Lesbian transgender couple declares their plan to transition their 5-year-old son

Pauliedragon

When I was seeing a neurologist the first he did was explain the different parts of the brain and the frontal part of the brain which doesn't fully develop until adulthood is responsible for judgement, decision making etc. This is also the part alcohol numbs which explains why we make stupid decisions when drunk. The reason we restrict a lot of things to over 18s is because until then we are incapable of making rational decisions.. Why so would be let someone make a life changing decision when the brain doesn't have the capacity do so? If at 18 they want to go ahead good luck to them.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Pauliedragon wrote: »

When I was seeing a neurologist the first he did was explain the different parts of the brain and the frontal part of the brain which doesn't fully develop until adulthood is responsible for judgement, decision making etc. This is also the part alcohol numbs which explains why we make stupid decisions when drunk. The reason we restrict a lot of things to over 18s is because until then we are incapable of making rational decisions.. Why so would be let someone make a life changing decision when the brain doesn't have the capacity do so? If at 18 they want to go ahead good luck to them.

And even at that the brain doesn't reach full development until about 25. It's a very complex piece of machinery.

Zorya

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Here is the full text of the article. Worrying to say the least

Another article by Gilligan in the Times. The response to the leaked Bell report, that was covered in the last article is that another Governor of the NHS Trust that runs the Tavistock child gender clinic has resigned. I will quote a chunk as it is behind paywall. The second part is a reiteration of the earlier article.

A governor of the NHS trust that runs England’s only gender clinic for children has resigned in protest at its “blinkered” and “one-sided” response to doctors who had raised the alarm about “woefully inadequate” care.

Marcus Evans, a consultant psychotherapist at the Tavistock and Portman trust with three decades’ experience, told The Sunday Times that the trust had said things that were “not true”, had created a “climate of fear” and was trying to “dismiss or undermine” concerns raised by its own clinicians.

“I am sad to be ending my proud 34-year association with the trust,” Evans wrote in his resignation letter. “However, I do not have confidence that these serious issues . . . are going to be sufficiently addressed and dealt with in a thorough, thoughtful and balanced way.”

Twenty-five other clinicians at the trust have signed a letter protesting against how it had handled the concerns of medical staff. The 25 said the attitude of managers was “not acceptable”.

In a report leaked to this newspaper last week, some staff at the Tavistock’s gender identity development service (Gids) said it was exposing young patients to “long-term damage” because of its “inability to stand up to the pressure” from “highly politicised” campaigners and families demanding fast-track gender transition.

.....

After the leak [of the Bell Report}, the trust published a statement on its website claiming Bell’s report was “unsubstantiated”, the case studies were “hypothetical” and he had “no expertise in this field”.

It did so even though a review it had commissioned in response to Bell’s report, by the trust’s medical director, Dinesh Sinha, had found that some of the concerns were valid.
.....

A Gids clinician who contributed to Bell’s report but asked to remain anonymous said last week that the case studies were real and they had personally treated some of the children described.

Evans said: “Things in that statement simply were not true.” He added that Bell, a former president of the British Psychoanalytic Society, had “one of the biggest reputations in the Tavistock yet he’s treated like he’s some sort of charlatan in order to defend their position”. The statement has now been removed from the trust’s website.

Separately, a group of academics in the field of gender has written to The Sunday Times attacking the trust’s attempt to “discredit” Bell and saying that for the sake of “the health of thousands of children” it should “encourage scientific investigation and ethical debate”.

Calhoun

Zorya wrote: »

Another article by Gilligan in the Times. The response to the leaked Bell report, that was covered in the last article is that another Governor of the NHS Trust that runs the Tavistock child gender clinic has resigned. I will quote a chunk as it is behind paywall. The second part is a reiteration of the earlier article.

Wow so if I read that correctly he stood down because political pressure is being exerted on the clinic to push children through fairly damaging reassignment process without the right checks and balances.

Zorya

Calhoun wrote: »

Wow so if I read that correctly he stood down because political pressure is being exerted on the clinic to push children through fairly damaging reassignment process without the right checks and balances.

The original Bell report by David Bell, which Ceadaoin linked to in the post of hers I quoted above, outlines the story. Pressure from activists on clinicians. Now this is another governor who is reacting because it is not being handled correctly. Scroll back or click the arrow in the link to C's post and you can read the last article.

Calhoun

Zorya wrote: »

The original Bell report by David Bell, which Ceadaoin linked to in the post of hers I quoted above, outlines the story. Pressure from activists on clinicians. Now this is another governor who is reacting because it is not being handled correctly. Scroll back or click the arrow in the link to C's post and you can read the last article.

