World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) Files

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021082#Comment_122021082

I think considerable harm will be done by withholding puberty blockers from those very small percentage of children who they are considered appropriate for, but the good thing is that as a consequence of the Cass recommendation my opinion will have a much stronger evidence base in the future - which can only be considered a good thing.

And I genuinely do not believe for one second that if I am confirmed in this position that you would change your opinion one inch and support their use.

Birneybau

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021121#Comment_122021121

And thank God you are not in charge

concerned_tenant

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021121#Comment_122021121

My opinion is irrelevant. I neither support nor don't support puberty blockers. In the same way I neither support nor don't support a particular drug.

It's not my decision to make. It's the clinician's decision.

And as long as that decision is evidenced-based medicine, that's what matters — not what I personally like or dislike.

volchitsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021044#Comment_122021044

Except the ones who had to leave the field because they were vilified for expressing safeguarding concerns, right?

Not those clinical experts?

People like Sue Evans, way back in 2004, or Sonia Appleby, whose actual job was child safeguarding.

Or Dr Marcus Evans, or Dr Kirsty Entwhistle. Plus all those who went to Dr David Bell anonymously because they knew what would happen to them if they spoke out openly.

All people who chose to work with young people with gender dysphoria but ended up feeling that GIDS was not interested in safeguarding because it was too influenced by activists over clinical evidence - but you'd say that those clinical experts are all crypto-transphobes I suppose?

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021143#Comment_122021143

Ditto.

plodder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021065#Comment_122021065

What are you saying isn’t quite the case plodder? Just so I’m clear on
what you’re saying. I just don’t want to be putting words in your mouth
or making assumptions.

This

The learning outcomes are mandatory in all schools.

"Schools will be expected to follow learning outcomes detailed in the document, even if they believe it clashes with their ethos."

The fudge:

"More latitude, however, will be given to schools in the detail of how these issues are taught and the resources used."

and

One of the learning outcomes says students should be able to “recognise the factors and influences that shape young people’s self-identity, such as family, peers, culture, gender identity, sexual orientation,
race/ethnic background, dis/abilities, religious beliefs/world-views.”

Another learning outcome says students should be able to “appreciate the breadth of what constitutes human sexuality, and how sexual orientation and gender identity are experienced and expressed in diverse ways”.'

I'm just quoting the IT article that you linked. The list of factors and influences is taken from the document. Those are the ones emphasised …

And this in the sub headline

Move follows research which found sex education is out of date, too focused on biology and does not reflect the reality of young people’s lives

"too focused on biology" and there's that phrase again that was used to justify the two failed referendums "reflect the reality of young people's lives".

A lot of people are quite fed up with that way of thinking - that we just formalise whatever it is that (young) people already know, rather than give them guidance which they can choose to accept or reject.

That's what I'm taking from the article you quoted. I assume they haven't misrepresented the document. It's pretty much what you would expect tbh, given the level of NGO influence over policy.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021146#Comment_122021146

I think the one thing that we should be able to agree on is that the Tavistocks was massively underfunded and underresourced for many decades - and this lead directly to child safety issue.

The best outcome from the Cass report will be the significant increase in funding and resources for gender dyphoric people in general. This will lead to more timely and appropriate treatment to all people referred for consultations.

volchitsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021121#Comment_122021121

Surely the problem is that since over 80% of young people presenting with gender dysphoria at the start of adolescence will desist by the time puberty is complete means that it's far too big a risk giving them to anyone, since the people behind the Dutch protocol do not claim to be able to identify those children whose GD will persist and those for whom things will settle down of its own accord? Particularly now that it's acknowledged that PBs are not irreversible.

volchitsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021169#Comment_122021169

I've no problem with extra funding for appropriate resources. I think it's now in the process of being accepted that GIDS and a number of other institutions were being dictated to by activists over the clinical evidence, so hopefully the various clinics that replace GIDS will be more evidence-led and less activist-led.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021178#Comment_122021178

Which maps very well to those who are actually treated. Clinicians are very well aware of this and look out for it and divert such children into more appropriate treatments. The system works and the data confirms this.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021190#Comment_122021190

That is in no way accepted by reasonable people and is a slander of the medical profession.

Vote4Squirrels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021044#Comment_122021044

That would be Dr Cass, the former consultant paediatrician and former President of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health ? As opposed to the "clinical experts" from Mermaids who sent out garments to destroy healthy breast tissue in vulnerable young developing girls ?

concerned_tenant

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021200#Comment_122021200

What we are witnessing with this report is the same disinformation we saw with anti-vax campaigners.

