'The Protocol' series on children's treatment for gender by the New York Times

[Helleofabore]

This series has been released today.

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLdMrbgYfVl-uRbb-KAAkSNzi_gHzQAX2d&si=WP74bzzXQQRAPKQn

The Protocol is a six-part series that tells the story of a new kind of medical treatment for a small group of young people and how it got pulled into a political fight that could end it in the U.S.

This is what if says on the trailer blurb

Introducing ‘The Protocol’

“Since 2021, nearly half the states in the U.S. have passed bans on medical treatments for transgender minors. The Trump administration is now targeting the care, and in the coming weeks, the Supreme Court is expected to weigh in. “The Protocol” is the story of youth gender medicine — where it came from, who it was meant to help, and what may come next in the legal and political fights over its future.”

Apologies about that link. You would have to cut and paste it, and it takes you to the playlist.

This looks to be the first episode

The Beginning

The story of youth gender medicine starts in The Netherlands, with a clinical psychologist and a 16 year-old who was determined to go through life as the gender he long felt he was.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=G5UOm3BB8Rs&list=PLdMrbgYfVl-uRbb-KAAkSNzigHzQAX2d&index=6&pp=iAQB

Episode 2

The Gender Kids

The new treatment is codified into a protocol, and the Dutch publish a landmark study that launches the field of youth gender medicine. A former patient describes the benefit of early treatment in a society that is still hostile to trans people.

Episode 3

The American Approach

In Boston, a psychologist helps set up the first youth gender clinic in the U.S., adapting the Dutch approach. Across the country, a rising star in the field questions their methods. Meanwhile, demand increases worldwide as the types of patients seeking care change.

Episode 4

The Whistleblower

A small Midwestern gender clinic gets consumed by a growing political fight when a whistleblower goes public. She had begun to see the treatments as harmful, and decided the political route was the only way to fix it.

Episode 5

The Review

The heated debate is not limited to the U.S. In England, a pediatrician tasked with figuring out how the country’s health care system should provide the care finds that the evidence is “remarkably weak.” One major medical group argues that’s missing the point — and repeating history.

Episode 6

The Now

State bans are enacted. The Supreme Court is poised to weigh in. President Trump declares that there are only two genders and threatens to withhold federal funds from hospitals that provide pediatric gender treatments. We hear from kids, parents and providers caught in the middle about the complicated decisions they are making.

Have you watched all these? Do they provide a balanced view?

I have started. But it will take me a while.

I figured at least some of them are worth it even if it reminds me of stuff I have forgotten. Or pulls out different perspectives I have not considered.

Even if these are incredibly biased, they will be thought provoking. But I am hoping that they will be a good, long, information source. Particularly for those who might be newly exposed and want some back story.

I will probably note bits on this thread as I come across them.

The ads are frequent and very distracting so far.

I've just seen it's in podcast form too Helleofabore
It's on Spotify, so I imagine on other podcast platforms too.
That should mean less ads?

I found it via Apple.

I am listening to this and wondering where it is going. So far the first episode seems to be just setting the scene with no discussion with the very first adolescent patient about negative impacts of the treatments. And she was on puberty blockers for 5 or 6 years.

I can understand just letting someone speak about their experiences, but if people only listened to this one episode, they could very well end up with a view that there were no health issues with the treatment at all. If anything, I find it concerningly edited with this in mind.

And FG's story seems to be that she wrote a poem that her parents thought meant she was going to commit suicide, but she had no thoughts about committing suicide. It was just a tweenage overly dramatic poem. But an aunt had read a book about trans sexual which she gave to FG's mother. The mother took FG to a psychotherapist with the poem and the clinician decided that it was a strong case and put the FG onto puberty blockers.

But at the end, FG says that she appreciates those clinicians actions because it saved her life??? This is confusing as she said she hadn't thought about committing suicide? Is this retrofitting the narrative?

Episode 2 and only a brief mention of negative side effects. And no in-depth analysis of the study that de Vries headed up even though they were interviewing de Vries.

It does seem that the next episode covers the way that the current affirming only treatment has skipped steps recommended. But on the other hand, there seems to be missed opportunities again to point out the now well exposed issues about the study.

I've listened to episode 5, the one on the Cass review, where they interview Baroness Cass, Marci Bower and JOK. I think the interviewer does a decent job (some of the criticisms to the Cass review is addressed at the beginning by Baroness Cass, the interviewer tries to push back to some points raised by Marci Bower). However, she could have been more forceful and more prepared. I wonder, though, whether this is the first time Hillary Cass is given so much space on US "left-leaning" media, if so it can be considered almost revolutionary! From the point of view of a UK audience, it could be better.

