BMA to vote to 'disavow' the Cass review

[mzdemeanour]

The governing body of the BMA is to hold a vote tomorrow (Wednesday July 17) to 'disavow' the Cass Review. Words fail me to be honest. Any doctors, particularly members of the BMA, able to explain or comment?

Article by Hannah Barnes in the Spectator www.newstatesman.com/politics/health/2024/07/why-are-british-doctors-voting-to-reject-the-cass-report and thread on X/Twitter x.com/hannahsbee/status/1813252387504857241

When you think you can't be shocked there's always some bugger comes along and surprises you by how insane they are. Good reporting from Hannah, at least it's under the spotlight now. What a loss she was to the BBC. I hope Wes Streeting has the guts for this fight, there seem to be lunatics everywhere.

It's just more evidence of the infection in our academic institutions that even medical associations get be brought this close to the brink.

Insane.

Dear God.

Hmmm, why? Follow the money would be a guess.......

Blimey. I am well past being surprised by any pronouncements from the Koolaid gang, for most of whom I suspect trans activism is a hobby that got out of hand. But the BMA? I thought these people were supposed to be professionals?

People who engage in medical politics are not representative of the views of all Drs

Didn’t Kamran Abassi, the editor-in-chief of the BMJ, write a considered, positive article about the Cass Report? There’s also an account of his interview with her on the BMJ website, which I can’t read as I’m not a subscriber.

According to Wikipedia, the BMJ is published by BMJ group, which is owned by the BMA. Hmmm.

Edit. Wikipedia also says the BMJ has editorial freedom from the BMA.

I am a BMA member, I have heard nothing about this. In my experience the Cass report has been well recieved.

I imagine a lot of the push is from doctors or gps who are so harassed and pushed by patients/ the parents that , as with the devastating over prescription of antibiotics in the past, they succumb to the pressure.

I can’t believe that any doctor actually believes that prescribing powerful drugs that they know are very likely to damage growth, brain development, fertility, bone density, heart function and other vital physical processes to patients who are simultaneously presenting with issues such as depression, anorexia , bulimia, anxiety and autism can be a good idea and in the best interests of their patients. What happened to “first do no harm”?

Then we've got to hope the doctors themselves vote the "right" way to stop all this nonsense.

Bloody hell.

Not a member of the BMA, largely because I wanted to join a union that focussed on employment law instead of activism.

A surprisingly large number of doctors aren't in the BMA - realised when we had to establish which juniors were striking and which weren't.

Even if you are in the BMA this probably doesn't mean much to you beyond paying your subs and occasionally ringing the helpline as yet again your trust hasn't paid you correctly.

The reps are the activists and as we have seen in so many organizations, activists don't necessarily have anything in common with members.

I am wondering, hoping, that this article is a strategic attempt to alert others to the fact that a minority group might try and get their motion accepted.

From the article:

... The motion, first drafted as an emergency measure in June, was not discussed at the BMA’s Annual Representative Meeting (ARM) last month.

BMA rules would suggest that for it now to be going to the union’s governing body, the proposal has gained the support of at least 10 members – about one in six – of the BMA’s Council in the intervening weeks. That makes it eligible to be voted on.

The motion alleges that the Cass Review contains “unsubstantiated recommendations driven by unexplained study protocol deviations” and is concerned at its “exclusion of trans-affirming evidence”.

It calls on the BMA to “publicly disavow the Cass Review” and to “lobby and work with other relevant organisations and stakeholders to oppose the implementation of the recommendations made by the Cass Review”.

It also calls for the union to “lobby the government and NHS in all four nations to ensure continuity in provision of transgender health care for patients younger than 18 years old”. ...

Article is behind paywall but can be read at https://archive.ph/y7G9S

Is the agenda for the meeting in the public domain?

The governing body of the BMA

So it’s not the membership of the BMA doing this (ie ordinary doctors), it’s the ones who were motivated to get themselves elected into a decision making position?

The motion, first drafted as an emergency measure in June, was not discussed at the BMA’s Annual Representative Meeting (ARM) last month.
^^
BMA rules would suggest that for it now to be going to the union’s governing body, the proposal has gained the support of at least 10 members – about one in six – of the BMA’s Council in the intervening weeks. That makes it eligible to be voted on.

Does the BMA have any rules which permit its membership to call for an emergency vote of no confidence in its governing body?

Words fail me. Ugh.

Interesting that the BMA doesn't have a majority of doctors belonging to it, though.

@AnnaMagnani are you in a union? And if so, would you mind saying which one?

We know the education unions are in thrall to this ideology. But I’d be surprised at the BMA. My late father was active in the BMA, he would be turning in his grave if this happened.

I'm afraid I resigned from the BMA and joined Unite as they have not represented my views for a while.

WTF?!

Is Unite better on this issue?

This.

Pretty much all the teaching unions come out with total bonkers, especially on this topic.

I'm a teacher but I just don't have the armour to go into battle. I pay my subs as an insurance for legal expenses if I ever need it.

I'm fed up with my union, the biggest teaching union in the uk I believe. I could go on and on about their bonkers and sometimes downright dangerous political ideas. They don't represent me at all. I use them purely for legal expenses insurance. I imagine some doctors use their BMA membership the same way.

Ordinary members haven’t been invited to vote. It’s odd that this is being done like this - it was not included at the ARM (annual meeting of BMA reps) a few weeks ago, or AGM (which is more about procedure, and all members can vote).

I’m surprised the BMA is doing this. Or maybe it is at the stage where putting it to an anonymous vote is the only way through an impasse? In which case one would hope for reason to prevail…

I'm not sure if Unite have views on trans activism but, as others have said, I just wanted to be in a Union to represent my employment rights and really don't share most of the BMAs political views. (I resigned largely over the consultant strike because I was sick of getting pestered to support something that I don't agree with).