Hillary Cass at Scottish parliamet - live

[ArabellaScott]

This started at 9am.

https://www.scottishparliament.tv/meeting/health-social-care-and-sport-committee-may-7-2024

Cass is so clearly intelligent and caring, it makes it much harder for the extremists to ignore her findings.

Thanks Arabella.

Mackay: What does good research look like to you? Should trans people be represented?

That's a question from someone who doesn't understand scientific research.

Thanks @ArabellaScott

Yes thanks @ArabellaScott

I liked that the answer to the 'trans people being represented in research' question was along the lines of 'of course in the same way that patients are always involved in research as a matter of course in standard good practice' i.e. a veiled 'you clearly know nothing about how good research works'.

Thanks arabella

I have to say, I was surprised that she seemed so willing to say that medical transition was appropriate for some children, even if we don't know which ones - that made me rather uncomfortable.

This point - the claim from activists that ‘transitioning’ is good or, at worst, neutral. It is clearly the worst possible outcome. It is a bit like asking ‘why do you think amputating a leg is worse than antibiotics for an infected toe?’ There may come a point where amputation is necessary but it is never better than curing the infection through antibiotics and keeping the leg (though this is a poor comparison as there might actually become a need to amputate a leg…)

This actually reveals this is little to do with resolving any sort of dysphoria but rather about the ability to demand body modification and making others play along with your fantasy.

I should add that was a paraphrase and possibly the second part a bit clumsily worded by me.

Totally agree.

If there is no way of telling who will benefit and who will be harmed it doesn't matter. It'd be the same as sterilising all teen girls who say they don't want babies on the reasoning that some won't change their mind.

I mean it's exactly the same.

Thank you @ArabellaScott
Its well worth listening to because the quality of the questions/questioners was (mainly) at a lower level than the quality of Cass's answers. The first two questions were basically 'Tell us what we should do in Scotland' and came across as 'I have not done more than flick through, its a big document, can you supply a Cliff's Notes summary that is more my speed?' Sigh.

So glad she did this. What a woman.

Even with a paraphrase, I'm quite confident in my assessment of her understanding - given previous form.

I'm concerned though, that a good part of the audience (including several of the MSPs on the committee) don't understand that - that they are not able to read between the lines to realise that if it's not possible to determine who should and shouldn't be treated then the risk is too high for anyone to be. I think Gillian Mackay, for example, will walk away from that session thinking that she's had it confirmed that medical treatment for minors is appropriate, and won't realise how much of Dr Cass's evidence was damning of previous practice and activists' demands, because she used polite doctor-speak that depends on her audience understanding what normal protocols and standards are and that departure from them is really shocking.

Yes, unfortunately it probably does have to be spelled out in very short words. I'd hope that clinicians would have a better understanding of Cass' implication, though.

I'm not a doctor, I have no medical experience at all. I've read the Cass report. There are parts I don't fully understand. What I do understand though is that this is a woman who was top of her field for many years in paediatrics, who researched the topic thoroughly and wrote a highly evidenced report. Her recommendations that she put forward should be acknowledged and followed in order to prevent unnecessary harm to children. If Scottish politicians disagree, refuse to read the report and listen to deranged activists then (to quote Logan Roy), they are not serious people.

If Scottish politicians disagree, refuse to read the report and listen to deranged activists then (to quote Logan Roy), they are not serious people.

Sadly, they are not serious people - but with power.

My understanding from listening to doctors working in the area is that for a small number of people their gender dysphoria and/or MH issues are so extreme that they may be best treated by transitioning and living like somebody of the opposite sex.
These are doctors working in gender clinics who have spoken out strongly about how trans ideology has come to dominate policy and who are stongly critical of what's been happening btw.

The children part makes me uncomfortable too though. I can understand it being true for mature adults.

As Cass noted, though, any evidence was based on earlier cohorts. GIDS used to treat fewer than ten patients a year, and most were 'watchful waiting'. They were virtually all male.

Surely there can be social transition without taking hormones and undergoing radical surgeries?

*Could PBs be the right intervention for some?

Cass: Yes, hormones for some are right treatment. We don't know which young people those are. Evidence base for PBs - much less clear.*

I think there's some confusion caused by this answer. It starts by sounding as if she's answering to say that PBs could sometimes be appropriate, but in fact she goes on to say 'hormones', and even clarified that she doesn't mean PBs as that evidence is much less clear.

I wonder if she initially misheard the question.

I've been told she previously was of the opinion that younger children who declared they were the opposite sex and were distressed might be more likely to find transition helpful. Also studies are lacking.

Whether she's still of that opinion I've no idea, but obviously it's still not a good reason to give drugs and social transition on that basis as Arabella's comparison illustrates.

Whilst I'm glad it's now been published, I have many issues with the Cass review, not least that it still gives set ups like mermaids reason to exist.

ArabellaScott

thank you for the summaries.

And yes it would appear that the people doing the questioning are still in activist mode, not doctor mode.

As time goes on I'm sure it will become quite clear why the doctor mode will prevail over the activism.

Thanks to Arabella for this writing up of meeting.

Hillary Cass for woman of the year.

Thank you Arabella