The series is important because it represents another break in the code of silence over child experiments in the US from the mainstream media. So that is to be celebrated. How significant it is can be seen from the fact that US TAs are going crazy about it being available and are organising protests and demanding the New York Times remove it. They are attempting to undermine it via carefully curated articles - an example.

‘Who Can I Talk to That Has a Human Heart?’: New York Times doubles down on harming trans people

https://archive.is/Rep9B

In typical fashion a lot of the attacks on the podcast started before it was released and before they had even listened to it with Alejandra Caraballo a prominent TA being one example.

However the podcast actually soft pedals how bad the medical situation is from all accounts, I have not listened to it much myself.

The reviews are in on X and for those informed on the situation it leaves out a lot. It doesn't mention a lot of the worst aspects of what is happening. It is more of a beginners guide and omits a lot of important stuff. For Mumsnetters it will be old news it seems.

Glenna Goldis

Missing from NYT's podcast THE PROTOCOL
❌Vaginal atrophy
❌Homophobia at GIDS
❌rentedocean detransition🦎 (NYT hypes her 2023 🏳️‍⚧️ status)
❌Incontinence
❌AAP investigated for fraud, pediatricians beg it to review evidence
JuliaMasonMD1

❌Biden official Rachel Levine pressuring WPATH
❌HHS Review
❌Definition of gender, sex, trans, girl, boy
❌T is anabolic steroids💉
❌Clitoris chafing against pants
❌Gender doctors consulted civil rights lawyers to draft medical guidelines
❌Why 54% of Dems oppose child gender med
❌Interview with a conservative
❌The "scathing" takedown of Cass Review was published by a law school 🤨
❌How medical associations choose their stances
❌Detrans activists
❌T ➡️ severe pelvic pain ➡️ hysterectomy
❌If feeling like a girl means liking makeup, and I don't like makeup, am I not a girl?
❌What happens to gender nonconforming kids who are not drugged🌈
❌Feminist critique of "gender" as stereotypes
❌Sexual dysfunction
❌The Fetish 👠
❌Puberty blockers' cognitive damage in animal studies 🐑
❌Lefty lobbying
❌Inability to cry, sing, scream from T 😶

There is a lot of the criticism on X of the series because of this. This is fair, however the fact is the podcast will start start the process of peaking for many. When they realise the FULL extent of the horror we can expect a stronger reaction. Many people do not peak suddenly, some do, many others it takes a long time and they need easy beginners guides which ease them in which are still "nice" to some degree.

This is why the TAs are losing it over the podcast. The mildest examination of the situation shows massive issues.

Thanks for linking to this podcast. I’m just near the end now and I think it’s been well done. It doesn’t go into the extremes of either side and allows the interviewees to talk. It starts very sympathetically with 2 puberty blocked transitioners (now about age 30) and is very much in the “Be Kind” territory. It’s all very sensible in the Netherlands and everything seems great - it’s not totally rosy for the first Guinea pigs imo altbough they are happy. One says they hadn’t really considered how it would be as an adult - sexual partners and being surrounded by women have having kids at age 30 but overall they seem happy with their choices. But the turning point is the 3rd episode where Dr Laura goes back to the US from 1 week of observation in Holland and converts the careful Dutch psychological year long protocol into a structured interview she can do in a day. Yes 1 day!! She’s an inexperienced clinician who works 4 hours a week and seemed to have been let loose…. Listening to her matter of fact but increasingly guilty sounding interview took my breath away. There’s no judgement or analysis. Her words are enough - total shit show! Then the shit just keeps coming and by the time we get to Cass she stands out as a beacon of nuance and calm. The pro trans people sound garbled and ideologically radical rather than doctors. And parents who are too invested to be able to quit… For people new to the subject this is pitched well so I’d say send out to be-kinders who are maybe slightly open to questioning and I think this could set off a lot of slow peaking….

I'm on the last episode. It's frightening how quickly and how totally it went off the rails when it went further than The Dutch cohort.

I agree with Knotty, the second Laura got her hands on it it turns into an absolute shit show!

I am still half way though the third episode. I was shocked when she confessed that she worked four hours a week and thought this was sufficient for the diagnosis and prescribing process!

I agree any thinking person who had heard the first two episodes would be concerned. But not as concerned as if they had had more depth about the negative side effects.

