Nearly 900 doctors sign letter urging BMA to abandon inquiry into Cass review

[IwantToRetire]

(sorry if already posted - really struggling with MN search function )

Not in Our Name BMA

We note that the sources the BMA is relying on to cast doubt on the review are authored by groups with serious conflicts of interest and have not been through peer-review.

Full text of letter and option to sign for members at https://notinournamebma.co.uk/open-letter-not-in-our-name-bma/

I thought I had read somewhere this morning (on this thread/in the article linked) that it was a very low number of the 69 council members who voted on this issue. 45? and that there were abstentions. But I can no longer find that information. Did I imagine it or has it been edited out?

There's this from the archive of the Hannah Barnes article in the Times that I linked this morning. It may have been edited in the interim?

Even the BMA’s leadership body, the UK council, was split on the matter. Sources have confirmed to me that 45 of 69 voting members of the BMA’s council took part in the votes. Less than half — 21 — voted to oppose implementing the Cass review (11 voted against; 13 abstained). Twenty-nine members voted to critique it.

Thank you @IcakethereforeIam that is the bit I was looking for (and which was invisible at the time, no idea why). Its still there now, so not edited. What are those odds? 950 signed letter complaining about the vote and are members of BMA vs 21 who voted for this overstepping move. Likely overwhelmingly the less experienced junior doctors voted in last time. Appalling.

Hopefully BMA members of the BMA's Representative Body of policy makers, who have seen the effect of this, will step in. Otherwise what might happen next.

I think (hope) if there's going to be any reputational fallout from this it'll be the BMA 🤡 that'll take the hit.

I, until recently, didn't realise the BMA was just the union, albeit a powerful and (formerly?) respected one. The last time they hove into view over my horizon was when they opined on older women becoming pregnant. I, turned 40 and about to have my second, joked to my midwife about them coming round and breaking my windows. She...well...one of the finest eye rolls I have ever witnessed.

The Telegraph have a little more on some of the medics speaking out against this action by the BMA and the entryists who got the motion (in every sense of the word) passed

https://archive.ph/udYnn bypass paywall

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/09/02/trans-row-bma-british-medical-association/

Again for reasons I dont understand why archive.ph doesn't work for me but archive.is does. So for anyone else having problems try https://archive.is/udYnn

Interesting slant from the Telegraph. But as they haven't investigated how many who are opposing the BMA were also active in doctors going on strike!

And although I know there are left wing aligned who are reluctant to be seen as gender critical, I dont want the Telegraph turning sex based rights into being a right wing issue!

That's a very interesting read. I realised, reading it, that I assumed would have assumed all Doctors would react like Clare Gerada to the idea of giving minors unevidemced treatments.

I wonder what has happened to the profession recently to explain this shift?

I voted for the consultant strike. I contributed to the junior doctors' strike fund. I voted for Labour. I signed the letter calling out the BMA for opposing the Cass review.

Possible answers to your question
a) I think there is a large number of (mainly specialist) doctors who don't or would rather not think about it as it does not affect their line of work and is way to toxic to stick an uninvited oar in
b) there are a significant number of GPs who are utterly disillusioned with their work; caring about this issue (or evaluating the evidence) is beyond their bandwidth. Just do what the 'shared care' letters/GMC say and try to survive.
c) there are GPs who do care and are completely horrified but again, too toxic. Think it needs to be fixed systemically and their voice will be not heard except where it hurts them personally
d) there are a number of doctors who believe purely in patient choice, think the NHS is too nanny state, and if people want to do themselves harm (and pay for the privilege) then they should be able to crack on.
e) there is a vocal minority of doctors of different stripes who are ideologically committed to 'progressivism' and push that agenda. They are not all junior, not all young - but many are. Principle is more important than evidence.
f) some doctors think that Cass fixed it, Labour are on side and it will all just come out in the wash
g) and a very very few doctors (like the brave ones in the Telegraph article) who put their money where their mouths are and keep shouting about evidence.

And they are heros. The rest of those that do not to speak up are depending on them risking their reputations.

It's heartening to see the strength of opposition to the BMA activists - and from so many senior medics. It's taking so long but finally children are being centred again.

That's really interesting thank you. Makes a lot of sense.