Wow that is fairly damning, the joke of it all is that any negative criticism is being seen as trans-phobic. If these people are left unchallenged we will have a repeat of the likes of the church scandal down the line.

mvl

We can say the transhumanist revolution & acceptance is here, isn't it ?

Zorya

mvl wrote: »

We can say the transhumanist revolution & acceptance is here, isn't it ?

Personally I see a strong transhumanist element but that view is not widely accepted, at least not without a raised eyebrow in your direction :pac:

Zorya

Apologies if this has been linked already.

Conclusions -
There are significant problems with how the evidence for Gender-affirming cross-sex hormone has been collected and analysed that prevents definitive conclusions to be drawn. Similar to puberty blockers, the evidence is limited by small sample sizes; retrospective methods, loss of considerable numbers of patients in follow-up. The majority of studies also lack a control group (only two studies used controls). Interventions have heterogeneous treatment regimes complicating comparisons between studies. Also adherence to the interventions are either not reported or at best inconsistent. Subjective outcomes, which are highly prevalent in the studies, are also prone to bias due to lack of blinding, and many effects can be explained by regression to the mean.

The development of these interventions should, therefore, occur in the context of research. Treatments for under 18 gender dysphoric children and adolescents remain largely experimental. There are a large number of unanswered questions that include the age at start, reversibility; adverse events, long term effects on mental health, quality of life, bone mineral density, osteoporosis in later life and cognition. We wonder whether off label use is appropriate and justified for drugs such as spironolactone which can cause substantial harms, including death. We are also ignorant of the long-term safety profiles of the different GAH regimens. The current evidence base does not support informed decision making and safe practice.

Carl Heneghan
Editor in Chief BMJ EBM, Professor of EBM, University of Oxford

Tom Jefferson
Senior Associate Tutor University of Oxford
Visiting Professor Institute of Health & Society, Faculty of Medicine, Newcastle University

https://blogs.bmj.com/bmjebmspotlight/2019/02/25/gender-affirming-hormone-in-children-and-adolescents-evidence-review/

mvl

Ahh - this can also show how activists may be moderate in UK (for now).
- Just amazed how activism triggered academic censorship is a thing in US.
- But something else, before getting to decide treatment options, should parents not take into consideration the ratio of persisters/desisters ?
Quote from a very good article on the subject (linked below):
And while the numbers vary, there is a general consensus among the various studies that anywhere between 60 and 90 percent of children with gender dysphoria who receive no medical interventions desist when they reach adulthood. In short, children who are treated using a "watchful waiting" approach largely desist, no longer identify as transgender, and accept their bodies. Those who are subjected to medical intervention do not.

Zorya

An Oxford University professor has accused the NHS’s only specialised clinic for transgender children of suppressing negative results while undertaking experimental treatment on adolescents.

Dr Michael Biggs, an associate professor at Oxford’s Department of Sociology claims the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) has been giving puberty blocking hormones to children, without robust evidence as to the long-term effects.

This is refering to the Tavistock clinic, where there have been recent problems with staff claiming pressure from trans activists, resignation of governor, Bell report etc.

Basically he is saying that a study has found significant negative consequences in young girls put on hormone blockers and cross sex hormones - and that this is suppressed information.

Dr Biggs’ research suggests that after a year of treatment “a significant increase” was found in patients who had been born female self-reporting to staff that they “deliberately try to hurt or kill myself”.

Parents also reported “a significant increase in behavioural and emotional problems” and a “significant decrease in physical wellbeing” in children born female, he claims. According to his research, there was no positive impact on “the experience of gender dysphoria”, the diagnosis given to those who are described as feeling intensely uncomfortable with their biological sex.

Parents did report their children suffering less “internalising behavioural problems”, however.

Dr Biggs said: “Puberty blockers exacerbated gender dysphoria. Yet the study has been used to justify rolling out this drug regime to several hundred children aged under 16.”

His findings are derived from a 2015 report to the directors of the Trust and an abstract from a presentation to the World Professional Association for Transgender Health in 2015 by Dr Polly Carmichael, the director of GIDS - based on the first 44 children to have been treated.

Full results of the trial remain unpublished.

The study covered 2011 - 2015. 50 children were administered hormone blockers, between the ages of 10 and 16.
Prior to 2011, Tavistock did not adminsiter hormones to children under 16, but this was opposed vigorously by Mermaids who said children lives needed to be saved.
Since then the numbers have increased. By 2017 800 children have been enrolled on the ''trial'', 230 of whom are under 14 years of age.


So, in spite of the serious problems found in the study - “a significant increase in patients “deliberately try to hurt or kill myself” and a significant increase in behavioural and emotional problems” and a “significant decrease in physical wellbeing” and no positive impact on “the experience of gender dysphoria”,
- ever more children have been recruited to this experiment.

