NHS England Prohibits Access to Puberty Blockers at Gender-Identity Clinics, Limits Them to Research Settings

[Debater Slayer]

NHS England has prohibited the use of puberty blockers at gender-identity clinics, limiting it to research settings:

Children will no longer be prescribed puberty blockers at gender identity clinics, NHS England has confirmed.

Puberty blockers, which pause the physical changes of puberty such as breast development or facial hair, will now only be available to children as part of clinical research trials.

Fewer than 100 young people are currently on puberty blockers and they will be able to continue their treatment. These children are being seen by specialist endocrine services at Leeds and University College London Hospital.

The decision comes after a public consultation on the issue and an NHS England-commissioned independent review in 2020 of gender identity services for children under 18.

New clinics will open to offer care for minors with gender dysphoria:

In February 2022, Dr Cass published an interim report saying there was a need to move away from one unit and recommended the creation of regional services to better support youngsters.

The NHS has said children attending these clinics will be supported by clinical experts in neurodiversity, paediatrics and mental health, “resulting in a holistic approach to care”.

Around 250 patients are expected to be transferred to the new clinics from Gids when they open and some 5,000 more children and young people are currently on the waiting list for referral into the new clinics.

Dr Cass also pointed to a lack of long-term evidence and data collection on what happens to children and young people who are prescribed medication.

NHS says children to no longer receive puberty blockers at gender identity clinics

Puberty blockers, which pause the physical changes of puberty such as breast development or facial hair, will now only be available to children as part of clinical research trials

www.independent.co.uk

Multiple other European countries strictly control minors' access to puberty blockers, although most of them don't have a ban similar to England's. Other countries in the UK also haven't adopted this policy.

What are your thoughts on the decision of NHS England?

 

[Debater Slayer]

I think this is one issue where more research is needed before a definitive approach could be formed and adopted in different countries, since it's clear that there's considerable disagreement among experts on the pros and cons of different approaches.

Generally, though, I think it's crucial to recognize the issue as a medical rather than political one, and I'm not sure that a blanket ban on puberty blockers as opposed to highly strict control is the optimal approach, given that many medical bodies don't support a ban. It's obvious that the issue is far from settled, though.

It seems to me that there are a lot of gray areas and room for uncertainty with this one. I hope more research can help medical experts to provide care to trans kids while maximally limiting any drawbacks and ensuring that proper, stringent controls are in place when it comes to certain procedures. I have no doubt that such a balance is immensely difficult to strike, especially considering the political climate around this issue.

 

[icehorse]

I think this is one issue where more research is needed before a definitive approach could be formed and adopted in different countries, since it's clear that there's considerable disagreement among experts on the pros and cons of different approaches.

For the most part, the doctors who treat patients with gender identity issues follow the lead of an organization called WPATH. For example, the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the American Psychiatric Association (APA), the American Psychological Association (APA), the Endocrine Society, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), GLADD, the ACLU, and other organizations are all on record saying that they've taken the advice and protocols supplied by WPATH in their treatment of chiidren with gender identity issues or in support of such treatments.

Recently a scathing report of WPATH was released (link below). This report includes an hour+ long video of a discussion between WPATH leaders and hundreds of internal WPATH documents. This report demonstrates that WPATH does NOT follow standard medical and research approaches, and it clearly documents that many important public claims coming from WPATH are known within WPATH to be untrue:

- WPATH officials admit that GD kids often vacillate concerning their gender identities, often way past puberty.
- WPATH officials admit that they often do not have informed consent from the kids or their parents.
- WPATH officials admit that regret is a substantial problem.
- WPATH officials admit that their patients often do not have a cohesive medical team.
- WPATH officials admit that many of their patients have significant mental health issues separate from GD.
- WPATH officials admit that they are still learning and EXPERIMENTING on their patients.
- WPATH officials admit that they seldom discuss the sexuality aspects of the interventions they recommend and perform.

==

Recently the NHS commissioned a thorough investigation of gender affirming (GAC), care in the UK. The result was the "Cass Report" (link below). The Cass report was also quite critical of GAC protocols determining that the evidence that GAC leads to improved mental health outcomes is of very low quality.

