World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) Files

Hillary Cass, whatever else she is, is not a scientist.

I mean, I know they say that medicine is an art and not a science, but TBF there is some crossover, especially for experts who have carried out scientific research in their own medical field - and I think it's very clear that Hilary Cass fulfills that requirement.

There's a selected list (not exhaustive) of her publications - and not a one in the Scientific American, LOL - at the end of that wiki article.

Second:

the recommendations simply couldn’t be deduced from the evidence presented in the review,

That's not how it works though: her recommendations were that, for instance, treatments such as puberty blockers have no solid research basis for use in gender dysphoria (and yes, we all knew that already, but activists have made it necessary to prove this step by step) and therefore should no longer be given as though they were the gold standard treatment, but rather an experimental treatment to be compared with other treatments.

That's not going too far based on insufficient evidence - it's exactly the opposite. It's the basic prudent approach that should have been in place years ago. Because the evidence is insufficient.

I mean, I know they say that medicine is an art and not a science, but TBF there is some crossover, especially for experts who have carried out scientific research in their own medical field - and I think it's very clear that Hilary Cass fulfills that requirement.

It’s not clear though, which is the point, because no matter what they say, it does not turn Hillary Cass into something she is not.

(now that’s irony 😂)

There's a selected list (not exhaustive) of her publications - and not a one in the Scientific American, LOL - at the end of that wiki article.

“The NHS Experience: The Snakes and Ladders Guide for Parents and Professionals”? 😁

I’ll give you one just as good, though it may cause you to wonder what the fcuk do I be reading 😂

In 1546, the Malleus Maleficarum established that sexual relationships between demons and humans were an essential belief for Christians. But its authors considered also the possibility that demons provoked a false pregnancy in some women, filling their belly with air due to certain herbs they made them drink in beverages during the Sabbaths; at the time of giving birth to the child, a big quantity of air escaped from the woman's vagina. The false pregnancy was later explained by medicine. [citation needed]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexuality_in_Christian_demonology

I’m guessing the [citation needed] refers to the belief, and not to the fact that it was later explained by medicine. I’d hope that’s what it refers to anyway or there’s someone somewhere has some explaining to do 😂

That's not how it works though

That’s exactly how recommendations based on a review of current evidence are supposed to work. What you’re referring to as a recommendation was just one of the findings, but nobody needed a 400 page review of current evidence to determine that much - not only is there not sufficient evidence of their efficacy, the evidence there is, is of such poor quality that it’s a perfectly reasonable recommendation for the NHS to dial it back and design clinical trials to gather evidence from the UK population for themselves, in order to determine future policies.

The US are far more gung-ho, not just in regards to the provision of transgender healthcare services, but if you’ve got the money, someone’s got the snake oil… medicine. PP for example pivoted their business model into the provision of hormones, catering for a different clientele than their traditional clientele:

https://www.plannedparenthood.org/get-care/our-services/gender-affirming-care

I’m not sure that explains how their funding increased under the Trump Administration, seems unlikely given the numbers involved, but rather than put PP out of business as was intended, their business is in rude health:

https://archive.ph/jhKuM

Yet another example of… y’know 😬

I wasn't particularly impressed by the list of academic signatories, here's a sample.

1. Naoise Murphy, Lecturer in English, Maynooth University, Maynooth
2. Gerry Kearns, Professor of Geography, Maynooth University, Maynooth
3. William O'Reilly, Senior Administrator, TU Dublin, Dublin
4. Victoria Sánchez Muñoz, PhD student, University of Galway, Galway
5. Mercedes Carbayo Abengozar, Lecturer in Spanish, Maynooth, Maynooth
6. Jennifer Schweppe, Professor of Law , European Centre for the Study of Hate, University of Limerick, Limerick
7. Dermot Barry , Technical Officer , Munster Technological University , Cork
8. Niamh Duggan, Student, ATU Sligo, Cork
9. Aoife Lynch, Marketing Officer, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast

It's a wonder they didn't get the campus janitor to sign it.

I am grateful though for being made aware of the 'expert' Dr Chris Noone of Galway Uni. I've always wanted the names of the experts. Looking at his academic research it's not surprising he does seem have some rather odd interests. (PDF) Understanding how gay men construct good chemsex participation using critical discursive psychology.pdf (researchgate.net) . Fascinating.

Now that he has been brought to my attention (well I actually came across this weeks ago) I will be keeping an eye on him, because if he is proven to be wrong I don't think he should get away with it professionally unscathed. Not the only one either.

