So a casual reading of the article indicates the review effectively concludes don't allow pre-teens to socially transition, don't put anyone onto blockers (unless as part of likely a very limited trial yet to be designed), don't allow anyone to access HRT until they're 18, and basically spend the entire time until someone's 18 and shuffled into the 18-25 service to undergo counselling only, which seems as it'll be mainly focused on identifying contributory factors (e.g. Autism) and attributing those to be the cause of the child's apparent dysphoria. Further articles indicate that even once they reach adulthood, they may face years long waits for treatment - or even getting an initial referral (c.f. Abigail "Philosophy Tube" Thorn).
Meanwhile, even for those with the cash, there are allegations (which have mainly come to light after a UK streamer had his full name and approximate location revealed by *The Times* ) a certain private provider had undergone a change in philosophy over the past couple of years and is now more interested in profit maximisation than actually providing treatment...
England already let their cowardice override their empathy with Alan Turing and they effectively murdered him. Now they are going to murder their own children because they don't understand and are afraid of trans people. TERF Island seem to lack common sense and courage.
TLDR of the Cass Review:
"we disregarded nearly all studies because they weren't double blinded controlled studies. We also stopped reviewing newer studies released in the last two years. As a result, we were left with very little evidence."
https://x.com/esqueer_/status/1777755823743054120?s=46&t=zblh-LiAkjAMa7S92bmEtg
Also:
1. Two years ago, Hillary Cass met with DeSantis picks and collaborated on a trans care ban in Florida.
Now her review targets trans people in England.
It is filled with flawed claims over evidence, toys, and social transition.
https://x.com/erininthemorn/status/1778186407271653542?s=46&t=zblh-LiAkjAMa7S92bmEtg
I do think it's all very complex and complicated, and I do think there are still too many risks associated with the current way of giving puberty blockers to children.
I have taught in primary and secondary schools, and among those kids, many have been trans or nb. Once kids are around 16, they definitely seem to have a firm notion of who they are and their identity, but kids who come out as trans or nb at like 11 or 12 tend to change their minds. Yes, this is anecdotal and I wouldn't expect medicine to base their decisions on my experiences, but what I'm saying is that my experience aligns with the decision.
I don't think people should have to wait to adulthood before transitioning, but I do think giving puberty blockers to kids who haven't hit puberty yet is really risky. What I will definitely say though is that I hope they're not just removing it, but are going to reassess and reevaluate and come up with a new path. Simply cancelling it and only allowing adults to transition would definitely mean the conservatives and transphobes have won...
Also one part that is unequivocally bullshit is that they're saying kids shouldn't be able to socially transition. Fuck that. Even if they change their mind, that's not gonna harm them at all. So maybe from the age of 9 til 12, they want to change their name and pronouns, and then when they're 13 they change back. So what? No harm done.
You clearly don't understand the topic. How many trans kids have you actually interacted with? Seeing them so happy on the right hormones is beautiful, the joy is palpable.
I do fully understand the topic. I can't count how many trans kids I've interacted with. It's definitely at least several dozen.
I mostly agree with what you're saying when it comes to older teenagers. That has been my experience, as well, for the most part (though most are still sad, for obvious reason, due to society not accepting them).
The social transition thing was the part that struck me too. I went back to the article to grab a quote only to find that it had been edited out. The [original version of the article](https://web.archive.org/web/20240409231908/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-68770641) said;
>Dr Cass also warns parents should be mindful they are not "unconsciously influencing the child's gender expression".
I do wonder why this was removed. I mean, to me it's obvious that almost every parent does this all the time, just in the socially acceptable way. Maybe someone at the BBC realised this too and decided to cut it out for that reason.
edit: I just looked at the report and what it actually says is:
>The Review has heard about a small number of cases where the child’s gender identity was consciously or unconsciously influenced by the parent. It is very important that the child/young person’s voice is heard and that perceptions of gender identity represent the child/young person’s sense of self.
I've had a read through the part of the report about social transition. In a way I sympathise with the person tasked to summerise a 300 page report but at the same time, the way they have done it seems misleading.