The WPATH Files — Environmental Progress

Interim report – Cass Review

 

[Revoltingest]

NHS England has prohibited the use of puberty blockers at gender-identity clinics, limited it to research settings:



New clinics will open to offer care for minors with gender dysphoria:

NHS says children to no longer receive puberty blockers at gender identity clinics

Puberty blockers, which pause the physical changes of puberty such as breast development or facial hair, will now only be available to children as part of clinical research trials

www.independent.co.uk

Multiple other European countries strictly control minors' access to puberty blockers, although most of them don't have a ban similar to England's. Other countries in the UK also haven't adopted this policy.

What are your thoughts on the decision of NHS England?

Outright bans fail to address circumstances
that government has never considered.

It's a blunt one-size-fits-all approach that
reminds me of some states banning abortions
in a manner that poses great health risks &
even death upon some.

 

[icehorse]

Outright bans fail to consider circumstances
that government has never considered.

It's a blunt one-size-fits-all approach that
reminds me of some states banning abortions
in a manner that poses great health risks &
even death upon some.

Don't you think medical protocols ought to be based on high quality science?

 

[Revoltingest]

Don't you think medical protocols ought to be based on high quality science?

Why start with "Don't", eh.
I favor protocols based on science & liberty.
Science alone is inadequate for designing
public policy.

 

[libre]

- WPATH officials admit that they often do not have informed consent from the kids or their parents.

This is nothing short of libel.

 

[icehorse]

This is nothing short of libel.

The link has been provided. This is directly from WPATH officials.

 

[icehorse]

Why start with "Don't", eh.
I favor protocols based on science & liberty.
Science alone is inadequate for designing
public policy.

The topic is medicine, correct?

 

[Brickjectivity]

I don't know much about it, except that there are risks to the treatments. In USA its a political hot potato. Joe Biden recently speaks in support of such treatments for kids who need them. He's perhaps just towing the political line though, since he can't be all that knowledgeable about it. Various political activists and parent groups are worried that kids in school are confused about this treatment and that its become trendy to pretend to need it. There is a Parents Rights bill in Congress requiring schools to report anything a school does in relation to this concern, but this too is a political hot potato.

Unfortunately I think you must avoid advice from USA about it, because we are having political fights about it. There will be accusations from the two major parties, and there will be lobbyists paying adverts and sponsoring studies that support their sides. It can get very messy and confusing.

I'd keep an eye on other countries and what they decide and what medical facts they use to decide it.

 

[libre]

What are your thoughts on the decision of NHS England?

I think this type of decision making is often worded to mislead.
'Banning puberty blockers for minors' may seem reasonable on the surface to some, but the reality is that the point of these drugs is to block puberty. To force someone to go through puberty before taking them is to basically flat out neutralize most benefits of the treatment.

They are banning it across the board for the demographic it matters most for. It's not a balanced or consent-informed approach because it's actively denying the patient the choice to decide which puberty they want to go through.

 

[Revoltingest]

The topic is medicine, correct?

Yes. And medicine involves public policy,
ethics, individual needs, & rights.
You aren't hinting at trying to ignore
those aspects of medicine, are you?

 

[libre]

The link has been provided. This is directly from WPATH officials.

No, the link you provided regarding WPATH is a report by anti-trans activist Mia Hughes which only includes highly distorted explanations of WPATH's practices. She's got a reputation as a TERF activist involved with anti-trans organizations and is not accurately reporting on WPATH.

But you knew that. Near all of the links you provide regarding WPATH are from transphobic organizations which masquerade as being capable of meaningful analysis of the established medical standards.

Challenge: provide any direct quote, video or any other medium of a WPATH official stating they 'often do not have informed consent from the kids'.
I'll hold my breath.

 

[Debater Slayer]

No, the link you provided regarding WPATH is a report by anti-trans activist Mia Hughes which only includes highly distorted explanations of WPATH's practices. She's got a reputation as a TERF activist involved with anti-trans organizations and is not accurately reporting on WPATH.

But you knew that. Near all of the links you provide are to transphobic organizations masquerading as meaningful analysis of the established medical standards.