My answer would be similar:

There are large numbers this doesn't affect
Doctors are used to new conditions and treatments being discovered
Most naturally tend to 'be kind'
The narrative of most underprivileged group took a strong hold
Everyone assumed assessments were a lot more thorough and evidence based than it turned out to be

What might be overlooked by the doctors you describe is the impact this could have on the profession as a whole. Trust in doctors is pretty high, still. As you say, people assume that they are acting from an evidence based position. It is shocking to find out that this has not been the case here.

When this becomes more broadly known, I fear it may affect the profession as a whole. I'm not sure people will be thinking 'oh this is just one niche branch of medicine'.

This is so important. People put their trust in doctors and other HCPs. We trust that they're educated and informed. We trust that they will treat their patients with respect, using the best available knowledge and science and deal sensitively with the major transitions in life including birth and death.
And then we discover that one branch of medicine is in the pockets of queer theorists - have been experimenting on vulnerable children / young people with unevidenced medication and the most brutal of surgery to "cure" a mental health issue and all their peers failed to speak up because they were busy, exhausted and scared of being bullied.
I know that the same criticism can be made of teachers, politicians, psychiatrists etc but those who kept silent need to make sure that now so many doctors have spoken, everyone else speaks out too. Because it's going to be the weight of informed opinion that will remove the influence of queer theorists from child medicine.

I can understand the point you are making say in relation to day to day work, or reviewing (assuming this happens) changes in prescribing or whatever.

But the issue here is about the actions of the BMA.

Some objecting may also have doubts about CASS, but on principle are saying how the BMA behaved in rigging the vote, and presuming to be the vehicle to challenge a report on a branch of medicine is not in line with their function.

ie irrespective of accepting the CASS review or not, the behviour of the BMA is unaccetable, and brings the profession into disrepute.

What other unions are there for doctors who want to leave the BMA but still need to belong to a union?

I just listened to an interview with Helen Joyce about this, discussing Hannah Barnes' latest article about the capture of the BMA by approximately 30 individuals, the leader of whom was a prominent member of Momentum. (I do remember hearing that there some very inappropriate goings on inside Momentum. I wonder if it was connected to the same individual).

There is the Hospital Consultants and Specialists Association which is open to any doctor except GPs.

There is also Doctors in Unite which is open to all grades of doctors and includes GPs.

No idea what Unite is like, I've been very happy with the support from HCSA.

BMA stance on Cass review of transgender care has ‘damaged its reputation’
‘Climate of fear’ at British Medical Association after it rejected findings of landmark study, leading member claims

The British Medical Association has threatened the reputation of all UK doctors by rejecting the findings of the landmark Cass review of transgender healthcare, a leading member of the BMA has told the Observer.
Dr Jacky Davis claims that the doctors’ union’s stance on the Cass review is “irrational”, has created a “fracture” between its leadership and the grassroots doctors it represents and left the medical profession “in an uproar”.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/sep/07/bma-stance-on-cass-review-of-transgender-care-has-damaged-its-reputation

Also: Undemocratic and secretive: the BMA no longer speaks for doctors trying to protect children
…
So why did the BMA, which is not a scientific body such as Nice, feel it could criticise and undermine Cass’s work? The BMA has allowed itself to get into a position whereby a vocal minority of council members with an anti-Cass agenda have engineered policy that the membership have not been consulted on and do not agree with. While they are sincere in their beliefs, these council members have no hard evidence for their opposition, and good intentions aren’t enough to guide medical practice. It must be underpinned by evidence.
The BMA now finds itself isolated in its opposition to Cass, and with its reputation and integrity damaged. The prognosis for the union is not terminal, but it needs to acknowledge the mess that it is in and then to pull itself back from the brink of what one critic has called “its descent into madness”.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/sep/07/bma-cass-report-gender-identity-services

Well done to The Observer. Keep up the sensible reportage.

Good to see this getting coverage in the Guardian & Observer. Long overdue that their readers were given the reality side of the trans debate.

The Observer has always been good on this, tbh - particularly the wonderful Sonia Sodha

Me too!

I was going to post a link to The Observer article by Dr Jacky Davis but saw that StickItInTheFamilyAlbum has already done it.

It's interesting to see how BMA politics works but heartening to see the backlash from members.

Also in the Times:
https://www.thetimes.com/article/38a4c7b9-1443-4f0c-9db3-1de22aef8b58?shareToken=5d6e6411c0a974f233bbabffcf3b8443