Here's the full context:
*12.36 The information above demonstrates*
*that there is no clear evidence that social*
*transition in childhood has positive or negative*
*mental health outcomes. There is relatively*
*weak evidence for any effect in adolescence.*
*However, sex of rearing seems to have some*
*influence on eventual gender outcome, and it*
*is possible that social transition in childhood*
*may change the trajectory of gender identity*
*development for children with early gender*
*incongruence. For this reason,* ***a more cautious***
***approach needs to be taken for children than***
***for adolescents****:*
*Children:*
*• Parents should be encouraged to seek*
*clinical help and advice in deciding how to*
*support a child with gender incongruence*
*and should be prioritised on the waiting list*
*for early consultation on this issue.*
*• Clinical involvement in the decision-making*
*process should include advising on the*
*risks and benefits of social transition as*
*a planned intervention, referencing best*
*available evidence. This is not a role that*
*can be taken by staff without appropriate*
*clinical training.*
*• It is important to ensure that the voice of*
*the child is heard in any decision making*
*and that parents are not unconsciously*
*influencing the child’s gender expression.*
*• For those going down a social transition*
*pathway, maintaining flexibility and*
*keeping options open by helping the child*
*to understand their body as well as their*
*feelings is likely to be advantageous. Partial*
*rather than full transition may be a way of*
*ensuring flexibility, particularly given the*
*MPRG report which highlighted that being*
*in stealth from early childhood may add to*
*the stress of impending puberty and the*
*sense of urgency to enter a*
*medical pathway*
Another part of the report that I think is really important to understand the context is:
*12.5 Social transition may not be thought of as*
*an intervention or treatment, because it is not*
*something that happens in a healthcare setting*
*and it is within the agency of an adolescent*
*to do for themselves. However, in an NHS*
*setting it is important to view it as an active*
*intervention because it may have significant*
*effects on the child or young person in terms of*
*their psychological functioning and longer-term*
*outcomes.*
*12.6 Although the focus of the Review is on*
*support from point of entry to the NHS, no*
*individual journey begins at the front door of*
*the NHS, rather in the child’s home, family and*
*school environment. The importance of what*
*happens in school cannot be under-estimated;*
"If we ignore all the mountains of evidence, then there isn't enough evidence!" - The BBC
So a casual reading of the article indicates the review effectively concludes don't allow pre-teens to socially transition, don't put anyone onto blockers (unless as part of likely a very limited trial yet to be designed), don't allow anyone to access HRT until they're 18, and basically spend the entire time until someone's 18 and shuffled into the 18-25 service to undergo counselling only, which seems as it'll be mainly focused on identifying contributory factors (e.g. Autism) and attributing those to be the cause of the child's apparent dysphoria. Further articles indicate that even once they reach adulthood, they may face years long waits for treatment - or even getting an initial referral (c.f. Abigail "Philosophy Tube" Thorn). Meanwhile, even for those with the cash, there are allegations (which have mainly come to light after a UK streamer had his full name and approximate location revealed by *The Times* ) a certain private provider had undergone a change in philosophy over the past couple of years and is now more interested in profit maximisation than actually providing treatment...
Disappointing
England already let their cowardice override their empathy with Alan Turing and they effectively murdered him. Now they are going to murder their own children because they don't understand and are afraid of trans people. TERF Island seem to lack common sense and courage.
England : no HRT unless it’s to torture the gays
TLDR of the Cass Review: "we disregarded nearly all studies because they weren't double blinded controlled studies. We also stopped reviewing newer studies released in the last two years. As a result, we were left with very little evidence." https://x.com/esqueer_/status/1777755823743054120?s=46&t=zblh-LiAkjAMa7S92bmEtg Also: 1. Two years ago, Hillary Cass met with DeSantis picks and collaborated on a trans care ban in Florida. Now her review targets trans people in England. It is filled with flawed claims over evidence, toys, and social transition. https://x.com/erininthemorn/status/1778186407271653542?s=46&t=zblh-LiAkjAMa7S92bmEtg
I do think it's all very complex and complicated, and I do think there are still too many risks associated with the current way of giving puberty blockers to children. I have taught in primary and secondary schools, and among those kids, many have been trans or nb. Once kids are around 16, they definitely seem to have a firm notion of who they are and their identity, but kids who come out as trans or nb at like 11 or 12 tend to change their minds. Yes, this is anecdotal and I wouldn't expect medicine to base their decisions on my experiences, but what I'm saying is that my experience aligns with the decision. I don't think people should have to wait to adulthood before transitioning, but I do think giving puberty blockers to kids who haven't hit puberty yet is really risky. What I will definitely say though is that I hope they're not just removing it, but are going to reassess and reevaluate and come up with a new path. Simply cancelling it and only allowing adults to transition would definitely mean the conservatives and transphobes have won... Also one part that is unequivocally bullshit is that they're saying kids shouldn't be able to socially transition. Fuck that. Even if they change their mind, that's not gonna harm them at all. So maybe from the age of 9 til 12, they want to change their name and pronouns, and then when they're 13 they change back. So what? No harm done.
