The report argued the service was "facing a crisis of capacity" to deal with an ever-increasing demand and it should "take the courageous and realistic action of capping the numbers of referrals immediately".
"Several staff have confirmed to the BBC most GIDS employees were never told of the recommendations."
"The report's findings were shared only during a meeting of the senior team."
Escalating referral numbers, large caseloads & increasingly complex cases led to "escalating risk." "Many were self-harming; others were struggling with depression, anxiety, bullying or eating disorders. Some suffered traumatic or abusive childhoods."
This is not just about children not receiving adequate care. These are adolescents being put on a pathway of experimental medical intervention which will affect their bones, brains, fertility & sexual function, with unknown long-term risks and lifelong dependency on medication.
"Had this report been acted on, and indeed even shared internally, GIDS and the Tavistock may have stopped themselves from going down a path which many, least to say some of its patients, may end up regretting," one clinician said.
Instead GIDS doubled the workforce through recruitment of junior, inexperienced staff to work alongside experienced clinicians, adding to their workload and the pressures they were already under.
"There are also questions for NHS England. How was it that as reports questioning both GIDS' model and, in later years, its ability to offer the best care possible to every single patient surfaced, it didn't step in?"
It is difficult to imagine a greater degree of negligence from GIDS & NHS England towards this group of highly vulnerable adolescents, the majority teenage girls with complex mental health problems.
We also still ask the question: How is it that in their 2016 report on the Tavistock GIDS the Care Quality Commission rated the service "good"?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The Sandyford clinic in Glasgow claimed puberty blockers were "fully reversible" even though they knew in 2017 of the risks. They join a list of those who have given false information to children, from NHS England to Polly Carmichael. This is a scandal. thetimes.co.uk/article/health…
Officials "recognised that the long-term impacts of hormones known as puberty blockers were not known but could affect bone density and stunt growth. Despite this, a leaflet published by the health board until last year said that taking blockers was considered “fully reversible”"
A Glasgow health official admitted that “Uncertainties also exist regarding the effect of puberty suppression on growth and adult height, the psychosocial problem of delayed puberty and possible effects on brain development."
It is well understood that adolescent girls are susceptible to 'contagion' of sudden, new symptoms. This knowledge is not applied to the explosion in trans-identified teenage girls but the parallels are striking and unavoidable.
Thread. thetimes.co.uk/article/teenag…
Sudden onset tics and a doubling of referral rates. Sound familiar?
Inevitably, sharing information on social media sites reinforces and maintains symptoms. Teenage girls are particularly susceptible to developing similar symptoms out of empathy and emotional connection.
In the UK we have a good number of wise, thoughtful and experienced clinicians, psychologists and psychiatrists researching and writing on gender dysphoria in children and young people. Imagine if the GIDS model of care had been developed by the following professionals.
Thread.
In March 2018 Margaret McCartney wrote this for the BMJ. Back then you didn't see even cautious pieces like this.
"Yet playing with dolls and liking dresses doesn’t make children female, just as playing with trucks and liking mud doesn’t make them male."
James Caspian @jamesfreespeech is applying to the European Court of Human Rights for a hearing of his case against Bath Spa University for preventing his research into #detransitioners.
“Some of the people I spoke to said they were too traumatised to speak about their experiences, which proved it was even more important to research the issue, not less."
“I was astonished therefore that a university could censor a research project on the grounds that what people ‘might’ post on social media may be detrimental to the reputation of the university.”
A judicial review is a legal course of action whereby someone can challenge a decision of a public body on the grounds that it is unfair, illegal or irrational. Court doesn't look at the merits, but the process and legality of the policy.
Issue at heart of the case was consent, whether informed consent in the legal sense can be given. Court found children under the age of 18 do not have capacity to give informed consent, children under 13 never, older children need to apply to court of protection.
Now it's time for Feminist Perspectives. We have Susan Matthews chairing and speakers Selina Todd @selina_todd, Vaishnavi Sundar talking about erosion of women's rights in India, and Ziggy Melamed. #DoNotAdjustYourSet2021
Selina Todd now on Ideology and Academia. We are in a state where there is a great deal of fear around raising questions in UK universities, in relation to women as a sex. Threats, de-platforming, accusations of transphobia. Institutional policies strengthen their hand.
The attack is mainly on women, reflecting the misogyny of the movement and this can be interpreted as an attack on 2nd wave feminism, a backlash. How did those attacks come about and what does it mean for women in academia?