I don't know what other aspect of medicine would show such dangerous disregard for scientifc findings. It's a disgrace.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/03/07/nhs-transgender-clinic-accused-covering-negative-impacts-puberty/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw

Zorya

This is a link to the first tweet in a thread of 17 to 18 tweets from 4th Wave Now. 4th Wave now is a community of parents and others who are skeptical about the transgender push for children.
It is a series of screenshots from a facebook group that has about 8000 members where parents are discussing their trans kids. This series of tweets is specifically screen grabs re packers and stand to pee arrangements for children that are 4 or 5, and up.
Maybe it's just me but I find it highly disturbing that these parents in some cases seem to be basking in the identity of their children as gender incongruent and pushing ideas into their heads, and from the posts it seems that the children themselves are not all that interested in many instances. I find it extremely disturbing, actually.

Follow the thread if you are interested.

https://twitter.com/4th_WaveNow/status/1104778089974980609

conorhal

Zorya wrote: »

Maybe it's just me but I find it highly disturbing that these parents in some cases seem to be basking in the identity of their children as gender incongruent and pushing ideas into their heads, and from the posts it seems that the children themselves are not all that interested in many instances. I find it extremely disturbing, actually.

"Munchausen syndrome by proxy (MSBP) is a mental health problem in which a caregiver makes up or causes an illness or injury in a person under his or her care, such as a child, an elderly adult, or a person who has a disability. Because vulnerable people are the victims, MSBP is a form of child abuse or elder abuse."

These are people that crave the attention of medical profesional's and as far as I'm concering 'my 5yr old kid is trans' is just the the latest, easiest and safest way to garner that attention without going to jail, because anybody that queries your actions can be battered back with accusations of transphobia.
It's abuse protected by the shield of intersectional identity politics.

donkeykong5

conorhal wrote: »

Zorya wrote: »

Maybe it's just me but I find it highly disturbing that these parents in some cases seem to be basking in the identity of their children as gender incongruent and pushing ideas into their heads, and from the posts it seems that the children themselves are not all that interested in many instances. I find it extremely disturbing, actually.

"Munchausen syndrome by proxy (MSBP) is a mental health problem in which a caregiver makes up or causes an illness or injury in a person under his or her care, such as a child, an elderly adult, or a person who has a disability. Because vulnerable people are the victims, MSBP is a form of child abuse or elder abuse."

These are people that crave the attention of medical profesional's and as far as I'm concering 'my 5yr old kid is trans' is just the the latest, easiest and safest way to garner that attention without going to jail, because anybody that queries your actions can be battered back with accusations of transphobia.
It's abuse protected by the shield of intersectional identity politics.

Attention seekers should have the child taken off them sooner rather than later.

FutureGuy

Thinking of becoming a solicitor so I'll be there for the court cases when these poor kids sue the fcuk out of their parent for mutilating them.

AllForIt

mvl wrote: »

Ahh - this can also show how activists may be moderate in UK (for now).
- Just amazed how activism triggered academic censorship is a thing in US.
- But something else, before getting to decide treatment options, should parents not take into consideration the ratio of persisters/desisters ?
Quote from a very good article on the subject (linked below):
And while the numbers vary, there is a general consensus among the various studies that anywhere between 60 and 90 percent of children with gender dysphoria who receive no medical interventions desist when they reach adulthood. In short, children who are treated using a "watchful waiting" approach largely desist, no longer identify as transgender, and accept their bodies. Those who are subjected to medical intervention do not.

This goes to support my person belief that I stated previously which is it's easy to see how a child can develop a physiological aversion to the gender stereotype they are forced into. Or have a strong affinity for the gender stereotype they are not, or a mixture of both.

After all it's the parents that dress girls in dresses and boys in pants. It's the parents that decide to let a girls hair grow long and cut a boys hair short, etc etc. Young children don't decide these things for themselves. I wonder if all children we left to make their own decision about these trivial things would they go with the stereotype. I feel not, not in all cases anyway.

You often see gay men/women taking up social activities and work careers, that are more associated with their opposite gender (and some don't at all). But homosexuality has nothing whatsoever got to do with gender dysphoria. Gay men are still men and identify as men. Which just goes to show for me anyway that when pressure is taken off to conform to a stereotype which I feel is the case for homosexuals that they will make non-stereotypical gender choices naturally. Thus I feel if kids weren't forced from childhood into stereotypical gender roles they might be a lot less cases of gender dysphoria.

