World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) Files
Comments
-
How is that even relevant to anything? I told you before I’d no intention of going there either, because it’s a shìthole. I didn’t see the specific episode of Fiorscéal that carveone was referring to either, I didn’t have to, to know that from carveone’s recollection of it, there was more to that story than the producers were prepared to share with their audience.
I’d no clue what carveone was even referring to, but as soon as ProfessorPlum mentioned Kenneth Zucker above, then I knew, and just thought “Oh. Him!”, because I’m well aware of the story that went on there, and I’ve still never been to Canada, nor did I have to go there to be aware of the way the law works over there, and that story as carveone recalled it, didn’t add up. Carveone was there, you were there, and yet somehow because I wasn’t there, the implication is that I couldn’t be aware of what goes on there? Isn’t the whole point of posting these nonsense stories from Canada to convince people who don’t know any better that the place is a shìthole? You’ve never had to convince me, I already knew, for other reasons.Just for shìts ‘n’ giggles I looked up whatever happened to Jessica Yanniv after their numerous vexatious complaints were thrown out by the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal. ‘Not much’, is the answer to that question, and still I don’t have to have ever been to Canada to know that:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Yaniv
You’ve lived there, or you live there Frank, it doesn’t mean you actually have any greater knowledge of the country than I do. It just means you’ve been there, and I haven’t. My wife wants to go see the lakes, I told her she can go on her own 😒
Post edited by One eyed Jack on1 -
That would be to mischaracterize the WPATH files.
The exposed conversations detail a gross disregard for medical ethics and informed consent. Clinicians admit not to knowing the long-term consequences of the decisions they make re: puberty blockers etc. The conversations provide evidence that the most basic safeguarding practices are wholly disregarded. In other words, the subsequent Cass Report's findings verify the concerns through the evidence provided in these leaks.
In the WPATH Files, members demonstrate a lack of consideration for long-term patient outcomes despite being aware of the debilitating and potentially fatal side effects of cross-sex hormones and other treatments. Messages in the files show that patients with severe mental health issues, such as schizophrenia and dissociative identity disorder, and other vulnerabilities such as homelessness, are being allowed to consent to hormonal and surgical interventions. Members dismiss concerns about these patients and characterize efforts to protect them as unnecessary “gatekeeping.”
The files provide clear evidence that doctors and therapists are aware they are offering minors life-changing treatments they cannot fully understand. WPATH members know that puberty blockers, hormones, and surgeries will cause infertility and other complications, including cancer and pelvic floor dysfunction. Yet they consider life-altering medical interventions for young patients, including vaginoplasty for a 14-year-old and hormones for a developmentally delayed 13-year-old.
The WPATH Files also show how far medical experiments in gender medicine have gone, with discussions about surgeons performing “nullification” and other extreme body modification procedures to create body types that do not exist in nature.
The theme is now consistent. We saw it with Tavistock, we saw it with Mermaids, we saw it throughout clinics in Europe; we now see it with WPATH — what it supposed to be the leading authority in this field — and we most certainly see it with the Cass Report.
Yet despite all these warnings, some people are unwilling to admit there just might be a problem here worth addressing.
How many more reports of medical malpractice have to emerge before some people conclude what everyone else has concluded — that enough is enough; that too many patients have been harmed and that it's high time for a total and complete reset.
"The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it." — George Orwell
10 -
I am heartened to see the petition to strip Stonewall’s Ruth Hunt of her peerage is heading for 15,000 signatures.
If Paula Vennells of the Post Office can be shamed into handing back her CBE for her role in the Horizon financial scandal, then Hunt should lose hers for her role in covering up a medical scandal involving children.
9 -
It should go further than people losing peerages.
Anyone found to have engaged in medical malpractice that knowingly harmed children should be prosecuted.
"The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it." — George Orwell
3 -
Yeah but, again, you're quoting something offering an opinion on the files rather than the files themselves — right?