I agree with fromorbit in the soft pedalling bit. Obviously that comes from having the background knowledge that we do.

I also believe that they took a long time to record these episodes. That Jamie Reed said her own view has changed slightly on this since she did her interview. I think she said she did it two years ago.

It has been an interesting series so far though. I haven’t checked in on the reaction yet, I notice Jamie’s post earlier but not seen others.

I am looking forward to working through them though.

@Helleofabore what did Jamie Reed say?

Ive now listened to the final episode. It focussed on the political situation in the US where they had state bans being brought in particularly over the last 2-3 years - finished off with US wide presidential orders by trump. It’s clear that the situation there is politically hostile to trans people- almost full stop. It’s not about how the care is done but that it shouldn’t be permitted at all. A large chunk of the last episode is just hearing different young people and their families. Due to the timeline the majority are positive. Whereas in previous episodes they talked about concerns of “satisfying consumer demand” that wasnt repeated here. The final episode is left fairly neutral and on the words of people directly affected- mainly positively. I was left thinking that I’m glad we don’t live in the US where there doesn’t seem to be space for any nuance. The final episode will put the brakes on any “peaking” as its very “be kind”

I was left thinking that some children will need this care going forward but probably in much lower numbers and preferably supported by much better data. Trans people are going to be part of our society and probably the Cass approach is a reasonable and balanced one. The final episode will put the brakes on any “peaking” as its very “be kind” and it’s interesting how the testimonies began wiping out my “grasp” of the hard evidence presented in the previous episodes…

My big take away is that the Dutch protocol sounded reasonable but it went completely wrong at the point it left their clinic. It’s persuaded me that the Cass/UK approach is probably the best/nuanced/humane way forward if they run trials based on the long Dutch model rather than 1 appointment then on to blockers which is clearly horrendous malpractice

@KnottyAuty, I disagree. There are no children ever who need this treatment.

Do you know why the Dutch protocol for children was developed? It was developed because the researchers found that their adult trans patients were not showing improved mental health even after hormones and surgeries. So the researchers decided, on the basis of no evidence whatsoever, that this lack of improvement was because their adult patients “didn’t pass” as the opposite sex, because they had gone through puberty and so there was only so much that hormones and surgeries could do to change their appearance. And so they - again, on the basis of no research whatsoever - decided that the way to “fix” this problem was to give puberty blockers, hormones and surgeries to pre-pubescent children.

The research paper that reports that the Dutch protocol was a success has been thoroughly analysed and rubbished (among other things they flipped their questionnaires post treatment, they also discovered that boys who are given puberty blockers have penises that are too small to invert to create neovaginas and so have to have a neovagina created from their colon, one boy in the research group died as a result of that surgery), and has never been able to be replicated.

Furthermore, prior to the emergence of the Dutch protocol, the standard practice for children who presented with gender confusion was called “watchful waiting.” Under a watchful waiting protocol, studies show that 80-90% of children desist in thinking that they are the opposite sex around puberty, and of those 80-90%, 80% turn out to be gay.

Yes, there will possibly always be gender confused kids; most of them historically have been shown to be proto gay kids. Of the new cohort of kids who are discovering a trans identity in puberty (which is a cohort that was vanishingly small to nonexistent before the Dutch protocol) most of these appear to be the same group of kids who are susceptible to things like eating disorders and cutting, etc - ie body-based mental health issues. And this second group should absolutely be nowhere near anything that affirms their mental health issues as based in reality.

Ok that certainly doesn’t see the light of day in this podcast! I revise my previous opinion and will go off to education myself [shuffles off]. However my understanding as a newbie is probably a good indicator of how others will receive this show…

Also, this is from Jamie Reed a couple of days ago:

Jamie Reed Whistleblower

@JamieWhistle
Jun 6
I think that the @nytimes podcast The Protocol did an excellent job ensuring all further whistleblowers are put on notice. Imagine a plane crashes due to negligence from an airline and 86 people perish and a whistleblower steps forward to talk about the practices leading up to the crash. Now imagine that one of those 86 passengers actually had a heart attack right before the plane hits the ground and all that the @nytimes wishes to discuss is that the whistleblower might not have correctly reported about that heart attack. That's what I feel like today.

It’s ok @KnottyAuty 😊. I know way too much about this, and as a result have very, very strong feelings.

I’d be the same in your shoes. It’s a good reminder to check and check and check the facts. Nothing in this game ever seems to be properly explained