Zorya

FutureGuy wrote: »

Thinking of becoming a solicitor so I'll be there for the court cases when these poor kids sue the fcuk out of their parent for mutilating them.

Because the supposed ''best practise'' is supported by legislation and the state and state-supported bodies, I don't know what the locus standi issues would be for children to sue their parents. It would be better if some sort of class action was brought against the state. After all the state promotes, facilitates and funds the treatment. In some countries the role of parents are being usurped by the state when parents do not support transitioning. It is not a grass roots movement, as some might claim, although there are doubtless useful idiots being deployed. It is a top down policy.

There are genuine cases who need treatment of various kinds. For sure. Just not the insane epidemic we are seeing.

Zorya

What are the odds?

This couple from the UK, known only as CP and TP, who had a biological child of theirs transition from a boy to a girl at the age of 7, were then given a foster child, who miraculously given the statistical likelihood, also transitioned from a boy to a girl, this time aged 3. A third foster child previously cared for by the couple also had “gender identity issues”.

However, in a closed hearing at Preston family court last month the concerns were dismissed by a judge. The pair were cleared to carry on caring for the children after experts said they were good parents and the youngsters were happy.

Some of the experts continued to express fears about the children’s “early transitions” of gender but the judge rejected this after another of the experts, Vickie Pasterski, said gender dysphoria had biological foundations that could not be shifted by “interpersonal influence or environmental interference”.

Mr Justice Williams said “the evidence from almost all sources of how the children are prospering in the care of CP and TP provides very powerful support to the contention that CP and TP are good parents”.

He said Pasterski “compellingly rebuts” the social services’ claims about the early transition of the children, making it “overwhelmingly obvious that neither . . . have suffered or are at risk of suffering significant emotional harm arising from their complete social transition to females occurring at a very young age”.

Pasterski’s view is disputed by the NHS’s gender identity development service (Gids) clinic — also known as London’s Tavistock centre — where at least one of the children was treated.

Writing generally in an academic journal last month Bernadette Wren, head of clinical psychology at the Tavistock, said: “Younger gender-atypical children are likely to be more easily influenced by their parents’ view about gender, even to the point of assuming an absolute, long-term commitment to a binary gender identity and a social transition.”

Wren said that “at Gids, we would prefer that young children (below 10 years of age, say), while receiving plenty of genuine support and affirmation for their gender preferences . . . not make a full, legally confirmed social transition to the ‘other’ sex at a young age”.

I can hardly read the rest of it for crossness, as it is patently bizarre, but for those who might object to the account being inaccessible unless email is given, here is more...

The judgment, published late last week, said TP and CP had been foster carers for 16 years. Five children, now aged between four and 17, were the subjects of the court proceedings. Two of them are the couple’s natural children and three are fostered.

Their youngest natural child, known only as R, who is now 13, transitioned from male to female at the age of seven, the judgment said. Her parents took immediate steps to legally cement her new identity, changing her name by deed poll and getting a new passport. However, R remained unhappy, telling a member of staff at her school just a few months later that “she did not think life was worth living”.

Shortly after R transitioned, a boy — known as H — arrived as a foster placement in the family. According to the judgment, H, who is now six, was “being dressed in girls’ clothes” by January 2016, when he was three. The mother, TP, was reported to have told a teacher: “Here’s another one for the Tavistock.”

The following year, when H was four, he started school. “The school requested H attend in a boy’s uniform,” the judgment said. “However in September H came in a girl’s uniform.”

Another child, C, was taken to hospital five times in three years after experiencing “a greater number of significant injuries than would be expected for a child of his age”, including nearly drowning in the family swimming pool.

Last year further incidents, including reports by TP to mental health services with a “significant degree of exaggeration”, triggered a full-scale investigation. A social work statement said: “TP and CP are highly manipulative people . . . there are significant concerns that parents/carers have manipulated children’s gender and diagnosis of additional needs, which is considered the highest level of emotional abuse.”

Lancashire social services claimed TP and CP “consistently sought to have additional foster children placed in their care in order to meet their own needs, whether financial or emotional”.

Last July proceedings to remove all five children were brought by the council, which claimed, among other things, that TP and CP had “acted in a precipitate manner in relation to perceived gender dysphoria” and were “resistant to acknowledging any potential disadvantages to R and H of being identified as transgender prematurely”.

A number of experts, including Pasterski, were appointed to consider the case. A consultant paediatrician — referred to as Dr Ward — said: “Failure to seek medical support and opinion leaves H at significant risk of emotional harm as a result of being presented at school as a girl.”

A report by an independent social worker, Alex Sayer, said there were “some concerns that CP’s attitude to gender dysphoria might lead to faulty decision-making with good intentions”.

