Continuation Transwomen are not women - part XI

[Elaedith]

Originally Posted by Robin

If it were me I would want to know the details.

What steps did Bristow take to address this very serious matter?

Who did he inform and what was their response?

If the response was unsatisfactory, to whom did he escalate the matter?

Where did he document it?

These are all steps which a medical professional would take when notified of malpractice.

All of these issues have already been discussed, including evidence from David Bell. The Bell report is mentioned in Barnes' book and Bell has discussed how he was treated when he questioned the affirmative policy. We previously covered the way whistleblowers were treated. Sonia Appleby won damages for vilification after raising concerns over the way children were being treated.

[Nick Terry]

It might help to look up some of the basics on Wikipedia; no guarantee it's complete, perfect or bias-free, but the basics generally can't be entirely shirked
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NHS_Ge...ce#Controversy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_t...e_for_Children

[d4m10n]

Originally Posted by Elaedith

The Bell report is mentioned in Barnes' book and Bell has discussed how he was treated when he questioned the affirmative policy.

Has that internal report ever leaked to the public?



Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Elaedith]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

Has that internal report ever leaked to the public?



Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

It was leaked to the press as described in this article.

I'm not aware of the full report being publicly available. There are varous discussions of the report contents from journalists who saw it, and David Bell has given various interviews about the issues.

[d4m10n]

Thanks for the info

[Robin]

I would assume the Cass Interim report and Barnes' book will covet all that is in .the Bell Report in any case.

[Robin]

Originally Posted by Elaedith

It was leaked to the press as described in this article.

I'm not aware of the full report being publicly available. There are varous discussions of the report contents from journalists who saw it, and David Bell has given various interviews about the issues.

It's not necessarily going to give an indication of what he said at the time that isn't coloured by things that have happened since.

[Robin]

As an example of what I am talking about, Barnes details when and to whom Dr Hutchinson notifies her concerns and the noted she took of this at the time.

So if this government department had rampant homophobia I would expect to see this similarly notified, documented and escalated as per the established procedures.

If there were any evidence of anyone knowingly doing any malpractice or there was evidence of parents pressuring for transition then I would expect those who observed this to have notified, documented and if necessary escalated.

Barnes is careful to detail this in the case of Dr Hutchinson but not as I recall, do this in the cases of the allegations of pushing gay children towards transition alleged by Bristow and Spiliadis. I am rereading to confirm.

As I said, surveys show that there is much more social acceptance for lesbians, gay men and bisexuals than there is for trans people so if these parents came from areas of high homophobia then almost certainly they would come from areas of even higher transphobia, hence the unlikelihood that a parent who didn't want a gay child would want a trans child.

[LondonJohn]

Originally Posted by Robin

As an example of what I am talking about, Barnes details when and to whom Dr Hutchinson notifies her concerns and the noted she took of this at the time.

So if this government department had rampant homophobia I would expect to see this similarly notified, documented and escalated as per the established procedures.

If there were any evidence of anyone knowingly doing any malpractice or there was evidence of parents pressuring for transition then I would expect those who observed this to have notified, documented and if necessary escalated.

Barnes is careful to detail this in the case of Dr Hutchinson but not as I recall, do this in the cases of the allegations of pushing gay children towards transition alleged by Bristow and Spiliadis. I am rereading to confirm.

As I said, surveys show that there is much more social acceptance for lesbians, gay men and bisexuals than there is for trans people so if these parents came from areas of high homophobia then almost certainly they would come from areas of even higher transphobia, hence the unlikelihood that a parent who didn't want a gay child would want a trans child.

Indeed.

On a more general note: I'm much more inclined to examine the (extremely-difficult-to-get-right*) issue of the Tavistock (and best practice approaches for minors presenting with transgender identity) by examining the actual official report, which had access to everyone and everything (good and bad).... rather than a book written by a journalist with an editorial slant and a propensity for listening to self-selecting interviewees with axes to grind.


