended. One of the reasons for the update to the Act is that there has been a lot of confusion around it even in trained people.

I mention this because it's been stated this young man has autism so if he was diagnosed at the time it strikes me that a MCA assessment should have come into play for this decision. Emphasis on the word 'should' because in reality it doesn't always happen.

However, because the direction of thinking in recent years around mental capacity for vulnerable people is built around the idea that they have the right to make bad decisions in the same way as anyone else having an assessment may not have changed anything.

The current standard is that someone who is vulnerable (mental health issues/LD/Autism/addiction etc.) has the right too engage in risky behaviours, poor decision making just like anyone else and doing this does not necessarily equal lack of capacity.

This is going off at a bit of a tangent here and I'm in no way an expert in the MCA, just know a little bit about it through generic training but I think it speaks to the wider thinking around issues of allowing people to make unwise decisions. I'd be surprised if it didn't crop up as an aspect of this court case. (possibly by the defence team rather than prosecution?)

FemmeNatal · 24/06/2022 10:42

Staffy1 · 24/06/2022 10:37

He should take some responsibility, as it should have been obvious that there wouldn’t be the same feelings down there and it would result in infertility, but at the same time, was the op supposed to result in taking 10 minutes to pee and it then dribbling out for the next hour? Sounds like the surgery went a bit wrong.

The surgery going wrong is not proof of it being I’ll-advised or poorly carried out though. Most surgery comes with risks.

beastlyslumber · 24/06/2022 10:44

Stop victim blaming.

It's disgusting.

MichelleScarn · 24/06/2022 10:44

I suppose unless things change, doctors may have to consider if they want to be labelled as bigoted, evil suicide causing monsters for not affirming and run the risk of being posted all over news and media, or blamed for the above as per Tulip. Is there still plans for those who don't do the surgery to have threats of being struck off GMC for discrimination, or did that turn out to be 'fake news'?
Has Tulip said what they would have done if surgery had been denied? Sued at that point?

SamphirethePogoingStickerist · 24/06/2022 10:44

EggRollsForever · 24/06/2022 10:40

and then you have groups like those who complain that the NHS doesn't do enough and are supporting transpeople who have to wait for surgery.

goodlawproject.org/update/trans-healthcare-court-permission/

And yet nobody seems to wants to hear that. Those who try to say it out loud are vilified.

We, those who say stop, don't do this, are vilified and those who advocate for it remain strangely silent when it all goes horrendously wrong!

EggRollsForever · 24/06/2022 10:44

SamphirethePogoingStickerist · 24/06/2022 10:37

I don’t understand how he agreed to surgery without researching first?

Fear. Confusion. Body dysmorphia. Lack of detail from medical professionals.

All in the article!

Well of course he is going to say that now.

SamphirethePogoingStickerist · 24/06/2022 10:47

OMG! It seems nobody spoke to TullipR before publishing that!

twitter.com/TullipR/status/1540157638016647170

SamphirethePogoingStickerist · 24/06/2022 10:48

EggRollsForever · 24/06/2022 10:44

Well of course he is going to say that now.

You have no idea. And are showing your ignorance quite clearly!

Artichokeleaves · 24/06/2022 10:49

Desperately sorry for the poor man. And yes, the NHS should be sued. This man is owed compensation, not least for the awful future ahead of him and how difficult and expensive it is going to be due to their intervention.

No one should be able to have extreme, permanent, very high risk of complication surgery that involves the removal of healthy tissue and body parts and permanent loss of function based on nothing more than an emotional decision, without very, very in depth psychological exploration first. It should be an absolute last resort. It should not ever be experimental, it should not ever be carried out by a unit or base in hock to a political lobby pushing their own agenda, and it needs to be with eyes wide open to the fact that there is a whole lot of pressure, politics and marketing being put on patients as a magic bullet to their distress.

CherryReid · 24/06/2022 10:50

But his decision making was based on, probably, convincing, believable info on the net.
He was convinced he was making the correct decisions. I don't see how you counteract that.

EggRollsForever · 24/06/2022 10:50

I read that leaflet and it very clearly lays out the likelihood of what can happen:

Vaginoplasty surgery related complications:
• Loss of sensation
• Loss of sexual function
• Dissatisfaction with visual appearance of the vagina, clitoris and/or labia
• Inability to orgasm
• Urinary incontinence (unable to control the need to urinate)
• Necrosis to skin or clitoris (tissue dying resulting in blackening of the skin or Clitoris)
• Vaginal prolapse
• Fistula: (an unwanted connection between the vagina and urethra or bowel)
• Urethral stenosis: (narrowing of the urethra, making it difficult to urinate)

In fact it is almost the list that this man is complaining about. Did he not read this bit and think it was all not going to apply to him? The media is too full of people like Jessica Alves and other Hollywood stars touting their lifestyles.