From my reading of the actual conversations being had in the files, the doctors are discussing their views on various elements of gender affirming care. And to be honest, nothing they say if any huge closely-guarded secret is it? That gender affirming care is a difficult topic involving difficult decisions, not least the ability of children to properly understand the ramifications of such treatment and give informed consent to them, is not being swept under the carpet. You can literally Google and easily find all manner of studies, reports and opinions on this. The existence of some great conspiracy to pretend these things don't exist is something that seems to be claimed by people who don't really seem to be familiar or have any real desire to actually familiarise themselves with the literature that is available.
The fact that there may be different opinions on medical practices does not invariably mean that the practice, elements of the practice, or the medical / ethical intention behind the practice is wrong. A particular treatment or procedure can have a good outcome even if aspects of it present difficult questions or space for continued research and improvement.
1 -
Advertisement
-
You minimize the impact of the files by using phrases such as "doctors having conversations" and "discussing their views".
The problem isn't doctors having conversations, the problem is the content of those conversations — and the content is counter to how medical professionals are expected to conduct themselves.
The consequence of those "conversations" led to direct harm to children and young adults; that they are unaware of the consequences of their clinical decisions but are implementing them regardless; that informed consent, in many cases, was wholly disregarded.
And that's just the least of it.
It's a medical scandal, and the full extent of this scandal is only just unfolding.
"The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it." — George Orwell
12 -
I am minimising the impact of the files by stating what they actually contain?
Tell you what, why don't you pick one or two pages from the actual files (rather than the extremely loaded opinionated report) and we can discuss them. Looking at them again here and while I haven't gone through all of them I'm not not seeing the big conspiracy here —— and from what I've seen so far it's not particularly surprising or shocking stuff and is more or less in line with what you'd expect on an area of medicine that undoubtedly presents ethical and medical complexities that need to be handled carefully.
0 -
Dr Hilary Cass has already done that, in far more detail than I could hope to achieve.
The Cass Report directly refers to the treatment protocols that were implemented throughout the UK, as recommended by WPATH.
"The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it." — George Orwell
6 -
I would suggest starting with this report here.
When even the Grauniad is reporting on this with a critical eye, you know it can't be swept under the rug anymore.
I found this extract especially concerning. These are people who graduated from medical school, passed board examinations and now practice. How they can be so clueless about basic anatomy and biology is chilling. And lest we not forget, they are talking about still developing CHILDREN!
"Elsewhere, there are extraordinary discussions on how to manage “trans clients” with dissociative identity disorder (what used to be called multiple personality disorder) when “not all the alters have the same gender identity”. Surgeons talk about procedures that result in bodies that don’t exist in nature: those with both sets of genitals – the “phallus-preserving vaginoplasty”; double mastectomies that don’t have nipples; “nullification” surgery, where there are no genitals at all, just smooth skin. And doctors discuss the possibility that 16-year-old patients have liver cancer as the result of taking hormones. The problem is not necessarily the discussions themselves, but that the organisation is not so open when speaking publicly"
11 -
Well, as the article itself says, the problem is not necessarily the discussions themselves but that the organisation is not so open when speaking publicly.
Now, being more vocal about discussions is one thing, but another thing entirely when discussions are being had with patients themselves. I'd be much more disturbed if the circumstances were that doctors were not adequately and thoroughly explaining the issues to the people who matter — the patients and (where they are minors) their parents. Does the report make any allusion to doctors concealing information from patients or deliberately misleading them?
As for it all being swept under the rug — I'm not sure it is. Even from just a quick Google there now, the NHS specifically mentions the existence of risks in gender affirming care and there's lot of journal reports about risks on Google Scholar.
0 -
Advertisement
-
I'll try one last time.
The UK, among other countries, implemented WPATH's clinical recommendations wholesale, including the "affirmation approach". The same recommendations that were made to Tavistock, which had to be closed down on the same basis i.e. lack of safeguarding.
The Cass Report tore asunder this approach and the flawed medicine that underpinned it; the same flaws that have been exposed in the WPATH files themselves.
"The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it." — George Orwell
5 -
When anything involving children includes the need to keep parents out of it - huge alarm bells should go off!
Did we learn nothing from the Catholic priests scandal ??
7 -
Yikes, that is a long winded way of doubling down. How you can know anything about Canada having never been there is quite ignorant, but you do you on that one.