* And it's important not to lose sight** of the fact that in many - maybe even most - instances of interventional treatment given to minors presenting with gender dysphoria, those treatments have led to positive therapeutic benefits and long-term successful outcomes. The incontrovertible fact that there's still a paucity of evidence from which to measure & compare outcomes, and thereby to tailor treatments to produce optimal outcome success.... a) doesn't in any way mean or imply that, in overall terms, the treatments given to minors over the past several years has been clinically improper, and b) means that clinicians will have no option but to use their clinical judgement (along with overall guidelines) to make decisions on treatments, up until sufficient evidence comes forth over time to add an evidence base to those clinical decisions.

** Though it's interesting to note how the recent "revelation" about the current (obvious) lack of a statistically-significant evidence base in this area has prompted certain commentators to claim that this factor, in and of itself, both 1) invalidates the treatments currently being offered in places such as the Tavistock, and 2) in some way imputes incompetent (and perhaps even malevolent) motives to the clinicians who've been making extremely difficult decisions with the aim of helping the patients under their care.

[lionking]

Originally Posted by LondonJohn

Indeed.

On a more general note: I'm much more inclined to examine the (extremely-difficult-to-get-right*) issue of the Tavistock (and best practice approaches for minors presenting with transgender identity) by examining the actual official report, which had access to everyone and everything (good and bad).... rather than a book written by a journalist with an editorial slant and a propensity for listening to self-selecting interviewees with axes to grind.


* And it's important not to lose sight** of the fact that in many - maybe even most - instances of interventional treatment given to minors presenting with gender dysphoria, those treatments have led to positive therapeutic benefits and long-term successful outcomes. The incontrovertible fact that there's still a paucity of evidence from which to measure & compare outcomes, and thereby to tailor treatments to produce optimal outcome success.... a) doesn't in any way mean or imply that, in overall terms, the treatments given to minors over the past several years has been clinically improper, and b) means that clinicians will have no option but to use their clinical judgement (along with overall guidelines) to make decisions on treatments, up until sufficient evidence comes forth over time to add an evidence base to those clinical decisions.

** Though it's interesting to note how the recent "revelation" about the current (obvious) lack of a statistically-significant evidence base in this area has prompted certain commentators to claim that this factor, in and of itself, both 1) invalidates the treatments currently being offered in places such as the Tavistock, and 2) in some way imputes incompetent (and perhaps even malevolent) motives to the clinicians who've been making extremely difficult decisions with the aim of helping the patients under their care.

Right.

So WHY WAS GIDS CLOSED?

There must be some grand conspiracy involved methinks….

[Matthew Best]

I've only got through the first four episodes so far, but I'm finding The Witch Trials of J K Rowling to be a fairly even-handed look at the whole trans debate/TERF wars. Maybe I'm just too blind to see how biased it is, but that's how it looks to me.

[Robin]

Originally Posted by lionking

Right.

So WHY WAS GIDS CLOSED?
….

The reasons are set out in the Cass Interim Report

[lionking]

Originally Posted by Robin

The reasons are set out in the Cass Interim Report

I was asking London John. He is under the impression they did nothing wrong.

[Robin]

The Tavistock centre will be closed with the roll out of a new service model which will address the issues identified the first stage of the Cass enquiry, ie

* The service is overstretched

* There is no way for any other mental health problems the patient's have to be treated once they start with GIDS.

This matches some of the issues Barnes outlines.

It has also recommended a rigorous data keeping protocol for the new centres.

The interim report doesn't mention it but the new model could help with the centralised power issues Barnes identifies.

For all the other things, we will have to wait for the completion of the enquiry.

[Robin]

I would imagine, in keeping with precedents, Cass will deal with.any actual wrong doing in the final report.

[Robin]

Originally Posted by LondonJohn

** Though it's interesting to note how the recent "revelation" about the current (obvious) lack of a statistically-significant evidence base in this area has prompted certain commentators to claim that this factor, in and of itself, both 1) invalidates the treatments currently being offered in places such as the Tavistock, and 2) in some way imputes incompetent (and perhaps even malevolent) motives to the clinicians who've been making extremely difficult decisions with the aim of helping the patients under their care.

There may be cases where incompetence has occurred, I'm waiting for more information.

The Cass Interim report and Barnes' book emphasise the skill hard work and commitment to the well being of the patients exhibited by most of the staff.