She's a physician who does research. Unless you think that means psychotherapy or homeopathy or something, that's scientific research. IMO she's better qualified as a scientist than someone who's done a BSc and went straight into management or other unrelated domain.

What exactly is your definition of a scientist?

"It's a wonder they didn't get the campus janitor to sign it."

😁

No one knows for those who go through gender dysphoria as a child or teenager that will then persist into adulthood. Noone seems to think differently.

Well the hope of treatment is that it wouldn’t? That’s why they’re making the point about 3 year waiting list -

How long will I have to wait before my initial assessment?​

We are currently seeing people referred between three and three and a half years ago. This is longer than we would like and we are working to reduce the waiting times. Waiting times are subject to change and can get better or worse. 

This does not mean you have to wait to start exploring and expressing your gender. For more information on social and legal transition see the “While You Wait” and “Supports” section.

https://nationalgenderserviceireland.com/waiting-times-2/

I know what you’re saying, and they address your point further down the article by demonstrating what they mean by the provision of transgender healthcare -

The Cass Report speaks about being trans as if it is a disorder. This is counter to the ICD-11 guidelines adopted by the World Health Organization in 2019 which moved away from the practice of pathologising trans people and moved issues of gender identity from the chapter on mental and behavioural disorders into the chapter on conditions (as opposed to diseases or disorders) related to sexual health, to reflect “current knowledge that trans-related and gender diverse identities are not conditions of mental ill-health, and that classifying them as such can cause enormous stigma”.

They’re not solely referring to gender dysphoria (or as it’s now defined), gender incongruence:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9286744/

They’re distinguishing between transgender as an identity, and the distress caused by experiencing gender incongruence which is what healthcare services are intended to address. CAMHS is a disaster, but that’s kinda what’s being touted similar to the recommendations of the Cass Review of having more localised hubs offering holistic support services (which haven’t worked out well for patients availing of NHS healthcare services already, but y’know - definition of insanity, etc), so how well they can work in Ireland really is anyone’s guess, and no one, or Noone at any rate, can possibly predict how these hubs will actually work in practice. The hope is that they will operate smoothly, but if parents wish to avail of the services, they really will have to bet their children’s lives on it.

That’s why the article starts that way, but the link goes to the Pew Research Centre survey of parents in the US, would’ve been more helpful if they’d provided information from any of the many sources in Ireland, and the second link to the stat on attacks on people who are transgender across Europe is broken (it’s only been a few months 😖), but the figures are fudgy anyway. It’s a rhetorical device in any case much like the ‘appalling vista’ scenarios that have been proffered at various times throughout this discussion. The originator of that term was some baby:

As Master of the Rolls he threw out a civil action by the Birmingham Six against West Midlands Police in 1980 and remarked that to accept their case that police officers had lied about their confessions and beaten them would have opened up ``an appalling vista''.

When the Guildford Four's convictions were overturned in 1989, he said they were probably guilty of murder anyway. He subsequently apologised.

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/appalling-vista-judge-dies-at-100/26155585.html

The wheels really come off the wagon well down into the article though:

Two thirds of the country voted for bodily autonomy in 2018, and that is all that trans people are asking for. Consider another parallel with the stories we heard during the campaign to repeal the Eighth Amendment — it is not possible to stop people from transitioning, so what is happening now is that we are just denying people from accessing safe and effective healthcare.

That’s not what two thirds of the country voted for, and the only justification for claiming that children are being denied transgender healthcare is because previously children were referred from Crumlin to the Tavistock clinic in the UK, gone now obviously, took their ball and went home, so the children* started picking fights amongst themselves:

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/hse-use-of-controversial-tavistock-gender-clinic-needs-an-external-review/a615683078.html

*adults, obviously, but you wouldn’t be able to tell from their behaviour.

There's a lot more to it all than that of course

There really is, and while much of it started before Wadhwa was appointed to the CEO position of ERCC, it was because of the way they mishandled the issue of one of their employees expressing their philosophical beliefs in the workplace:

The tribunal heard that when Ms Adams joined Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre as a counselling and support worker around February 2021, she was supportive of trans people and "excited" by its trans inclusion policy.

In the months that followed, she began to feel there were issues around the way gender issues were dealt with by the organisation and described the atmosphere as "eggshelly".

…

Much of the tribunal centred on a disciplinary process that began after Ms Adams sought clarity on how to respond to an abuse survivor who wanted to know if a support worker who identified as non-binary was a man or a woman.

