Nurse reveals why she blew the whistle on 'experimental' treatment on children as young as ten

[DerekFaker]

From The Mail yesterday:

The stomach-drop moment I realised there was something terribly wrong at the Tavistock gender clinic: Nurse reveals why she blew the whistle on 'experimental' treatment on children as young as ten

By Kathryn Knight21:56 16 May 2023, updated 23:17 16 May 2023

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12091229/amp/The-moment-realised-terribly-wrong-Tavistock-Nurse-Sue-Evans-reveals.html

This stood out to me

When, on one occasion, she asked the director of GIDS why they had to offer puberty blockers at all, the answer dismayed her.
'I asked why we couldn't just be a really thoughtful and supportive therapeutic service. And he replied, 'Because they wouldn't come'.

Little better than any other drug pusher.

So healthcare employees have been raising issues about GIDS, sometimes at very senior levels, since 2005, but nothing changed. The Cass report is excellent, yet still GIDS continues to use experimental treatments without properly tracking the results. Advice to schools and primary care still seems to be affirmation, despite Cass stating explicitly that social transition is not neutral.

What does it actually take to get things changed - by which, I don’t mean the same processes applied in several regional GIDS hubs!

"Sue Evans took up her post at the Tavistock Clinic in 2003 . . . A few weeks into her tenure she had what she calls a 'stomach drop' moment at a team meeting when a psychotherapist colleague revealed that she was sending a newly referred 16-year-old male patient for hormone therapy in the form of puberty blockers."

So that's 20 years ago. Was that when Mermaids was still recommending "watchful waiting" or after Susie Green took over?

Tavistock GIDS now routinely blames outside pressure-groups for harassing them into fast-tracking kids on to puberty blockers.

If 20 years ago the Director of GIDS was saying they had to offer puberty blockers because if it was just a really thoughtful and supportive therapeutic service 'they wouldn't come' - why was that?

It would be the parent's not the kid's decision surely? Does Mermaids influence go back that far or were other influences at play?

I found the tone of this article interesting. I've read all of the information within it before (and the Sue and Marcus Evans interview with Benjamin Boyce was really interesting, covering lots of the same stuff) but I sensed a tone shift in this article. From "This is outrageous. Something needs to be done" to "This is already acknowledged as a medical scandal". If that's the case, that's an interesting and significant development in the main stream popular press.
Or am I just imagining it?

I find Sue Evans particularly compassionate and caring in this field. From everything I've read (including the gender dysphoria therapy book for children and adolescents, she never denies that gender identity is very real for some people. Nor the distress that gender dysphoria can cause people. However, she's a real advocate for a differential diagnosis when there are other presenting factors. This comes across well in the article too. I appreciate many would still find that approach transphobic, as it's not underpinned by affirmation, but I think many more will find it a sensible way to help a child to understand the many different reasons why they might feel at odds with their body.

If 20 years ago the Director of GIDS was saying they had to offer puberty blockers because if it was just a really thoughtful and supportive therapeutic service 'they wouldn't come'- why was that?

That is an odd one. Was it 'they won't come and we'll be shut down and I'll have to find a new job'? Or 'they won't come here they'll go somewhere dodgy so this is the least worst option'? 20 years ago was children's MH short of clients, it seems unlikely given how things are now. I don't get it

It has to be less than 20 years that susie green 'had' to get pb from the states, if her sprog is 30 now.

Maybe the protocol then was only to give them to children 16 and up. Jackie Green must have been younger than that, having famously been 'gender-confirmed' in Thailand on the dot of age 16.

I think the Mail has been one of the few mainstream media that has openly opposed the Mermaids agenda in its articles.