Of course bad practice happens throughout medicine unfortunately. Our youngest suffered deafness for six months because our pediatrician wouldn't refer him to an ENT as we wished.and an audiology clinic tested normal hearing when he could not have had more than 5% of the sound penetrating.

The brother of a friend of mine at school nearly was disabled for life when his knee pain was diagnosed as psychosomatic.

There is a distinction between the problems at Tavistock, cause by organisational dysfunction and the general running down of the NHS and the status of treatment for.gender dysphoria generally.

That is, of course, the intended bait and switch intended by bringing up Tavistock in a discussion about the status of treatment for GD.

By the way, the Barnes book is actually quite good. From the comments I think that a few of those accusing me of not reading it have probably not read the whole thing themselves but just referred to parts reproduced in blogs here and there.

[d4m10n]

Originally Posted by Robin

There is a distinction between the problems at Tavistock, cause by organisational dysfunction and the general running down of the NHS and the status of treatment for.gender dysphoria generally.

That is, of course, the intended bait and switch intended by bringing up Tavistock in a discussion about the status of treatment for GD.

In all the years this thread has been going, we've turned our attention to the NHS GIDS only when there was a new source of information about how they were practicing medicine.

If you'd rather talk about how (youth) gender medicine is done in, say, Canada, we're going to need different source materials, which may not yet exist.

[Elaedith]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36156703/

Jesse Singal just unlocked a good critique of this study.

Maybe It’s A Bad Idea To Give A Bunch Of Kids Double Mastectomies Without Checking Whether It Helps Them

Among other things, the study didn't use any validated measures of mental health and used a non-validated scale of chest dysphoria which essentially just measures whether patients are unhappy about having breasts before surgery and less unhappy about having breasts once they no longer have them.

[Aber]

Originally Posted by LondonJohn

** Though it's interesting to note how the recent "revelation" about the current (obvious) lack of a statistically-significant evidence base in this area has prompted certain commentators to claim that this factor, in and of itself, both 1) invalidates the treatments currently being offered in places such as the Tavistock, and 2) in some way imputes incompetent (and perhaps even malevolent) motives to the clinicians who've been making extremely difficult decisions with the aim of helping the patients under their care.

A key part of the Tavistock debacle was that they were NOT keeping sufficient evidence of those decisions and outcomes, as you well know.

[Elaedith]

Originally Posted by LondonJohn

* And it's important not to lose sight** of the fact that in many - maybe even most - instances of interventional treatment given to minors presenting with gender dysphoria, those treatments have led to positive therapeutic benefits and long-term successful outcomes.

No, there is no evidence of this. The methodologies used do not allow causal inference, not to mention lack of systematic long-term follow-up.

Quote:

The incontrovertible fact that there's still a paucity of evidence from which to measure & compare outcomes, and thereby to tailor treatments to produce optimal outcome success.... a) doesn't in any way mean or imply that, in overall terms, the treatments given to minors over the past several years has been clinically improper, and

Actually it does mean this. Giving irreversible invasive medical treatment with serious side effects and unknown risks, without sufficient evidence of benefits that exceed those of less risky treatments, is clinically improper.

Quote:

b) means that clinicians will have no option but to use their clinical judgement (along with overall guidelines) to make decisions on treatments, up until sufficient evidence comes forth over time to add an evidence base to those clinical decisions.

There is no evidence base 'coming forth over time' until there is properly-conducted systematic long-term research.

Quote:

** Though it's interesting to note how the recent "revelation" about the current (obvious) lack of a statistically-significant evidence base

The problem is not lack of a 'statistically-significant' evidence base, it is lack of properly-conducted research. Statistical significance does not establish validity.

Quote:

in this area has prompted certain commentators to claim that this factor, in and of itself, both 1) invalidates the treatments currently being offered in places such as the Tavistock, and 2) in some way imputes incompetent (and perhaps even malevolent) motives to the clinicians who've been making extremely difficult decisions with the aim of helping the patients under their care.

When clinicians and researchers repeatedly lie about evidence and try to silence critics, one makes inferences accordingly.