Artichokeleaves · 24/06/2022 10:50

SamphirethePogoingStickerist · 24/06/2022 10:47

OMG! It seems nobody spoke to TullipR before publishing that!

twitter.com/TullipR/status/1540157638016647170

Oh God that poor man! Bloody journalists! Angry

stepuporshutup · 24/06/2022 10:51

I have waited 4 years for a knee replacement
I am in severe pain and cannot walk
But he gets this nonessential op

Luidaeg · 24/06/2022 10:51

Whatwouldscullydo · 23/06/2022 23:04

Its the drs job to explain and get informed consent from the patient. If the patient doesn't understand what is about to be done then the consent Is not valid.

but obviously the man said he did understand, he consented to surgery

Ereshkigalangcleg · 24/06/2022 10:51

This kind of legal action isn't just about compensation. It's about preventing the same thing happening to other people.

Exactly.

Staffy1 · 24/06/2022 10:51

SamphirethePogoingStickerist · 24/06/2022 10:39

Jesus wept!

Care to elaborate? Not sure what you object to…

Fifi0102 · 24/06/2022 10:53

I work in MH and we have quite a few patients presenting as Trans which is a relatively new thing. It didn't used to happen until the trans lobby whipped up a media frenzy. If I was mentally ill and asked a doctor to chop off my perfectly healthy leg because I had dysphoria, they would refuse and get me psychiatric help.

There definitely needs to be a long period of evaluation and therapy before agreeing to remove healthy body parts that isn't conversion therapy that's putting your patient first.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 24/06/2022 10:53

A lot of people are saying that this is also about consent. Surely it is also about whether this surgery should actually ever be offered in the first place - where is the evidence of benefit to the patient?

EggRollsForever · 24/06/2022 10:55

SamphirethePogoingStickerist · 24/06/2022 10:48

You have no idea. And are showing your ignorance quite clearly!

Do you have a factual idea? Do you know in detail exactly what has gone on- what counselling etc was gone through? Have you read his medical notes? You haven't and are only going on what everyone else is reading on a Twitter feed and newspaper articles. None of us really know. Some people are quick to point out that he has a mental health problem and it was wrong to do the surgery but then it is OK somehow now to accept that someone with a mental health problem ( if so) is giving an accurate account of what happened? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Motorina · 24/06/2022 10:55

@OvaHere I think you're right, and there's been a lot of misunderstanding on this thread about capacity. I'm sure you know all this from your training, so in a sense I'm speaking to everyone else here, but...

The bar for having capacity to make medical decisions is a low one. The presumption is that someone has capacity unless it is established that they don't, and that adults with capacity are entitled to make really stupid decisions.

To not have capacity the individual has to have:


  1. A disorder of the mind and brain

  2. Which prevents them from absorbing information, weighing up that information to make a decision, and communicating that decision


Both autism and gender dysphoria would count as a disorder in this context, but I see nothing at all to suggest that Tulip's ability to weigh up risks and benefits and make a decision was impaired to the point where he could be said to lack capacity.

Capacity is decision specific (you may have capacity to decide if you want the
cheese or the ham sandwich for lunch, but not where to live, for example) and I'd say that consenting to surgery of this nature needs a relatively high level of capacity. But Tulip, from the podcasts I've heard, is intelligent and articulate, and, had I been the clinician, I don't think I would have questioned capacity.

I know the information we have is very limited, but that's my take on it right now. As someone who occassionally does capacity assessments, I have 'passed' people with far far less decision making ability than Tulip has.

That's different, of course, from saying Tulip should have been offered this surgery. I don't think he should have been. In the same way someone with a broken toe should be offered painkillers and crutches, not amputation of the foot. But that's a seperate reason from lack of capacity.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 24/06/2022 11:00

He's taken up the services of a 'no win, no fee' lawyer who I imagine has got their eyes on a big payday.

It's the only way many people can challenge medical malpractice.

SamphirethePogoingStickerist · 24/06/2022 11:02

@EggRollsForever I have read his own words, blog/Twitter.

I know what dysphoria is, how it affects perceived reality and thought processes

I know the parlous state of pre-surgery counselling

I know the lack of consistency in available operations

I know the variation in outcomes of the various operations.

I know people who have had all of the operations available to them and their outcomes, good and bad

I know that it is not unusual for anyone with any kind of dysphoria to demand a form of self harm - but only in gender dysphoria does medical science oblige!

Ereshkigalangcleg · 24/06/2022 11:04

He has used valuable time and resources and now isn't happy.

Then maybe this isn't the best use of the NHS's valuable time and resources. Care in this country is supposed to be evidence based, there is no evidence that this treatment measurably improves peoples mental health, any suggestion that it does is cherry picked propaganda.

Swipe left for the next trending thread