Big news: WPATH concedes in court its Standards of Care are merely "an opinion"

[Cantunseeit]

Very interesting thread from SEGM

https://xcancel.com/segm_ebm/status/2086998491876991070?s=20

"WPATH has conceded in court that its "Standards of Care" is merely an opinion. WPATH says it represents one side of an unsettled scientific debate marked by uncertainty — and physicains & orgs that rely on WPATH as the standard of care must bear "independent responsibility."/1"

Obviously WPATH is trying to avoid legal liability so hopefully this positioning won't fly for it in court. However, this admission it is a win for evidence based medicine either way.

Get the message out the "Standards of Care" are just an opinion and there are other (better) opinions out there.

I hope the Nitter link works - its my first time trying to make one so fingers crossed...

Thanks for the update, that is big news, is this part of the court case brought against it in the US.
Unfortunately it'll fall on deaf ears as far as the Alphabetties are concerned, they only hear what they want to hear. But it a step to stripping this counterfactual, lying ideology out of healthcare.

Link not working for me but it seems likely that this is because of the FTC / Alastair/ Iowa / Nebraska / Texas suit...m

Alternative link if the one above doesn’t work for you:

https://nitter.net/segm_ebm/status/2086998491876991070#m

WPATH, Stonewall, TRAs:
"If you don't believe what we say and do as we tell you, you are an evil right-wing bigot and will be treated as such."
"If you do believe what we tell you, and act on it, and end up in a bad place, you're on your own, mate. In court being sued? Detransitioning? Not our problem."
So kind.

The idea that there are two sides to the debate and WPATH is on one side and Cass is on the other is inaccurate. WPATH is insane, Cass isn’t far behind, the third side- the one I agree with - is no medicalisation whatsoever.

Thank you OP, positive news is aways welcome!

I've used the presence of the acronym 'WPATH' as a red flag - its presence in policy documents on 'transgender health care' for instance suggests that the document isn't very thoroughly-researched or reliable.

Nice to have that confirmed by WPATH themselves!

One significant point about this is that when Mengele enthusiasts are called upon in court to defend the "medical interventions" they've conducted on, particularly, children and young people, then if they try to pray in aid WPATH, that can immediately be shot down on the basis of what WPATH is itself now saying.

Didn't the Irish government say at one point at that they were going to base their policy on WPATH? It's scary how much influence WPATH has had.

I hate to burst your victory bubble, but a lot of medical/scientific recommendations/conclusions are 'opinion' based so I don't think this is the big 'win' you think it is.

You can hear the sound of Helen Webberley's career imploding from space.

Wasn't Susie Green on the board, or something, too

Are they? Can you give another example of serious medical treatment which is only based on opinion?

Ever heard of getting a doctors second opinion? Apparently not.

Medical advice is the provision of a formal professional opinion regarding what a specific individual should or should not do to restore or preserve health.[1] Typically, medical advice involves giving a diagnosis and/or prescribing a treatment for medical condition.[2] Medical advice is not the same as personal advice even if the advice concerns medical care.[3]citation needed]

Yes, individual medical professionals talk about second opinion and form an opinion and make recommendations about how to treat something or what to recommend.

As you like wikipedia as a source here is what the Standards of Care are. (Effectively the advice on which medical professionals internationally are to make their decisions - form their opinions.

The Standards of Care for the Health of Transgender and Gender Diverse People (SOC) is an international clinical protocol by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) outlining the recommended assessment and treatment for transgender and gender-diverse individuals across the lifespan including social, hormonal, or surgical transition.[1] It often influences clinicians' decisions regarding patients' treatment. While other standards, protocols, and guidelines exist – especially outside the United States – the WPATH SOC is the most widespread protocol used by professionals working with transgender or gender-variant people.[2][3][4]

Hmm, firstly no "victory bubble" I think the adjective I used for the thread was "interesting"

Secondly, WPATH has previously called its opinion "Standards of care" not, recommendations or conclusions. A Standard of Care is not usually interchangeable with an opinion. One definition:

"standard of care
Listen to pronunciation
(STAN-durd ... kayr)
Treatment that is accepted by medical experts as a proper treatment for a certain type of disease and that is widely used by health care professionals. Also called best practice, standard medical care, and standard therapy."

The good news for those of us who believe that the opinions WPATH has been peddling have been profoundly harmful for vulnerable people, and have different opinions about how those people can be helped, is that WPATH itself has downgraded its Standards of Care to an opinion and exercise of free speech.

This gives more space for discussion of alternative opinions, recommendations and conclusions in the wider medical field.

Many clinical experts have voiced the opinion that the WPATH SoC does not meet the threshold of a true standard of care (particularly due to the weakness of its evidence base) for years. It is good that WPATH itself now agrees.

Apart from anything else, who would bloody well cite WPATH now, given that their own confidence in their own advice looks pretty shit.

A standard of care is a legal obligation or benchmark with peer professional opinion used as the key evidence to define and test whether that standard has been met.

In other words SOC is based on professional opinion.

Quite. A legal obligation. Doctors taken to court for malpractice / negligence are judged in part against whether or not they followed the relevant Standards of Care. If they have they may well not be found guilty of whatever claim is being brought against them.

WPATH is explicitly saying its SoC 8 shouldn't be used in this way - because otherwise all the shit from malpractice / negligence / fraud (as I think this case is about) will be coming back on them.

Now their document is an "opinion". This means clinicians following SoC 8 can't rely on it as a get out of jail card (literally possibly).

It depends on what victory you think we're celebrating, I have a feeling you don't. Sad for you. A win for us.

Probably. The whole 'debate' which preceded the passing of the 2015 Gender Recognition Act in Ireland took the form of adopting wholesale the 'expertise' of TENI/Transgender Equality Network Ireland, who I'm sure relied on the WPATH protocol bigtime.

WPATH cropped up in a lot of places where trans healthcare was discussed - I think it has been quietly sidelined in recent years, somebody somewhere must have done a bit of due diligence and realised that WPATH was not the respected international standards body it acted like.

It would be interesting to track the rise and fall of the use of WPATH as the go-to source for trans health policy, in Ireland and elsewhere.

@MarieDeGournaythis isn’t quite what you want but you may find it interesting nevertheless

https://genspect.org/resources/depathologization-campaign-timeline/

How very Stonewall of them 🙄

It is very useful and interesting, thank you.

BTW - I just did a quick wordsearch for 'WPATH' on the GRA debates in the Irish legislature in 2015 and it looks like WPATH was not specifically mentioned.

I think it's more likely than not that the WPATH 'standards of care' [their phrase] were central to the committee discussions that led up to the Act but I can't say for sure.

One thing is for sure, gender women have got long memories, and all the receipts.

Yes. Part of the team that wrote the Standards of Care V8

https://www.outspokenspeakers.com/Speakers/Details/Susie_Green_

Wasn't that bloody awful Steven Whittle a member as well, she went to NZ and as an WPATH 'expert' in the case LAVA 's bring didn't she.