[Robin]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

In all the years this thread has been going, we've turned our attention to the NHS GIDS only when there was a new source of information about how they were practicing medicine.

If you'd rather talk about how (youth) gender medicine is done in, say, Canada, we're going to need different source materials, which may not yet exist.

I started talking about the problems posed by autism in the diagnosis of GD. I was not speaking in the context of Tavistock. I had not mentioned or alluded to Tavistock at this point.

Someone else brought up Tavistock and demanded I discuss it, without telling me how it related my point.

So, no, Tavistock was not brought up in this instance because of new information available but to derail my argument.

[Aber]

Originally Posted by Robin

Someone else brought up Tavistock and demanded I discuss it, without telling me how it related my point.

your post #522

Quote:

Also, I'm not sure how the autism spectrum diagnosis would be relevant in any case.

Reply immediately below

Quote:

Tavistock clinic date in the UK showed a high proportion of same sex attraction, and autism diagnosis in the ROGD cohort.

You hadn't even got an argument at that point, let alone one to derail.

[angrysoba]

Holy ****...

Quote:

The premier of Australia's Victoria state condemned on Sunday Nazi salutes at a protest in the state capital Melbourne as an attempt "to scapegoat minorities" using "evil ideology".

Transgender rights protesters clashed with neo-Nazis in Melbourne on Saturday after a British anti-transgender activist sought to address supporters at the city's parliament building, the Sydney Morning Herald reported.

Link

Pictures and video show black-clad Nazi-saluting demonstrators with Australian flag and a sign saying, "Destroy Paedo Freaks".

Video of them

Seems the neo-Nazis could march around Parliament making their Nazi salutes while the police protected them.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Seems the neo-Nazis could march around Parliament making their Nazi salutes while the police protected them.

Well, yes. That's how free speech works: horrible people have a right to speak as well. If they don't, then you don't have free speech.

This is why many people don't believe in free speech. It's sadly common in democracies, where we aren't faced with the consequences of its absence and so don't realize the cost to abolishing it.

[Dismember]

Re: the link/correlation between autism and gender dysphoria, Dr. Susan Bradley, retired psychiatrist (in her 80s now) and founder of Toronto's first pediatric gender clinic, had some interesting commentary. I don't necessarily agree with all of it. But it should, imo, give reasonable people pause when considering whether or not it's a good idea to allow/encourage dysphoric young children and adolescents to transition, especially without careful, thoughtful exploration of comorbidities via competent, 'neutral' (i.e. not automatically "gender affirming") therapy:

Originally Posted by article

Bradley chaired the Subcommittee on Gender Dysphoria for the fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the official manual of the American Psychiatric Association, which is used for classifying and diagnosing mental disorders. She led eight other doctors in determining diagnostic guidelines for gender identity disorders.
She also produced research, along with other clinic doctors, showing that 87.8% of boys referred to their clinic for gender identity issues eventually “desisted,” meaning they stopped believing they were actually girls and came to terms with their sex.

Bradley came to believe that most child patients who identified as transgender were actually on the autism spectrum or suffering from borderline personality disorder, which she believes should be classified as part of the autism spectrum. Autistic adolescents are particularly prone to obsessive thinking and body image issues, and they struggle to change their minds once convinced something is true, all of which make them more vulnerable to being convinced they are actually the opposite sex and should seek medical interventions such as puberty blockers or hormones.

“You have to put yourself in the place of a 12 year old or a 13 year old, who is thinking, ‘This is my way to get normal,'” Bradley said. “These kids are not faring well with the current affirmative approach. I don’t know that any kids actually could, given the capacity of a 10 or 12, or even 14 or 15 year old to understand the complexity of the decision that they’re making on their long term sexual and life function. It just doesn’t make sense.”

The GIC was shut down following Bradley’s 2007 retirement amid intense pressure from transgender activists who believed that the clinic, which did not automatically affirm children’s gender identity or transgender status, was transphobic.

Full article: We Were Wrong: Pioneer In Child Gender Dysphoria Treatment Says Trans Medical Industry Is Harming Kids

Archived: https://archive.ph/I8TP0

ETA: Apologies if this has been posted already. I’m just now seeing that I missed some earlier posts with articles linked in them.