Might want to be careful bringing up Jessica Yaniv as well…
She is well known to British Columbians for several Human Rights Tribunal cases, including one against female aestheticians who would not wax her.
A biological male that went to get waxed at a female only location…and cries about discrimination. Their track record (maybe go beyond what you read on wikipedia) is very sketchy, to say the least.
In 2019, tribunal member Devyn Cousineau ordered Yaniv to pay the women $2,000 each for 'improper conduct' which included using the human rights law as a 'weapon' for 'extortion'
They are a con artist, and a sick individual.
But again, you do you on that one
4 -
Yikes, that is a long winded way of doubling down. How you can know anything about Canada having never been there is quite ignorant, but you do you on that one.
Easily, given you’re not the only source anyone is obligated to rely on, there’s plenty anyone can know about Canada without having to rely on the emigrant who’s spent a wet weekend in a foreign country and imagines they know all there is to know about the place. You might have a point if the discussion were solely about Canada, and who has or hasn’t been there, but it’s not, and therefore you just don’t have a point. You say to me ‘you do you’, but when I’m doing me and telling you the last time you tried to foist your feelings upon me that let that be the end of it, you STILL persist in doing so, attempting to prevent me from me doing me. It’s a noble attempt, but if Destination Canada couldn’t convince me to even so much as visit the place (and Canada is only one of many countries I have no wish to entertain), then you’re certainly not going to be able to, so again, even if it’s an indication of tripling down, outright ignorance as far as you’re concerned, I’m not the least bit concerned, as similarly as my attitude towards Canada - I have no interest in your opinions in that regard either.Now, back on-topic:
Might want to be careful bringing up Jessica Yaniv as well…
Your advice here is equally unwarranted. Though I understand you may feel equally protective of the citizens of your adopted country, the reason I bring them up is as an example of the nonsense which emanates from Canada in an attempt to portray the country as a shìthole, in order to convince anyone who doesn’t know any better that it is indeed a shìthole. That’s not me doubling down, it’s just repeating what I said in the previous post, which you appear to have ignored. I’m not going to call you ignorant for doing so, as that would be uncivil. What I am going to do however, is point out that it was because of the deluge of media interest in Yanniv’s various adventures in stupidity that they were portrayed as being representative of a threat to humanity on the basis of them being transgender, and rather than confine their shìt within it’s geographic Canadian borders, the Internet has no borders, so it was inflicted upon the world, and we were all forewarned that Yanniv’s adventures in stupidity was a sign of things to come.That didn’t happen, which prompted the question in my mind four years later as to the whereabouts and whatabouts of this biological weapon that was set to terrorise the free world. The anticlimactic answer to that question, is simply that nothing happened. Nothing became of Yanniv, they never even left Canada, and so if you’re still over there, you’re more than welcome to them, because from my perspective - I would never attempt to speak for anyone else, but I certainly don’t want them. From your perspective you’re perfectly entitled to perceive this unwillingness as ignorance, but like I pointed out to you previously - I’ve never drank my own piss either, I don’t have to, to know that it’s a bad idea. I’ve also said you previously that you should take your own advice and when you read something on the internet that you don’t like - move on. All you’ve managed to do so far is demonstrate that you are incapable of taking your own advice, not uncommon among people who seek to control other people, which is why laws exist which prevent them from doing so, even in Canada, as observed by what happened, or rather - didn’t happen, to Jessica Yaniv.
There’s a lesson for everyone in that tale, and despite your persistence in inflicting your feelings upon me in spite of being rejected numerous times now, I figure you’re at least intelligent enough to figure out the lessons you could learn from the case for yourself, in order to avoid being in the same position where due to the dunning-kruger effect - your expectations exceed reality.
0 -
This just reads as a stupid person tries to sound intelligent. Nice work.
7 -
So, I didn't get too much time to look at the SPHE material online, but from what I did see, I'd just make a few points.
- I agree now the Catholic Church was involved in formulating the policy.
- It seemed like there was a consensus (incl. from some of the Catholic bodies) that a new curriculum could be accommodated within the varied ethos-es (if that is the plural of ethos?)
