RCGP clarifies GP role in providing transgender care in new position statement

[IwantToRetire]

(Sorry is this has already been posted. And have to admit I am not quite sure what they are saying!)

The college has published a new position statement on the role of GPs in transgender care in response to recent developments including the Cass Review.

It set out that the RCGP considers that the ‘core role’ of GPs includes to ‘liaise and work’ with specialist gender identity services ‘in the same way as with any other specialist service’, and that this includes consideration of prescribing ‘under a collaborative or shared care arrangement’.

Once a patient has had a specialist assessment and requires ongoing prescribing, NHS bodies need to ensure that shared care arrangements and locally commissioned services are adequately funded, with the role of the GP ‘clearly defined’, the college added.

It added that while some GPs may have developed additional expertise and feel able to offer ‘bridging prescriptions’ for adult patients waiting for specialist assessment, many will not feel confident or competent to do this.

For GPs without additional expertise or extended role, the RCGP considers that the GP role ‘would not include initiating prescriptions’ before a patient was seen by a specialist gender identify service.

Full article https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/clinical-areas/mental-health-pain-and-addiction/rcgp-clarifies-gp-role-in-providing-transgender-care-in-new-position-statement/

Well the rcgp are not going to find many gps able and willing to participate in shared care as the GP is liable for everything they prescribe and if something goes wrong and they've prescribed medication outwith their competency and the patient dies or is seriously harmed it's the gps neck on the line not the gender clinic.
The above is why many gps won't prescribe adhd meds for pediatrics even with an nhs clinic.

That sounds like very good news. Especially for GPs who don’t want to prescribe on doubtful evidence.

There is more in the actual statement:

Such as

"There may be additional challenges in supporting those who, having received treatment for gender incongruence, find their transition goals have changed. There are currently no guidelines available to support advising these individuals; this population often has unmet physical and mental healthcare needs and may not want to engage with the services that supported them to transition."

'The RCGP does not consider that the GP role in relation to children and young people would include prescribing gender affirming hormones to address gender incongruence in a patient aged under 18."

"The RCGP would not consider the GP role to involve sharing care with the private sector, unless the GP practice has made their own decision to take this on and considers that it is safe."

"NHS systems must ensure that patients can be safely recalled for the appropriate screening according to the organs that they have, and that patient safety is not jeopardised because clinicians are not aware of a patient’s sex assigned at birth"

"ensure that gender identity services for adults and children and young people take a holistic approach, considering neurodiversity, adverse childhood experiences and mental health issues."

"Gender identity is a personal internal perception of oneself and, as such, the gender category with which a person identifies may not match the sex they were registered at birth. In contrast, sex is biologically determined"

It does seem as if they have actually thought properly about the issues?

For some reason I can't link to the actual position statement, but it is linked to in the piece referred to by the OP

If I remember correctly, there was previously advice that encouraged prescribing for people who were self-medicating off the internet.
Interesting also to make a statement discouraging shared care with private clinics, definitely not seen it written so clearly before.
I feel the tide is turning.

I feel the tide is turning

Hopefully, but I think it indicates that they are feeling they do not need to go done the affirmative route.

And as said up thread many may be grateful for that.

The Fox Killer has a big thread on some new NHS guidance here:

bsky.app/profile /jolyonmaugham.bsky.social/post/3lmhllnkfns2f

(Remove spaces, I can't post links for some reason)

I'm not sure if he is referring to the same thing l, or different guidance.

It set out that the RCGP considers that the ‘core role’ of GPs includes to ‘liaise and work’ with specialist gender identity services ‘in the same way as with any other specialist service’, and that this includes consideration of prescribing ‘under a collaborative or shared care arrangement’.

I would love to know what a 'collaborative agreement' is. Not defined anywhere. Makes it sound like GPs have a choice (and funding is amicably arranged) instead of imposed and unfunded.

I'm impressed by his analogy between puberty blockers and heroin

In Telegraph

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/8dfcb8f95fa7a826

I think it is good that this is getting publicity.

But expect that it will only be in a few papers and the misrepresentation in most other news outlets will continue.

Not sure why but someone has started another thread about this, but has provided a link to the actual guidance.
https://ourduty.group/2025/04/12/nhs-published-trans-guidance-for-gps/

The Good Law Project is saying it is an attack on trans health care or some such.

The Good Law Project is saying it is an attack on trans health care or some such.

It's not though is it. It's saying they should get appropriate care - who wants to see a GP when they need a specialist. The problem of course lies with the Gender clinics who don't bother to follow through.

Good Law Project holds a copy of new NHS Guidance published yesterday and it is clear that Wes Streeting is continuing his war on trans people. Remarkably the national health service is now directing GPs to cause harm to the community.

and

What NHS England did, in new guidance issued yesterday, was direct GPs no longer to offer shared care arrangements. This means the NHS is directing GPs to expose their patients to additional risks by refusing to monitor their hormone levels; to actively cause harm.

https://x.com/JolyonMaugham/status/1910360748049527077

This is wonderful!

Stating the need for services to be based on sex separately from gender. Recognising detransitioners. Opposing medicalisation of children and acknowledging the forces that might lead them to question their sex. Warning against involvement with the private bandwagon.

If the GPs can be so sane, why is the BMA so disgracefully captured?

Yes, well done Jolyon! Making the link between puberty blockers and other dangerous drugs that no sane parent would encourage their child to take.

P.S. does anyone else think of Martin in Cabin Pressure when they hear the name Jolyon?

MR. BIRLING: Hello there, my little man. Now, ‘Crieff,’ ‘Crieff.’ Any relation to Jolyon Crieff?
MARTIN: I doubt it.
MR. BIRLING: Ah, but one never knows, one never knows.
MARTIN: One never does, but one can have a fairly strong hunch that no-one in one’s family has ever been called Joly-on