[LondonJohn]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Holy ****...



Link

Pictures and video show black-clad Nazi-saluting demonstrators with Australian flag and a sign saying, "Destroy Paedo Freaks".

Video of them

Seems the neo-Nazis could march around Parliament making their Nazi salutes while the police protected them.

Yes. Here's another report on the debacle from Australia's leading news site:

https://www.news.com.au/national/vic...2805f78c77a49b

That report is explicitly clear about a) what the original protest was actually about (hint: it was about a lot more than "Let Women Speak", as their de facto "leader" has long since amply demonstrated), and b) why the neo-Nazis were there and with whom they were platforming (hint: they weren't there to support pro-transgender-rights protesters, and they weren't there simply of their own accord).

I see various transphobe commentators trying to claim that Keen-Minshul (who I understand is already under investigation by a UK police force regarding hate speech) was simply operating under the seemingly-anodyne pretext of "inviting local women to speak about women's rights".... whereas of course every normal person - including virtually all the Australian mainstream media, and the Victoria government - knows that "Let Women Speak" is clearly nothing more than a paid-up subsidiary of the blanket anti-transgender-identity movement.

And, of course, the thing that neo-Nazi groups share in common with anti-transgender-identity groups is......... well that ought to be rather obvious. And that's precisely why the neo-Nazis came to be platformed with the anti-transgender demonstrators in Melbourne this weekend.

It's hardly as if Keen-Minshull doesn't have form in this area. On her "tour" of the US, she platformed the likes of Proud Boys, extremist Christian groups, and far-right agitators. Literally platformed. assistance and all. Selfies and all.

What's that old saying? Something like "If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....."?

[LondonJohn]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Well, yes. That's how free speech works: horrible people have a right to speak as well. If they don't, then you don't have free speech.

This is why many people don't believe in free speech. It's sadly common in democracies, where we aren't faced with the consequences of its absence and so don't realize the cost to abolishing it.

Every democracy has limitations on free speech*. Which is exactly as it should be. Anyone who believes that "free speech" literally means the freedom for anyone to say anything they like (or that it should mean that) doesn't understand the concept properly.


* As certain anti-transgender-identity rabble-rousers might be about to find out to their cost....

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Well, yes. That's how free speech works: horrible people have a right to speak as well. If they don't, then you don't have free speech.

This is why many people don't believe in free speech. It's sadly common in democracies, where we aren't faced with the consequences of its absence and so don't realize the cost to abolishing it.

Actually, that's fine. I wasn't sure what the law was, as I think in some parts of Australia some Nazi iconography is illegal.

Do I think it should be? No.

Did I think it was? Yes.

[d4m10n]

Originally Posted by LondonJohn

As certain anti-transgender-identity rabble-rousers might be about to find out to their cost...

What varieties of anti-trans speech are you hoping to criminalize?

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

What varieties of anti-trans speech are you hoping to criminalize?

Perhaps the statement that women are adult human females. That seems to be quite triggering in certain circles.

[Robin]

I imagine that trans rights activists are, in fact quite pleased to see footage of anti-trans activists openly seig heiling in front of one of our parliamentary buildings.

[Samson]

Originally Posted by Robin

I imagine that trans rights activists are, in fact quite pleased to see footage of anti-trans activists openly seig heiling in front of one of our parliamentary buildings.

Yes, my enemy's enemy is my friend.
She is coming to NZ and battle lines are being drawn


https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/immigr...MWIJ4RUUELZJ4/

[LondonJohn]

Originally Posted by Robin

I imagine that trans rights activists are, in fact quite pleased to see footage of anti-trans activists openly seig heiling in front of one of our parliamentary buildings.

Absolutely.

Here's an interesting exchange: one of the anti-transgender-rights crowd complained to ABC (the Australian national network broadcaster) about their use of the term "anti-transgender" to describe Keen-Minshul's bigoted little gathering. The complainant got ABC to change its editorial policy on nomenclature..... but not in the way he'd have wanted:

[LondonJohn]

This "tour" is turning into something of a (well-deserved) disaster for Keen-Minshul. Maybe she'll find a little time for much-needed self-reflection when she returns to the UK, and before her next interview with the police. And she might also want to rethink her idea of modelling her appearance on that of 1950s murderer Ruth Ellis (who was the last woman to be hanged in the UK). Just a thought, Kellie-Jay

[LondonJohn]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

What varieties of anti-trans speech are you hoping to criminalize?