- The definition of gender identity in the curriculum is much milder than the one I quoted earlier from a different document. It says nothing about it being fixed at a young age, and it distinguishes clearly from sex. More about that below<*>
- I remain unconvinced that the Irish Times article by Education editor (Carl O'Brien) misrepresented the situation in that the curriculum must be taught ie. "New Junior Cycle curriculum will oblige schools to teach about gender identity"
- It's conceivable that you are both right though - that if a school took a particularly hard line stance on it, rejecting it entirely, then maybe it could end up in the courts, and the school might win, if they made a strong case that their ethos rejects gender identity theory/ideology ….
… which brings me to the situation at third level, where gender theory is much more embedded, through the Athena Swan charter that institutions are obliged to sign up to, in order to receive government research funding (no constitutional protection against the secular religion here I'm afraid). Fair play to Colette Colfer (lecturer in world religions) for getting it changed at SET university in Waterford but it remains the case apparently at UCD, TCD, RCSI, where they all falsely claim that misgendering is "unlawful". That's fairly serious.
<*> I don't have a major issue with the SPHE curriculum from what I could see of it. It's really just puzzlement at how something which affects a tiny number of people, and I mean the really tiny number of people who have consistently identified as transgender since a young age, and into middle age, but has been projected onto everyone. As far as I am concerned, the way the argument goes about gender being fixed at a young age (which isn't stated in the policy but has to be part of the background justification for it), you could just as easily argue that most children's fixed view of themselves as human beings from a young age, could justify a minority's view who identify as cats. "Sure, on the surface, biologically we are human, but inside we are cats".
The rest of it is either a passing phase, a mistaken reaction to sexuality, or an aspect of co-occurring mental health issues imo. Schools never formalised policies around the recognition of mods, rockers, punks, goths and all. More likely they went out of their way to disavow all of it. Maybe it is a reaction to that disavowal where we are attracted to the idea of recognising everyone's individuality now. It's really where other people are being compelled to participate, that the problems arise.
12 - I agree now the Catholic Church was involved in formulating the policy.
-
Common sense continues to prevail.
4 -
I cannot possibly see any way back from the Cass report.
Belgium and Netherlands both suspended the medical practice after the report, too.
It's all but over. Better late than never.
Even moderate supporters / celebrities on social media are now awkwardly rowing back their support, now realizing the error of their support to begin with.
"The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it." — George Orwell
7 -
Maybe it is a reaction to that disavowal where we are attracted to the idea of recognising everyone's individuality now. It's really where other people are being compelled to participate, that the problems arise.
Nah, in most circumstances group identity is still the most critical factor in determining policy, it’s why for example when one individual imagines they have the authority to violate their employers policies and inflict their delusions on the students, the individual in question is the only person who is subject to disciplinary action for their behaviour.Schools, in particular, are used to dealing with complaints of behaviour of that nature by their employees, in contrast to how those circumstances would have been dealt with differently in the past where the student was taught that it is they who are the cause of the disruption, because of their unwillingness to participate in the delusions of adults. It’s also why contained within the Constitution is the right every child has not to participate in religious instruction:
Legislation providing State aid for schools shall not discriminate between schools under the management of different religious denominations, nor be such as to affect prejudicially the right of any child to attend a school receiving public money without attending religious instruction at that school.
https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/cons/en/html#article44
That too, impacts only upon a small minority of students, in spite of claims that it is being projected onto everyone and the majority are are being compelled to participate in what you might identify as “secular religion” (I wouldn’t though). I’ve no immediate issue either with children should they identify as cats, they’re still expected to understand gender identity. It’s only if they started marking their territory around the classroom and demanding kitty litter trays be installed in all the bathrooms that they may be told simply they’re going to be put outside if they don’t behave themselves.
0 -
Are these puberty blockers legal for children in Ireland?
0 -
Advertisement
-
On the advice of Scotland's Chief Medical Officer, the Scottish equivalent to GIDS, the Sandyford Clinic, is pausing not only puberty blockers but also cross sex hormones. Another health board has already stopped putting new patients on PBs (I'm not sure whether that includes cross sex hormones.)
