Sandyford no longer to provide 'gender care' for children and young people

[ArabellaScott]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0jpy8l0weyo

'Gender services for children and young people in Scotland will now be delivered by paediatricians in a regional network of clinical settings instead of at the existing Sandyford clinic in Glasgow. '

'Access to the service is now only available following referral from a clinician, which Ms Minto said was in line with other child and adolescent specialist services.
New National Standards for Gender Identity Care include a commitment that young people will be screened for neurodevelopmental conditions and autism during initial assessments for gender dysphoria.
A new training framework is to be introduced too, aimed at improving specialist skills of staff who will work within an "evidence-based" approach.
Detailed care plans will be required for each patient to transfer from children's to adult services.

I've looked on a couple of the archive sites and nothing has been archived that I have seen.

Ooh @ArabellaScott this is great news. Also as a side note, I really do hope based on your comments and fantastic insights on these boards that you are indeed the one and only JKR. You are a powerhouse of a woman regardless. Thanks for sharing.x

@ArabellaScott @GargoylesofBeelzebub thanks for looking re the archive stuff. I appreciate I could have looked myself too. D'oh!

Hahaha, I'm flattered! Thanks, Pensieve. I'm afraid I'm far less impressive than JKR in almost every way. 😊

The article bloody well ought to be archived, I just did it ...

I would say you're welcome but it would be a lie to say that I had looked for you! I'd already looked anyway. 😂

https://www.gov.scot/publications/cass-review-implications-scotland/

It’s not good news. The standards are awful. Absolutely awful. Completely captured, ideological approach:

www.healthcareimprovementscotland.scot/publications/standards-for-gender-identity-healthcare-services-for-adults-and-young-people/

Is it? I'll need to read them tomorrow. <sigh>

I've just skimmed bits and it all reads so vague and bland it could mean almost anything.

Ha!

Yes, plenty of us are wise to the BBC ways when it comes to reporting on this subject. Edits deserve close scrutiny. I'll never forget the shrinking article about the ex-drag queen in Wales that got smaller and less detailed until it disappeared completely.

Obviously it's nothing to do with this story, but here's a link for anyone who's interested:

https://x.com/ReduxxMag/status/1695083112265322703?t=yjW1Dezojlu9KdRxLd80gw&s=19

I remember watching it change from "ex drag queen" to "man" and all the other edits until it went poof.. and reappeared in its new form. The comments on this tweet help to illustrate its edit journey. There have been other examples. The Isla Bryson coverage went a similar way. Lots of "she" pronouns... then all pronouns gone with sentences reformed, thus avoiding a difficult subject altogether.

Post from WRN Scotland:

'On the face of it appears the announcement about implementing #CASS was good news but as always the devil is in the detail. The first realisation that something wasn't right came with the lie from
@jenniminto
that our schools don't teach pupils about their gender identity.

Well anyone who has been paying attention this past few weeks would know all about the grip that LGBTYS has on our schools ranging from teaching materials to unsafe school policies on social transition which dismantle safeguarding. Next up two documents were also published today First https://healthcareimprovementscotland.scot/publications/standards-for-gender-identity-healthcare-services-for-adults-and-young-people/#:~:text=Overview%20of%20standards,and%20delivering%20gender%20identity%20services

It will come as no surprise that these standards don't reflect the protected characteristics of the Equality Act 2010 Including "gender identity" instead of "gender reassignment"

Gender identity is defined as "a person’s sense of having a particular gender. It is a way of describing the gender with which a person identifies such as a trans man, trans woman or as non-binary" Trans people are defined as "An umbrella term for people whose gender identity differs or does not fully correspond with the sex they were assigned at birth. This includes, but is not limited to, trans men, trans women and non-binary people"

Transition is defined as "the process of changing the way a person lives in order to match up with their gender identity. Examples of transitioning include the person changing their name, asking people to use different pronouns to address them and changing the way the person expresses their gender.

For some people, accessing gender identity services will be for support, information and care. For others, it may involve medical treatments such as hormone therapy or surgery. "Transition” can mean different things to different people. Some people prefer the term gender reassignment

Standard 10 refers to standards for gender identity for young people but no definition of young people is provided. We know from other Scottish Government documents that young people includes children Second document https://frameworks.nes.digital/transgender-care-knowledge-and-skills-framework This is the transgender care kmowledge and skills framework which sets 4 levels of knowledge and skill those working in transgender care should have

Similar language is used across both "Please note that we use trans people as an umbrella term for people whose gender identity does not fully correspond with their sex recorded at birth. This includes, but is not limited to, trans men, trans women and non-binary people"

Plus worryingly a disregard of safeguarding issues "Consider the relevance of disclosing a person's gender identity when making a referral to another service. Are aware of the importance of respecting confidentiality around someone’s gender identity, including relevant legal requirements" This all leads us to conclude that
@scotgov
Is paying lip service to the #CASS recommendations with a focus on restructuring health care in Scotland to provide gender affirming care with no focus on evidence based concerns raised in the CASS Review'

https://x.com/WRNScotland/status/1831092716349882767

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/09/03/scottish-doctors-prescribe-hormones-patients-self-id-risks/

https://archive.ph/0leyA

'GPs will be able to prescribe cross-sex hormones to patients who diagnose themselves as transgender in Scotland under new NHS rules.
Under guidelines published on Tuesday, it is stated that testosterone or oestrogen prescriptions are to be given out to adults “primarily based on someone’s self-report” despite an admission that there is “no guarantee” they will help patients.
Previously, access to a specialist gender clinic was usually required to access hormone treatments on the Scottish NHS.
However, the new rules open the door to GPs being able to prescribe the drugs after taking account of guidance or taking specialist advice.'