I don't have to "hope" anything. You might want to brush up on England & Wales criminal law.

[d4m10n]

Originally Posted by LondonJohn

You might want to brush up on England & Wales criminal law.

You want us to guess what you have in mind here?

[d4m10n]

Originally Posted by Dismember

Archived: https://archive.ph/I8TP0

The line about how the "GIC was shut down following Bradley’s 2007 retirement amid intense pressure from transgender activists who believed that the clinic...was transphobic" underscores something we were talking about upthread. If a clinic leans towards gender affirmation in complex cases, some clinicians will see that as homophobic, because many youth who would have desisted and grown up to be same-sex attracted and cisgender are instead put on the GnRHa → CSH → SRS pathway. On the other hand, if a clinic does not lean hard enough towards gender affirmation, they will be called transphobic by activists and other clinicians as well. Places like GIC & GIDS are forced to walk a tightrope between LGB on the one hand and T on the other, and there is no way to make everyone happy since there is no way to know probable outcomes in advance.

[Brainster]

It's getting to the point where it's cliched and trite, but USA Today's woman of the year for Minnesota is trans.

Quote:

Growing up in the western suburbs of Minneapolis, Finke was always interested in politics but never planned to be a political candidate herself. In November after her first bid for public office, Finke became the first transgender legislator appointed to the Minnesota House of Representatives after winning 81% of the vote in her district.

Finke has been an activist for transgender and LGBTQ+ rights, as well as Black Lives Matter, almost her whole life.

I do love that they had to throw in Black Lives Matter there, even though a person in late middle age having been an activist for BLM almost her whole life seems unlikely as BLM has only been around for about 10 years. The photos of her in the legislative chambers are cringe-worthy.

[LondonJohn]

Originally Posted by Robin

As an example of what I am talking about, Barnes details when and to whom Dr Hutchinson notifies her concerns and the noted she took of this at the time.

So if this government department had rampant homophobia I would expect to see this similarly notified, documented and escalated as per the established procedures.

If there were any evidence of anyone knowingly doing any malpractice or there was evidence of parents pressuring for transition then I would expect those who observed this to have notified, documented and if necessary escalated.

Barnes is careful to detail this in the case of Dr Hutchinson but not as I recall, do this in the cases of the allegations of pushing gay children towards transition alleged by Bristow and Spiliadis. I am rereading to confirm.

As I said, surveys show that there is much more social acceptance for lesbians, gay men and bisexuals than there is for trans people so if these parents came from areas of high homophobia then almost certainly they would come from areas of even higher transphobia, hence the unlikelihood that a parent who didn't want a gay child would want a trans child.

Yes.

And in broad terms, I'll take, any day of the week, an official investigation & report - where there has been full unfettered access to everything that has been going on at the Tavistock, with full access to clinical records and to clinicians themselves, and full access to patients and parents across the whole spectrum.......

....over an agenda-driven book, with largely self-selecting interviewees and case studies, with hardly any access to clinical records.


And it perhaps ought to give normal people pause for thought that Barnes' book found it immensely hard to find a publisher - and to focus for a moment on why that should be the case*. I don't think, by contrast, that investigative-journalism books such All The President's Men or The Dark Side of Camelot had any problems at all in finding a major publishing house. Just sayin'


* And no, it's not because of the ludicrous, CT-worthy, and totally-unsupported-by-any-credible-evidence "reason" of "ideological capture"...

[LondonJohn]

Originally Posted by lionking

Right.

So WHY WAS GIDS CLOSED?

There must be some grand conspiracy involved methinks….

I'll give you two hints:

1) The actual reasons why it's closing have been explicitly set out, and they aren't at all difficult to find for anyone who's genuinely and sincerely interested in truth over hysteria.

2) It didn't close for the reason that you and many anti-transgender-identity commentators think that it closed.

Hope that helps.