Like the people dismissing WPATH files and the Cass Report, they argue there's a kind of medical "conspiracy" going on; that people cannot be trusted; that certain medical professionals are biased and compromised, and that "we know what's really going on" here; the "we know what the best medical advice should be based on our own limited data that just happens to agree with us" etc.

It's funny to watch the same side who rightly identified and condemned the illogic of anti-vaxxers use exactly the same strategies to wholly dismiss or play down the WPATH files and Cass Report.

volchitsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021199#Comment_122021199

I don't understand exactly what you're saying here: do you mean that clinicians do know how to choose the "right" patients to put on puberty blockers, ie they can identify the ones whose dysphoria is (almost) certain to persist after puberty?

Or do you mean that they know to avoid the services where (in their opinion) anti trans activism means that children who need puberty blockers won't be given them no matter what?

Large bottle small glass

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021044#Comment_122021044

Looks like you have now read the report or got a memo from headquarters.

Can't challenge merit of report so let's discredit the author

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021242#Comment_122021242

They are experts who correctly identify the appropriate treatment for their patient. I couldn't have been more explicit on what I said.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021326#Comment_122021326

The report says fairly much what I expected it to say - which is not the same as what you think it says.

Shoog

I can see that the Cass report has got all your danders up by the gush of breathless posting it has elicited.

I am happy that there are going to be more and better funded treatment centres for gender dyphoric individuals leading to quicker assessment and treatment. It should lead to less distressed people waiting for years before they get the interventions they need - which hopefully we can all agree will be a great outcome for gender dysphoric and transgender people. More and better - a result.

chopperbyrne

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021351#Comment_122021351

Working from a flawed evidence base, and methodology.

A clinician who followed all of the guidelines provided to medical professionals by WPATH would have been providing "the appropriate treatment" for their patients.

Now, due to systematic reviews, it has become clear that the guidelines were incorrect.

concerned_tenant

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021377#Comment_122021377

There will be more treatment centres, but not with the current treatment pathway. That pathway was torn asunder by the report.

Your attempts to minimize the Cass Report whilst at the same time spinning it as a positive outcome is transparent and predictable in equal measure.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021520#Comment_122021520

The treatment path will be very much the same, but what will happen is people will get more external supports when they are found to not need gender affirming treatments, which again is better than the history of out the door and your on your own.

You so want this to be the end of gender affirming treatments that you can't see that it is the exact opposite of what you imagine will be the outcome.

Clinicians will continue to offer the best treatments for their patients and since transgenderism is real that will mean therapies that affirm that for those that need it. Anything less would be unethical.

concerned_tenant

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021655#Comment_122021655

No, the report marks the end of the so-called Dutch model of gender affirmation.

It's an absolute 180-degree departure from the existing treatment pathway.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021701#Comment_122021701

You cannot deny treatment to people who have been identified as needing it - what that would look like is medical malpractice and no ethical clinician would sign up to it especially with the world looking on.

The only basis on which you could attempt that is if you deny the reality of transgenderism which is an untenable medical position. Treatments will carry on much as before because clinicians were correctly identifying their patients.

concerned_tenant

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021731#Comment_122021731

It doesn't matter what either I think or you think when it comes to medical malpractice.

What matters is what the experts think; what the clinical research supports.

Dr Cass has established the criteria and that criteria must be implemented to ensure appropriate treatment and safeguarding of children.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021743#Comment_122021743

Your belief that there was widespread over treatment is simply not evidence based so your belief that the review will produce radically different outcomes is simply your wish.

concerned_tenant

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021754#Comment_122021754

I don't have any "beliefs" on this matter.

The research is thorough and well-evidenced in its conclusions.

It's the end of the gender affirmation model we all knew was damaging to begin with. It started with Mermaids and Tavistock and their gross negligence when it came to the standards of duty of care required when dealing with children and young people; and it ends here with this report.

Dr Cass' conclusions are fair and reasonable about how patients should be safely and responsibly treated going forward, without any external ideological infringement upon the recommended treatment protocols.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021778#Comment_122021778

If that is true then transgender people will be mighty grateful because they will get faster and better gender affirmative treatments.

concerned_tenant

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021800#Comment_122021800

If that is true then transgender people will be mighty grateful because they will get faster and better gender affirmative treatments.

No, this is what the Cass Report is expressly against.

I would suggest reading at least the conclusions of the Cass Report from the website I linked to above, as it contains all the relevant details as well as a link to the almost 400-page report.

hotmail.com

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021377#Comment_122021377

The delays don't do any harm.

Most of these people desist from changing their gender and stop attention seeking when they become older teenagers.

hotmail.com

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122021800#Comment_122021800

For Irish children?