So yes, it really only remains to see how long it will take before those many politicians and other public figures who've been thoroughly enmeshed in gender ideology decide that clinging on desperately to ever-more discredited beliefs is only making them look worse than admitting they got it wrong.
1 -
Yes. They've always been legal for children with premature puberty, and remain so.
The controversy is not about legality, but whether they are an appropriate treatment for children with gender dysphoria. They were only ever experimental in that indication, but due to pressure from activists, were given outside of research studies as though they were the accepted treatment for it.
Indeed they often seem to have been given along with particularly poor record-keeping, making meaningful follow-up of outcomes extremely difficult.
3 -
Presumably no proper doctor in Ireland prescribes these blockers to children and that's why they have to go abroad?
0 -
The number of children receiving puberty blocking medication in Ireland is <10.
Thanks in part to a dismally managed health service and in part to very good doctors, the situation in Ireland is "good" if your priority is the avoidance of visiting irreversible harm on children. It could be a lot better with the introduction of better mental health support and therapy, and some publicity around the danger of activist groups touting the fantastical "safe and reversible" line, but who knows how likely that is.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ~C.S. Lewis
3 -
While I agree mental services in Ireland are an underfunded mess, just resourcing that fully isn't the cure.
If we can figure out how to prevent the need for mental health services at all we would be in a much better position.
The recent trend in obsession with appearance, driven by Instagram, Snapchat etc can come at significant cost to young children)teenagers. I was 17 before I realised I had big lips (the ladies loved them they were no chore 😀) when a school friend made a joke. That would be impossible today with the culture of selfies, sharing images and the endless discussion on appearance.
For a cohort of our youth and older people that's not a good thing.
Add in the 24hr easy access to porn primarily for our young men, and the lack of positive male role models isn't good for our young men.
I think when you combine the above it shouldn't be a surprise that some many teenage girls are rejecting womanhood.
Getting control of large social media companies, and getting in front of AI before it makes it worse would be a starting point. That will take EU wide action.
Education for kids and parents alike would be another important element.
It's well past time to act.
3 -
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-68838029
In the UK 38% of kids aged 5 to 7 are on social media
65% use messaging apps
0 -
USA data but the poorer the kid the more time they spend looking at a screen. A recent survey for poorer kids in USA had daily screen time at 9 hours!
"As children mature, they’re exposed to more screens, with more diverse content via television, video games and social media. A report released in October 2019 by the nonprofit organization Common Sense Media found that 8- to 12-year-olds in the United States now use screens for entertainment for an average of 4 hours, 44 minutes a day, and 13- to 18-year-olds are on screens for an average of 7 hours, 22 minutes each day (The Common Sense Census: Media Use by Tweens and Teens , 2019). These numbers don’t count time using screens for schoolwork or homework.
Common Sense Media’s data also reveal a substantial disparity in media use based on socioeconomic status, with 8- to 12-year-olds from high income families using 1 hour, 50 minutes less of media each day than kids of the same age from low income families. Teens show a similar gap. Previous research has suggested that increased screen time in poorer families may be an attempt by parents to protect their children; studies in multiple countries have found that parent anxiety about neighborhood safety and actual neighborhood safety are linked to more screen time and less physical activity. For example, health researchers Valerie Carson, PhD, of the University of Alberta, and Ian Janssen, PhD, of Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, found that kids who lived in neighborhoods with the highest social and physical disorder (such as crime, graffiti and gang activity) had a 40% to 60% higher likelihood of high screen use (International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity , Vol. 9, No. 66, 2012). Higher-income families may also have more alternatives to screen time available, in the form of extracurricular activities and safe recreation areas."
1 -
In reality the low number is due to it being such a niche area of the national public healthcare system that there was never any real need before to provide the services in Ireland, it was just cheaper (or better value for the taxpayer if you like), to avail of the services in other countries such as the UK. Waiting lists are just a reality of the national public healthcare system in every country. For context, the number of children thought to be on puberty blockers in the UK is ~ 100 (estimated, because follow-up is not really a thing, never mind the numbers who are procuring medication through private healthcare and other illicit means):
The HSE said there are less than ten people under the age of 16 on puberty blocker medication, following specialist review by a team.