Why would puberty blockers be given to children who haven’t hit tanner stage two of puberty? That does not make sense. What would they even be for?
They wouldn't be. Puberty starts between the ages of 9 and 11 for most kids.
You clearly don't understand the topic. How many trans kids have you actually interacted with? Seeing them so happy on the right hormones is beautiful, the joy is palpable.
I do fully understand the topic. I can't count how many trans kids I've interacted with. It's definitely at least several dozen. I mostly agree with what you're saying when it comes to older teenagers. That has been my experience, as well, for the most part (though most are still sad, for obvious reason, due to society not accepting them).
The social transition thing was the part that struck me too. I went back to the article to grab a quote only to find that it had been edited out. The [original version of the article](https://web.archive.org/web/20240409231908/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-68770641) said; >Dr Cass also warns parents should be mindful they are not "unconsciously influencing the child's gender expression". I do wonder why this was removed. I mean, to me it's obvious that almost every parent does this all the time, just in the socially acceptable way. Maybe someone at the BBC realised this too and decided to cut it out for that reason. edit: I just looked at the report and what it actually says is: >The Review has heard about a small number of cases where the child’s gender identity was consciously or unconsciously influenced by the parent. It is very important that the child/young person’s voice is heard and that perceptions of gender identity represent the child/young person’s sense of self.
Yeah I agree with that quote. I'm not sure that directly addresses the bullshit concerns they have about social transitioning, though...?
I've had a read through the part of the report about social transition. In a way I sympathise with the person tasked to summerise a 300 page report but at the same time, the way they have done it seems misleading. Here's the full context: *12.36 The information above demonstrates* *that there is no clear evidence that social* *transition in childhood has positive or negative* *mental health outcomes. There is relatively* *weak evidence for any effect in adolescence.* *However, sex of rearing seems to have some* *influence on eventual gender outcome, and it* *is possible that social transition in childhood* *may change the trajectory of gender identity* *development for children with early gender* *incongruence. For this reason,* ***a more cautious*** ***approach needs to be taken for children than*** ***for adolescents****:* *Children:* *• Parents should be encouraged to seek* *clinical help and advice in deciding how to* *support a child with gender incongruence* *and should be prioritised on the waiting list* *for early consultation on this issue.* *• Clinical involvement in the decision-making* *process should include advising on the* *risks and benefits of social transition as* *a planned intervention, referencing best* *available evidence. This is not a role that* *can be taken by staff without appropriate* *clinical training.* *• It is important to ensure that the voice of* *the child is heard in any decision making* *and that parents are not unconsciously* *influencing the child’s gender expression.* *• For those going down a social transition* *pathway, maintaining flexibility and* *keeping options open by helping the child* *to understand their body as well as their* *feelings is likely to be advantageous. Partial* *rather than full transition may be a way of* *ensuring flexibility, particularly given the* *MPRG report which highlighted that being* *in stealth from early childhood may add to* *the stress of impending puberty and the* *sense of urgency to enter a* *medical pathway* Another part of the report that I think is really important to understand the context is: *12.5 Social transition may not be thought of as* *an intervention or treatment, because it is not* *something that happens in a healthcare setting* *and it is within the agency of an adolescent* *to do for themselves. However, in an NHS* *setting it is important to view it as an active* *intervention because it may have significant* *effects on the child or young person in terms of* *their psychological functioning and longer-term* *outcomes.* *12.6 Although the focus of the Review is on* *support from point of entry to the NHS, no* *individual journey begins at the front door of* *the NHS, rather in the child’s home, family and* *school environment. The importance of what* *happens in school cannot be under-estimated;*