How are you feeling today if you work in healthcare or a captured organisation?

[Citrusandginger]

Following the publication of the Cass report?

I'm a senior HCP and have been carefully emphasising the need to record sex medical accurately for months now, and have received, what I take to be, knowing looks and quietly supportive nods in return.

So I'm not out out, but I am sure that people are aware of my views. I'm also certain that I'm not alone.

Looking at social media today, I've seen people from my network posting media articles, but so far no comments.

My hunch is that a lot of us would like to discuss the issues publicly and in our own names, but are still hesitant because the debate is likely to remain toxic for a while, and could still impact our careers (and distress some patients).

Just wondered what other people's thoughts were and what it would take for you to speak out?

That is a very decent overview from Abbasi (Bread above).

Abbasi K. The Cass review: an opportunity to unite behind evidence informed care in gender medicine BMJ 2024; 385 :q837 doi:10.1136/bmj.q837

https://www.bmj.com/content/385/bmj.q837

I am very pleased with that BMJ piece!

One of the things I have noticed is that a lot of older males, didn't really understand how damaging the ideology was. The issues didn't affect them or their orbit, so while they didn't for a nanosecond think it was possible to change sex, the concept was so ridiculous that they didn't listen or stop and think about the harm being done.

Yes. I'm saving it for future reference.

My NHS paediatric department has just returned a whole batch of new name badgers because they didn’t display preferred pronouns. I didn’t want one but it was decided on a majority vote so we’re all steam rollered into this nonsense. I’m going to cover my pronoun with a star sticker and see if it’s commented on if so I’ll mention the Cass report and dare them to report me to HR for perceived transgressions. I’m even looking forward to confrontation and see how it plays out in the light of the Cass report. The gender rep in a department is a massive bully and manipulative and she’ll report you to whoever if you disagree with her. The department is fairly young so my colleagues either agree with her or if they don’t are too scared of her so don’t say anything. Honestly it’s been a toxic environment to work in for the last few years. I’ve attached the BMJ interview with Prof Hilary Cass which is definitely worth watching and explains a lot about the report.

Dr David Bell on Times Radio is good, the video is ends with discussion with a trans adult (Katy Jon Went) who agrees that paediatric transition has been an overstep, so perhaps a useful clip to share it anyone who is stuck in the ‘Be Kind’ mindset?

Dr Bell is very calm and measured and speaks well of the aims of the Tavistock (and Portman) and points out that GIDS was nothing like the rest of the institution (which is centred around talking therapies/psychoanalytic practice, research and teaching).

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mLjC7FLXMC0

I agree. This movement is powerful and cunning, we're already seeing accusations that Cass is biased or plain wrong, and they'll be looking to pull something out of the bag to discredit the report and carry on doing what they want.

I believe they have the protocol that fits with their biological sex, unless testosterone impacts on the efficacy of treatment?

They’d have to have the correct physical treatment for their sex, anything else would be negligent, by approach I meant ‘how is it talked about/do they have specific literature’ etc.

eg I know in some adult gynae services there are specific leaflets for transmen getting hysterectomies, but presumably the number of MtF paediatric transitioners who have certain cancers are too tiny to have their own leaflets?

Look at the job titles and seniority of the people who refused to cooperate with Cass and refused to handover data. Captured doesn't begin to cover the NHS fiefdoms.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/11/top-nhs-adviser-trans-health-failed-cooperate-cass-review/

Dr Derek Glidden, its clinical director, refused to comply despite being NHS England’s gender dysphoria national speciality adviser.
He chairs the NHS England Clinical Reference Group on gender dysphoria, while another of its five members, Dr Laura Charlton, the clinical lead at Leeds Gender Identity Clinic, also refused to participate in the research.
The Nottingham clinic has been key to the rollout of a new wave of experimental trans services being set up across the country. It has links to the Indigo Gender Service in Greater Manchester, which describes itself as “trans and non-binary led”, and to the recently launched scheme in Sussex which has put GPs in charge.
…
The clinical leads of the NHS Gender Identity Clinics in Northampton, Newcastle, and Sheffield also refused to cooperate with the Cass Review, as did the now discredited clinic at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust.

I really truly hope this gives more of you the confidence to speak out. Keep fighting the good fight ✊🏽

Noticd this fascinating thread on X about how Cass via the systematic review has exposesd deceptive practices among medical organisations pushing child transition.
Apparently medical authorities fabricated consensus by deferring to each others' guidelines rather than relying on real evidence. It's called circular referencing:

https://twitter.com/buttonslives/status/1778491281305378884

I’m pleasantly waiting for my senior (male) colleague to return from annual leave. Only last week I noticed he’d suddenly changed his email signature to include his pronouns. I asked him about this and he (to paraphrase) was filled with a sudden urge to be kind. We had a long conversation and I shared my views. We had a respectful discourse, to be fair. I expressed interest in his timing as I felt the tide to be turning. He said he wasn’t aware of a turning tide. The Cass report came out a few days later whilst he was on holiday. I’m eagerly waiting to see what he does with his email signature when he returns 😊.