…
Fewer than 100 young people are currently on puberty blockers in the UK.https://www.rte.ie/news/uk/2024/0313/1437607-uk-gender/
The issue of puberty blockers is as good a distraction as any to blow completely out of proportion in order to divert attention away from the absolute farce that is the national public healthcare system, not just in the UK or Ireland, but in most Western countries, it’s simply using a wedge issue to distract from the far more obvious issues impacting upon the greater number of the population. It’s not just Ireland where the HSE is in a bad way:It’s no different in the UK:
Could be in a worse position:https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2023/dec/06/canada-primary-healthcare-budget-cut-study
Perhaps revisiting the diagnostic criteria for gender identity disorder in the DSM-4 and making the criteria more stringent for a diagnosis of gender dysphoria in the DSM-5 may not have been such a good idea after all, as it exposed the myth being peddled of success rates in treating children who were never experiencing gender identity disorder or gender dysphoria in the first place, but rather their parents who were adamant that their children were neither homosexual nor transgender, and sought the assistance of quack doctors relying on crude stereotypes to claim success rates that led to the idea that children could be converted to grow out of whatever condition afflicted their parents and those who were determined to maintain delusions and a social order that would always be in conflict with reality:https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/debunked-no-80-of-trans-youth-do
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-end-of-the-desistance_b_8903690/amp
As for the idea that social media is somehow responsible? Social media is no more responsible than popular culture was always responsible for adults externalising their internal issues. It was no different when Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein was published and she only 20 years of age, critics imagined it could only have been written by a man, and even then the book was described as “a tissue of horrible and disgusting absurdity” (they’d a real way with words back then), but there’s no need to go back that far. Some of us here are undoubtedly of an age where we have fond (and perhaps not so fond for some of us) memories of the music of our youth, and the classic lyrics of some of the best of Britpop:Girls who want boys
Who like boys to be girls
Who do boys like they're girls
Who do girls like they're boys
Always should be someone you really love
Damon Albarn was inspired to write the song while on holiday in Magaluf, Spain, with then-girlfriend Justine Frischmann, lead singer of Elastica. According to Albarn, the city had "really tacky Essex nightclubs" and a rampant sexual scene among visitors, with "All these blokes and all these girls meeting at the watering hole and then just copulating. There's no morality involved, I'm not saying it should or shouldn't happen."https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girls_%26_Boys_%28Blur_song%29
0 -
Which points to the totally manufactured hysteria around puberty blockers - but its an easy one to rally the manipulated troops around
"Think of the children".
No one has actually established that puberty blockers are not an appropriate treatment - and this is not the conclusion of the Cass report. Its also a highly difficult thing to establish since a double blind trial is loaded with ethical difficulties where denying a cohort of children a treatment which they could benefit from simply as part of a medical trial is a very dodgy thing to do.
1 -
Advertisement
-
…manufactured hysteria around puberty blockers
What you refer to as "manufactured hysteria", I would call the need to safeguard children from ideological and permanent physical harm.
You then go on to state:
No one has actually established that puberty blockers are not an appropriate treatment
That means the opposite of this statement is also true; that nobody has established they are a safe and appropriate treatment. That is not a good reason to experiment with puberty blockers on children.
If anything, the bare minimum you should argue for is a temporary cessation if or until the evidence-base is firmly established; the same principle we would apply to any other aspect of medicine / medical research.
But as the Cass Report shows — medical research you have denied the validity of — children are being pigeon-holed down one single "treatment" pathway; that the Dutch "affirmation model" is not rooted in the best medical science and should be discarded; that a more "holistic" approach (to borrow Dr Cass' word) is needed; that children are being actively harmed. This is not research to be casually dismissed on a whim. The stakes are too high here.
I strongly suggest listening to the actual science on this, and not the word of activists who care nothing for the children but who care everything for the ideology they are so dogmatically affixed to.
And like all dogmas, it conveniently rejects evidence that contradicts its core beliefs.
"The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it." — George Orwell
9