She said both parents “presented as closed to the prospect of either R or H reverting back to their assigned gender,” which could “cause emotional distress”. She also said the children should stay with TP and CP, however.

Lancashire council decided not to remove the children and asked for permission to withdraw its care application.

The judge made it clear that he agreed with Pasterski, saying the concerns had been “comprehensively dispelled”.

Child H H, now six, was just a toddler when he arrived in the household. By the time he was three, he was being dressed in girls’ clothing. At four, he started school in a girl’s uniform.

Child R The child known as R is now 13. Born a boy, he switched gender at the age of seven in April 2013. Her name was changed by deed poll and a new passport was issued.

This is about Pasterski, the psychologist who convinced the judge. Are these people simple minded or just plain bad? :mad:

Vickie Pasterski, the psychologist whose report played a key role in the TP and CP case, is a supporter of Helen Webberley, a private Welsh GP who gave sex-change hormones to children as young as 12.

In 2017, the day after The Sunday Times revealed that the General Medical Council had banned Webberley from treating transgender patients unsupervised, Pasterski tweeted: “I support My Web Doctor [Webberley’s clinic]. [She] is saving lives and saving families . . . she is not the first person outside the NHS fortress to be attacked.”

Webberley charged between £75 and £150 an hour to prescribe the drugs, which NHS guidance says should not be given to children. She has since been criminally convicted for operating her clinic without a licence and has been suspended from all practice by the GMC.

Last night Pasterski repeated her support for Webberley, saying her case had been misreported.

Pasterski, an American academic with 20 years’ experience in the gender field, also runs a private clinical practice in London that has “helped more than 500 individuals transition”, according to its website.

Call me Al

Yes they're good parents by all accounts... but maybe in future social services don't place young boys with them.

ETA I replied to a post that appears to have disappeared into thin air!

Zorya

Zorya wrote: »

What are the odds?

This couple from the UK, known only as CP and TP, who had a biological child of theirs transition from a boy to a girl at the age of 7, were then given a foster child, who miraculously given the statistical likelihood, also transitioned from a boy to a girl, this time aged 3. A third foster child previously cared for by the couple also had “gender identity issues”.




I can hardly read the rest of it for crossness, as it is patently bizarre, but for those who might object to the account being inaccessible unless email is given, here is more...



This is about Pasterski, the psychologist who convinced the judge. Are these people simple minded or just plain bad? :mad:

Got a link to source for that stuff?

Zorya

Deleted User wrote: »

Got a link to source for that stuff?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/the-tangled-case-of-the-brothers-who-became-girls-aged-seven-and-three-dq7spwkdq

Zorya

Zorya wrote: »

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/the-tangled-case-of-the-brothers-who-became-girls-aged-seven-and-three-dq7spwkdq

Damn paywall. Thanks though.

Zorya

Deleted User wrote: »

Damn paywall. Thanks though.

That's why I quoted almost all of it. Not a paywall - I don't pay for news - but you give an email address and then get access to a certain number of articles per month...or something like that.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Zorya wrote: »

What are the odds?

This couple from the UK, known only as CP and TP, who had a biological child of theirs transition from a boy to a girl at the age of 7, were then given a foster child, who miraculously given the statistical likelihood, also transitioned from a boy to a girl, this time aged 3. A third foster child previously cared for by the couple also had “gender identity issues”.




I can hardly read the rest of it for crossness, as it is patently bizarre, but for those who might object to the account being inaccessible unless email is given, here is more...



This is about Pasterski, the psychologist who convinced the judge. Are these people simple minded or just plain bad? :mad:

Does this really add anything to the debate? I mean, parents pressurising children to transition when they may not want to or may not be ready for it, we universally condemned; as opposed to teenagers and young adults doing it of their own accord because they genuinely feel they want to transition.

Hector Savage

These are the same people that moan about parents that buy typical "boy" stuff for their boy, or "girl" stuff for their girl, but then will do the same but with the opposite typical gender based toys on their own kids to transition them.

sick sick sick people.

Danzy

Poor child, he should be taken off them.

What other ways are they abusing him?

suicide_circus

to a man with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

Zorya

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Does this really add anything to the debate? I mean, parents pressurising children to transition when they may not want to or may not be ready for it, we universally condemned; as opposed to teenagers and young adults doing it of their own accord because they genuinely feel they want to transition.

The clue is in the thread title. The post is related.

And no, teenagers should not be included in transitioning. Fluck sake, they are not legally allowed to even smoke or drink yet.

Rubberchikken

its probably me but i find the whole thing confusing. lesbian transgenders?! god people
..make up your minds.

98q76e12hrflnk

Liberals:pac: