Thank you for those links, WarriorN.
It is incredible to think that the government may still be about to push through the Ban-Conversion-Therapy bill in spite of the evidence that it is psychological therapy that is needed for
gender questioning treatment, but that is precisely what could be called ‘conversion’ therapy by tras simply because it is not affirmative.
Meanwhile, affirmation of trans in a child may well be gay conversion therapy.
It is a failure of logic to Ban Conversion Therapy for LGBT as a homogeneous group.
Thinking about the ‘Gillick Competence’ decision regarding the Kiera Bell case in the Court of Appeal, (o e of the links you posted), meaning she was deemed able to know what her hormone treatment entailed - does this apply to all medical treatment?
At what age do children not require their parent/guardian to sign before they undergo a medical procedure ( especially one that is effectively experimental)?
Gillick Competence must have been decided at the time of the Victoria Gillick case simply because it was thought to be in the best interest of society. Teen girls not getting pregnant must have been seen as the lesser evil when compared to giving them the right to choose birth control in secret, especially as their parents cannot prevent the sex/ pregnancy otherwise.
It seems wrong to transfer this principle of underage permission to puberty blockers etc.