Norway deems Gender Affirmative care "experimental"

[WarriorN]

And as such unevidenced.

Excellent thread from SEGM

The Norwegian Healthcare Investigation Board, (NHIB/UKOM) has deemed puberty blockers, cross-sex-hormones & surgery for children & young people experimental, determining that the current “gender-affirmative” guidelines are not evidence-based and must be revised. /1

The UKOM report asserts that future guidelines must rely on a systematic review of evidence rather than cherry-picking studies, and that all hormonal and surgical interventions must be restricted to research settings to ensure clear protocols, safeguarding & adequate follow-up./2

It goes on in a lot of detail, then this:

However, unlike Sweden, Finland and England, Norway explicitly calls out the group of young adults whose development is still ongoing and who are at risk for erroneously undertaking gender transitions. The report notes that the age of consent for sterilization in Norway is 25./8

And

Norway's proposed model appears to resemble the model of care outlined in the Cass review. Gender dysphoric youth will receive care for their distress in local primary care settings with multidisciplinary support. Youth gender transitions will be an exception, not the rule. /10

There's lots more here:

https://twitter.com/segm_ebm/status/1634032333618819073?s=46&t=A2fpFNgDRyXF2d6ye97wEA

As Barry says, this is the ripple of Cass exerting effect.

Barry/ jester on it here:

I’m very glad to see this, especially in light of the recent, I’ll-considered legal changes in Norway. I hope this is the start of a series of recalibrations over the mindless acceptance of gender ideology.

I do feel very worried however, for the cohort of young people who looked for help when feeling troubled, and are going to have to live with the results of this experiment for the rest of their lives.

Yes. I really hope they sue for malpractice but no amount of money is going to put their bodies back to the way they were. It is heartbreaking and I can’t believe doctors that have done this are still practising and not in prison.

It's very welcome news, it's a reversal of the affirmative approach.

It also means that increasing numbers of European countries are rebuking WPATH's "guidance."

Its how Cass and all those who've been trying to wave the flag about the lack of evidence and so actual malpractice is rippling across medicine.

It's the opening of doors on good research on this that offered alternative views to affirmation.

Ultimately I hope a move away from affirmation generally in medicine also impacts guidance on schools and how there's a culture of affirmation across many other areas eg charities, media etc

I too fail to see how it squares with recent legislation but hopefully it also begins to get people questioning that too.

@WarriorN

I too fail to see how it squares with recent legislation but hopefully it also begins to get people questioning that too.

The reason might be in that politicians in many countries are mostly captured by trans activism but the same has not happened to health care systems where they are largely government-funded and where new treatments etc. are scientifically assessed before they get funding for general use. Medicine has a lot of social power in those countries.

I think this explains why Finland now has self-id, but also has banned puberty blockers for children with gender dysphoria (except in fairly limited cases).

But it doesn't explain how the NHS got so extremely captured that it openly practises sexist erasure of only the female sex and so on, though there's the Cass Report, too.

That seems a careful, ethical approach. And you'd have to think that ethics and care did not matter for highly vulnerable children to want to go on rushing kids through while saying if a few end up sterile, chronically ill and desperately unhappy afterwards what the hell, most will love it.

Spot the grown up thinking and the desperately unstable thinking.

'Last week, the Norwegian Healthcare Investigation Board announced it would be revising its current guidelines regarding so-called " gender -affirming care" for minors because it no longer considers them to be evidence-based. The board also acknowledged that the growing number of teenage girls identifying as male post-puberty remains under-studied.

Under the proposed updated guidelines, the use of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and transition-related surgery would be restricted to research contexts and no longer provided in clinical settings. Norway joins Finland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom in introducing greater safeguarding for children. In the United States, eight states thus far have banned affirmative care for individuals under 18, with Tennessee being the latest to pass such legislation.'

Just adding another article:

https://www.sott.net/article/480555-Norway-bans-child-sex-changes-joins-Finland-Sweden-and-UK-in-rejecting-gender-ideology

I've just put this article on my facebook wall....same tumbleweed as ever! I'm pretty sure I'm unfollowed by most people on my page. Hey ho!

Sometimes I suspect the algorithms favour certain stories over others ...

Agree re algorithms....

More positive news for children, thanks for the link

If anyone was in any doubt about the extreme levels of unethical medical experimentation on mentally unwell children by medics, take a look at Arabella's thread and read it from the horse's mouth :

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4820954-non-binary-gender-affirming-surgery-and-the-problem-of-treating-patients-who-were-pubertally-suppressed

Bloody hell. Thank you

Is it a rejection of gender ideology, though, or simply a recognition that uncontrolled unethical practices have been going on?

If these practices will be restricted to research contexts, does that mean they will, effectively, still be carried out on children and adolescents - just with a bit of CYA because the children or their parents will have signed a form of consent? What are they saying about affirmative treatment for adults? Do they recognise that affirmative treatments are inappropriate for under 25s, or is there some magical maturity that occurs at 18?

Most of those countries still accept self-ID, some in law, some in practice. Not convinced that they reject gender ideology.

I believe that there's a split between medical researchers, boards, etc. and what politicians in those countries think. It's the former who are changing practice, and this seems to be based on the current lack of information in published research.

The politicians, as far as I can tell, have many trans activists in the countries on that list. So I'd agree, on the whole, that these decisions alone are not a sign of the countries, say, not supporting self-identification.