I wonder how Scottish GPs feel about this.

'The new Scottish NHS guidelines state that the basis for being prescribed hormones is “primarily based upon someone’s self-report” yet admits there is “no guarantee that endocrine [hormone] treatment will offer benefit to them, or to the extent desired”.'

Wow.

This is far worse than I expected, given the post-Cass era that we're now in. It's closer (by a country mile) to the Edinburgh Trans Health manifesto than the Cass Report.

https://www.tumblr.com/edinburghath/163521055802/trans-health-manifesto

Seeing it in an NHS font and screen layout is mind-blowing.

https://wingsoverscotland.com/your-children-will-be-harmed/

'There are thousands of words of boilerplate waffle and impenetrable jargon in the flurry of documentation that the Scottish Government released yesterday, but the few lines that we’ve highlighted above betray the reality of the situation and render everything else meaningless.
Far from being accepted, the findings of the Cass Review will be comprehensively ignored in Scotland. A maze of smoke and mirrors has been constructed to conceal the truth, but these new protocols and the accompanying guidance provide an easy route for anyone of any age to almost instantly access powerful and permanently life-altering medication without any meaningful scrutiny from a medical professional.'

I need to re-read - I thought I saw something that said that under 18s would not be prescribed hormones as a matter of course?

'The overarching conclusion from the review by Dr Cass and the sum of the evidence presented in the systematic reviews suggests that there is inadequate evidence for the use of puberty-suppressing hormones or regarding the longer-term risks. In addition, whilst gender-affirming hormones may be the right treatment for some young people, we do not have sufficient evidence to know which children or young people will benefit most.
We agree with the review conclusions that, at the present time, there is insufficient evidence to support the benefits of puberty-suppressing hormones and that the risks of harm remain a significant potential concern.
We understand that it is this emerging evidence base that has led to clinicians across the UK deciding, in their professional opinion, that they no longer feel it is clinically appropriate or safe to continue prescribing puberty suppressants for children and young people with new presentations in GICs.
In the situation where there is an insufficient evidence base to support either efficacy or potential harm, it would be clinically and scientifically unsafe to proceed without further clinical trial evidence from properly designed trials. This is not just the case for puberty supressing hormones but for other medicines too.'

My emphasis.

'In Scotland, clinicians in NHS GGC and NHS Lothian have already identified concerns about the use of gender-affirming hormones in those under 18 years of age due to rising levels of concern around the short- and long-term use of these medicines in this age group. For this reason, they have paused the use of these medicines in those aged under 18 years in Scotland.
We are of a view that, as part of an individualised approach to care, there should be caution and a clear rationale for providing gender-affirming hormones for individuals aged under 18 years and where this happens it should be part of a shared decision-making conversation and be recorded. We would also suggest that further UK-wide research should evaluate the use of gender-affirming hormones in young people aged under 18 years which is linked to the wider aspirations of recommendation 8.
Medical Directors and Directors of Pharmacy should assure themselves that they are content that they have clear governance processes in place that include treatment protocols, multi-disciplinary peer support to clinicians prescribing in this area and clear professional line management and support.'

https://www.gov.scot/publications/cass-review-implications-scotland/pages/4/

So they are pressing on with cross sex hormones for children. So long as it's 'caution' and there's a 'clear rationale'.

I wonder what this 'rationale' looks like. And who is sharing this 'shared decision making'?

Jesus, read this:

'Currently, for pre-pubertal children, GICs will provide information about fertility with a referral for fertility preservation being made, where appropriate, for young people after the onset of puberty.
The service for young people and adults is carried out in Assisted Conception Units. The procedures for preservation of fertility involve a process of appointments, investigations and procedures and are potentially traumatic.'

This is disappointing to read.

However, FUCK! I cannot conceive the pain and the potential health issues of pumping an under 18 girl's body full of hormones to stimulate ovulations. With all the risks.

And then to start her on testosterone! WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK!

And all for what people actively dismiss as 'gender affirming care'.

And people wonder why we state clearly that the political aspect of that movement is so discriminatory against female people. And so fucking harmful.

I've been reading this thread with growing horror, wtaf

As puberty begins for a significant % of girls while they're at primary schools is it proposed that hundreds of pre pubertal girls will be shipped off to Assisted Conception Units to have arrangements made to harvest their eggs etc?

Women know how invasive, painful and challenging this can be. The idea that there are people in the Scottish medical profession proposing this for mentally vulnerable young children defies belief 😱

This is awful. Just awful. I have just read the wings over Scotland article posted further up. LGBTYS grubby hands over things as well. We are fucked. My children especially my autistic wee one is fucked. I'm so angry with the Scottish government. They are beyond redemption now they are all evil in my eyes. Sorry. Feeling so angry and emotional about this. And scared.

Well, we knew the Scottish government are well beyond saving! They will be out, resoundingly out, next year.

They are still working on guidance or something for children/young people, I think, due out soon-ish.

I suppose what we need to ask is how will Labour be any different?

My reading is that only post pubertal children/young people will go to Assisted Conception Units. It's not clear what stage of puberty they mean, though. Hoping there will be more detail.

I'd also like to know what they base this all on. WPATH are no-nos, apparently, since NHS Scotland had to report theyselves to the police for sharing the Eunuch porn link.

So on what basis are they working out their 'treatment' pathways? For a condition, we should remember, that is 'not a mental illness' so presumably not an illness at all.

Article in the Times today, don't think it says anything new:
https://www.thetimes.com/article/45cfb79e-7a93-462a-ad0f-3b8b53782679?shareToken=0ad834e690a4d41931fc459fa2dd949e