Teacher. I've always been openly GC among colleagues and been warned by leadership for being 'terfy' and a 'biological essentialist' for requesting that I be permitted to consistently use the term 'girls and women' when teaching Y5 about menstruation, as opposed to 'people who have periods / when someone is on their period', and adding that this overwhelmingly means immutable XX chromosomes.

I have really struggled with being seen as unfeeling and mean by colleagues especially as my concerns spring from wanting to advocate for the many girls in our community for whom segregated spaces are essential for religious reasons and communication around sex, bodies, sexuality and reproduction need to be transparent and unambiguous. My deputy head's eyes filled with tears of incredulity when she heard me defend single sex competitive sports recently; she was genuinely shocked and disappointed in me. That stung because I respect her professionally.

I'm hoping Cass will enable new conversations to be had.

Do you think this could be worth it's own thread?
It's key, and not everyone would read the full report?

That was for this. Oops! It's late...

I'm also in MH in a very captured Trust. I have no hope. I very quietly managed to get sex and gender identity if different onto our referral forms after sex was removed but this was through a faux casual conversation with admin. I absolutely hate my pronouns are name badge but when our menopause awareness sessions were basically trans focused, I was too scared to say anything. I'm thinking of working privately just to get away from all this.

Please excuse my ignorance as I ask this question. I don’t live in the UK so I’m out of the loop.

So the laws haven’t changed? Is the Cass report just something that can be referred to as a recommendation? Or does it have more power and influence than that?

I've put this on one of the main (and many!) Cass threads- but adding here too as it's appropriate.
A very thoughtful and healthcare specific response to Cass from SEGM (Society for Evidence Based Gender Medicine)
On of the best and most explanatory I've seen yet:
https://segm.org/Final-Cass-Report-2024-NHS-Response-Summary

I'm a primary school teacher.

No trans-identify children in my school so all discussions have been theoretical so far. I emailed my Head last term to raise my concerns about some EEDI training we had had and she called me into her office a couple of weeks later to talk about it.
She had read the email and the links, respects my views but still wanted to be able to follow some kind of middle ground but there really isn't one with this.

I have said that if we did have a trans identifying child at the school, I wouldn't socially transition them (eg use preferred pronouns) because I wouldn't collude with something that could put a child on a medical pathway that would lead to irreversible damage.

I feel that the Cass report gives me a strong foundation if I was put in that situation.
I'm interested to see if there's any response from the Head or from other teachers when I get back after the Easter break. We don't have anyone strongly pushing gender ideology but neither do we have any other openly GC teachers. Everyone's vaguely "be kind" and not looking too deeply into it. I'm pessimistically assuming that most teachers and TAs won't have followed the latest developments.

My union is a totally different story. I left the NEU because it is captured by gender ideology. I'm standing up against it in other areas of my life. I don't have the time or energy to fight my union as well.

I think this answers your question.

segm.org/Final-Cass-Report-2024-NHS-Response-Summary

"SEGM Take-Aways
The single most salient take-away is that the so-called "gender-affirming" model of care, which treats young people's declarations of transgender identity as an indication that any physical body modification desired by the young person is medically necessary, is over in England. So is the era of the "gender-clinic model of care," which exists to operationalize the highly medicalized "gender-affirming" care model.
We end our take-away by pointing the readers to a powerful editorial by the BMJ Editor in Chief. The entirety of this short editorial is worth reading, but we will highlight the more salient quotes below:
"Offering treatments without an adequate understanding of benefits and harms is unethical. All of this matters even more when the treatments are not trivial; puberty blockers and hormone therapies are major, life altering interventions"
"Without doubt, the advocacy and clinical practice for medical treatment of gender dysphoria had moved ahead of the evidence—a recipe for harm."
"...Families, carers, advocates, and clinicians—acting in the best interests of children and adolescents—face a clear choice whether to allow the Cass review to deepen division or use it as a driver of better care."
This analysis, published by the Editor-in-Chief of one of the most prestigious medical journals in the world, signals that the implications of the Cass Report will likely reverberate worldwide. It now appears inevitable that the arc of history has bent in the direction of reversal of gender-affirming care worldwide, although in some countries it will take considerably longer to change medical practice.
The Cass Report is a historic document the significance of which cannot be overstated. It is also multi-faceted, and no single analysis can do it justice. We have done our best to synthesize the most salient aspects of the review after a single reading. We have no doubt that we missed other important aspects and we trust that others will point them out"

It feels genuinely harmful that people who think same sex sports is a violation of human rights are allowed to teach girls.

Sports coach working in a secondary school.
There does seem to be a genuine (mistaken) belief that before puberty, boys and girls are equals in sport.

Thanks so much for this; I hadn’t seen your original posting of it. I’ve added it to my pile of links to share with colleagues. (I’m in a NHS adult psychology team.)

I was struck by the implications of this, which I didn’t know, and remember the referrals when this was a thing:
“ Ehrensaft was also a notable figure in the epidemic of "repressed memories" of satanic abuse, and published on the subject.”

Yes, Swashbuckled.
I remember that info about Ehrensaft from years ago. It's good to see it highlighted, as its one of those facts that works in of 'a picture tells a thousand words' kind of way.

I think the SEGM response and the BMJ piece are an excellent summarising combo for sharing, where you know most won't read the whole report.