Challenge: provide any direct quote, video or any other medium of a WPATH official stating they 'often do not have informed consent from the kids'.
I'll hold my breath.

Aside from all of that, there's also the fact that WPATH is not the be-all and end-all of advice on gender-related care. Multiple countries don't ban puberty blockers, and they have their own medical bodies to consult on such policies, not WPATH.

I tend to find it suspicious when an article or "report" attempts to reduce a highly complex issue to the views of one organization or individual and then dismisses different views on that basis. Since it is a fact that many experts who don't work for WPATH disagree with banning puberty blockers, I think treating the issue as one with a straightforward answer neglects to take into account said disagreement.

A lot of anti-trans politicians like claiming that opposition to their views is "gender ideology," but it seems to me that anti-trans ideology also heavily features in much of the public discourse around the issue, including discourse about policymaking.

 

[libre]

Aside from all of that, there's also the fact that WPATH is not the be-all and end-all of advice on gender-related care. Multiple countries don't ban puberty blockers, and they have their own medical bodies to consult on such policies, not WPATH.

I agree.
Unfortunately the poster I'm responding to is not interested in discussions about WPATH or trans medical healthcare as it actually exists.
Instead he spreads conspiracy theories that WPATH are knowingly and deliberately pushing a standard of care that they know harms children without their consent.

 

[icehorse]

No, the link you provided regarding WPATH is a report by anti-trans activist Mia Hughes which only includes highly distorted explanations of WPATH's practices. She's got a reputation as a TERF activist involved with anti-trans organizations and is not accurately reporting on WPATH.

But you knew that. Near all of the links you provide regarding WPATH are from transphobic organizations which masquerade as being capable of meaningful analysis of the established medical standards.

Challenge: provide any direct quote, video or any other medium of a WPATH official stating they 'often do not have informed consent from the kids'.
I'll hold my breath.

The link I provided includes a long video of WPATH officials in discussion with each other. It also includes hundreds of internal WPATH documents in which WPATH officials are discussing these topics.

ALL of this documentation comes directly from WPATH.

I care about what's happening to confused kids with GD, so I watched the long video and I skimmed thru the WPATH documents.

Will you do the same?

 

[icehorse]

Aside from all of that, there's also the fact that WPATH is not the be-all and end-all of advice on gender-related care. Multiple countries don't ban puberty blockers, and they have their own medical bodies to consult on such policies, not WPATH.

I tend to find it suspicious when an article or "report" attempts to reduce a highly complex issue to the views of one organization or individual and then dismisses different views on that basis. Since it is a fact that many experts who don't work for WPATH disagree with banning puberty blockers, I think treating the issue as one with a straightforward answer neglects to take into account said disagreement.

A lot of anti-trans politicians like claiming that opposition to their views is "gender ideology," but it seems to me that anti-trans ideology also heavily features in much of the public discourse around the issue, including discourse about policymaking.

I already listed many of the medical bodies that ARE heavily influenced by WPATH. You can find the complete list in the link I provided. So you can speculate, or you can take the time to read the documents you've already been provided.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I care about what's happening to confused kids with GD [...]

Do you accept that there are some kids who do suffer from gender dysphoria even if some may only be "confused," or do you believe that no kid could be genuinely gender-dysphoric?

 

[icehorse]

I agree.
Unfortunately the poster I'm responding to is not interested in discussions about WPATH or trans medical healthcare as it actually exists.
Instead he spreads conspiracy theories that WPATH are knowingly and deliberately pushing a standard of care that they know harms children without their consent.

You can attempt to smear me all you want. But the links I've provided reveal the truth about trans medical health care as it really is, not the fake, happy, fiction that you seem to hope it is.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I already listed many of the medical bodies that ARE heavily influenced by WPATH. You can find the complete list in the link I provided. So you can speculate, or you can take the time to read the documents you've already been provided.

The link you provided is from anti-trans ideologues, though, and many medical bodies are not heavily influenced by WPATH. I have made it clear that my own position on this is ambivalent due to the clear disagreement among experts regarding what constitutes an optimal approach, but that's because I believe that expert opinions carry much more weight than the axe-grinding politics of unqualified commentators like many of those who claim that the issue is so simple and has one clear answer.