Jo Maugham Profile picture
Apr 10 17 tweets 5 min read Read on X
Good Law Project holds a copy of new NHS Guidance published yesterday and it is clear that Wes Streeting is continuing his war on trans people.

Remarkably the national health service is now directing GPs to cause harm to the community. 🧵
Background: the UK is a serious international outlier in how it approaches healthcare for young trans people. All over the world Governments are declining to follow the policy based evidence making of the Cass report. I believe we now have the most hostile regime anywhere.
Families in the UK who want to follow best medical practice - rather than pleasing Wes Streeting's true electorate (right wing media barons) - obtain puberty blockers (criminalised in the UK) from regulated prescribers in eg France or Netherlands or Switzerland. Image
(These are the ‘lucky’ families.

Streeting’s ban means that less wealthy families - or trans kids who are not supported by their parents - “DIY”. They buy drugs from unregulated suppliers over the dark web and learn how to administer those drugs from videos on YouTube.)
To ensure that puberty blockers can be taken safely, their effects are monitored with blood tests.

This is what the international Endocrine Society says (note the references to "monitoring".) Image
Those blood tests were once routinely done by GPs under “shared care arrangements”.

GPs might not feel expert enough to make a decision whether to prescribe puberty blockers. But they recognised they had a responsibility to protect their patient's health by monitoring bloods.
To take an analogy, if a GP has a patient who is a heroin addict they still monitor their health. The fact they disapprove of taking heroin would not be a reason to withdraw care.

Of course blood tests supported arrangements made by *regulated* prescribers abroad.
What NHS England did, in new guidance issued yesterday, was direct GPs no longer to offer shared care arrangements.

This means the NHS is directing GPs to expose their patients to additional risks by refusing to monitor their hormone levels; to actively cause harm. Image
The foundation for the Guidance is a simple and demonstrable lie. This is the basis for the instruction - that the prescriber is “unregulated”. Image
But these prescribers are not unregulated. They are regulated elsewhere in the world: in France or Switzerland or the Netherlands or Germany. Just not in the UK - which is an international outlier.

You can see this from how NHS England dishonestly defines “unregulated”. Image
You can see this even more explicitly in this section which amounts to a statement that it is every other country’s regulators which create additional risk and only England's which do not.

(Despite NHS England clearly and actively forcing GPs to create risk for its patients.) Image
NHS England also continues to encourage GPs to make safeguarding referrals in respect of a practice which is entirely orthodox in most of the rest of the world. Image
Again, this is intellectually dishonest. There is NO BASIS AT ALL, not even in the policy based evidence making Cass Review, for suggesting puberty blockers pose an “immediate safety risk”.
The intended effect of these referrals - and many are being made by social workers or Councils who basically want to eradicate the idea of transness - is that families who wish to adhere to international treatment protocols are frightened into ignoring them.
The consequence is to transfer scare social services resources away from children who are actually at risk like these children - who Wes Streeting’s government pretends to cares about. Image
I regret to say that Wes Streeting’s war against trans people is not confined to young trans people.

Here NHS England (presently only gently) discourages GPs from supporting shared care arrangements with adult trans patients as well. Image
Standing back, families are left with unenviable choices. Trans people are taking their own lives in numbers and Wes Streeting is suppressing the evidence.

There remain private providers based outside the UK who can offer both PBs and blood tests - to those who can afford them.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jo Maugham

Jo Maugham Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @JolyonMaugham

Apr 17
I've been reflecting some more overnight on the For Some Women Scotland case. 🧵
In this piece, which I am proud of and I stand by every word, I make two serious criticisms of the procedure that the Supreme Court adopted. goodlawproject.org/the-supreme-co…
The first is that in a case which is fundamentally about the rights of trans people with gender recognition certificates the Supreme Court excluded all trans voices and added in the voices of those opposed to the right and dignities of trans people.
Read 19 tweets
Feb 20
Since putting up this crowdfunding page, the Daily Mail has sent us, through their lawyers (RPC), two defamation threats.

A few points about them. 🧵goodlawproject.org/crowdfunder/da…
One or both were marked “private and confidential - not for publication”.

We have long (👇) deplored the practice of making threats which you say are confidential to try and stop your critics from telling the world you are trying to silence them. goodlawproject.org/they-want-to-s…
Neither letter pretends to be a formal letter under the pre-action protocol for defamation claims - a necessary precondition to suing. Yet each is pregnant with threat.

To intimate you have a legal claim which you don’t actually have also feels to us like a misuse of the law.
Read 6 tweets
Jan 20
Cass Review.

New article in the New England Journal of Medicine, founded in 1812 and amongst the most prestigious peer-reviewed medical journals. Its 2023 impact factor was 96.2, ranking it 2nd out of 168 journals in the category "Medicine, General & Internal". Image
I will share some extracts from it but tl;dr it is highly critical. It "transgresses medical law, policy and practice... deviates from pharmaceutical regulatory standards in the UK. And if it had been published in the United States... it would have violated federal law." Image
It calls for "evidentiary standards... that are not applied elsewhere in pediatric medicine... [and] are not applied to cisgender young people receiving gender-affirming care." Image
Read 9 tweets
Nov 14, 2024
Labour caving to some of the richest people in the country - whilst raising the tax burden on employing the low paid - has been described as the "lobbying coup of the decade."

But how bad is it? 🧵 Image
Well, we know that Labour promised to raise £565m per annum from taxing private equity properly. But, after lobbying, agreed only to raise 14% of that or £80m. Image
Image
But in fact, it's worse that that (or better, if you are amongst that mega rich class).

For a particular type of carried interest Labour actually proposes to *cut* tax rates...
Read 6 tweets
Oct 31, 2024
Three reasons why inheritance tax on farmland is a good thing (beyond the obvious - that it will raise money). 🧵
First, farmland being subject to inheritance tax will reduce the value it has as a token to pass wealth down tax free between generations, so that farmland is cheaper and farming more profitable.
Second, farmland being subject to inheritance tax will reduce the number of people who hold it as a token to pass wealth down tax free between generations so it is instead held by people who hold it to farm it so it is more efficiently used.
Read 4 tweets
Jul 19, 2024
I see my tweets about the effects of Wes Streeting's ban on puberty blockers on younger trans people have been criticised by the DHSC’s adviser on suicides. 🧵
1. What is undoubtedly true is that Victoria Atkins was warned by her own civil servants about the ban on puberty blockers posing “a high risk of self-harm and suicide” and Wes Streeting followed his predecessor in ignoring that advice.
2. Before publishing my thread (below) we went to the Tavistock and Portman with these numbers for a response. Other journalists went to NHS England for a response. Neither denied the numbers and both declined to comment.
Read 35 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(