Some people who do not consider themselves to have a solely male or female gender identity describe themselves as non-binary.

The tribunal found that the support worker in question had changed their name to one that “sounded and appeared to be male”.

Management drafted a response clarifying that the centre did not employ men, but advised against divulging any further details due to staff privacy.

Ms Adams responded in June 2022 saying that the issue appeared to be a “minefield”.

The following month, she was invited to an investigation meeting regarding “potentially transphobic” views. A disciplinary process was later launched.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1ee39wn30xo

That “eggshelly” atmosphere for other employees of ERCC was created by Adams who describes herself as a “sex realist” (I don’t ask what that entails, I don’t care, frankly - people are entitled to hold whatever beliefs they wish, they’re not entitled to create a hostile atmosphere in the workplace, basic employment law):

Adams, who describes herself as a “sex realist”, had questioned whether it was fair and appropriate for the centre to insist that its clients could not specify that they only wanted support from biological women.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/may/20/edinburgh-crisis-worker-wins-tribunal-over-gender-critical-views

It was that the disciplinary process was invoked and how it was carried out by the Management at ERCC is why they were found to be liable for unfair dismissal or constructive dismissal.

What’s actually interesting about Wadha’s comments (and it was unquestionably, undoubtedly a monumentally stupid comment), is that it came back to haunt them - it required that they examine their own prejudices:

In an interview on the Guilty Feminist podcast, Wadhwa stated:

So we might have fear of men of a certain ethnicity, we might have fear of trans people, and it could be linked to an experience of trauma. I think it is, it is okay to hold those things as long as you are willing to acknowledge that, in support, we will accept that ... the other thing is that sexual violence happens to bigoted people as well. And so, you know, it is not discerning crime. But these spaces are also for you. But if you bring unacceptable beliefs that are discriminatory in nature, we will begin to work with you on your journey of recovery from trauma. But please also expect to be challenged on your prejudices.

Wadhwa's comments were criticized, including by  For Women Scotland and sexual violence researcher Jessica Taylor. JK Rowling stated that Wadhwa's comments inspired her to create Beira's Place, a support centre which does not hire or serve trans women. Wadhwa said her words were taken out context.

Even in its proper context, it was still a monumentally stupid statement. There’s no question that Wadha given their background, education and extensive experience in the sector, is qualified for the CEO position, but their behaviour as CEO was rightly found by the subsequent investigation into the organisation that followed, to have failed to set professional standards of behaviour:

In September 2024, Wadhwa resigned after a review commissioned by Rape Crisis Scotland found that she "did not understand the limits on her role's authority, when to refer decisions to trustees and failed to set professional standards of behaviour". The review found that the Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre had not protected women-only spaces, had not put survivors first, and had not followed national service standards.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mridul_Wadhwa

It’s no different than the standards expected of doctors in employment - that they too are not entitled to refer to service users however they wish, or tell prospective service users that they ‘should expect to be challenged on their prejudices’, that doing so could see them becoming the subject of disciplinary action by their employer which would not amount to unlawful discrimination:

https://www.hilldickinson.com/insights/articles/eat-dismisses-appeal-christian-doctor-transgender-pronoun-discrimination-claim

or tell prospective service users that they ‘should expect to be challenged on their prejudices’, that doing so could see them becoming the subject of disciplinary action by their employer which would not amount to unlawful discrimination:

And you've got this the wrong way around too: the person who wanted to "challenge the service users on their prejudice" was Mridul Wadhwa, not Roz Adams.

Wadhwa said that rape victims "can be bigots too" (ie by asking to have a female rape counsellor they were showing their bigotry against males) and that they should expect to be challenged on that. She said that they needed to "reframe their trauma" by learning to be around men.

Somehow I'm not convinced that the most effective way to do that is to put a traumatised woman in a room with a man and tell her to suck it up.

It’s incredible that a rape crisis center employed a man in a job advertised as being for a woman. And that after they employed him, he then went in to attack raped women who, naturally, wanted female counsellors. He attacked the raped women by saying they were bigots, for wanting only females to deal with them.

Can't you read? Wadwha attacked raped women, or women who had been raped. Its not that hard to understand. That's all you got from the most recent posts? Really?

As a person who experienced domestic abuse and violence as a young child, to this day, more than 30 years later, certain things related to the circumstances of that 'trigger' me, for want of a better word, and I feel scared and panicky. I can't imagine how horrific it would have been for women who were the recent victims of rape or sexual assault to specifically ask for a female counselor and be gaslighted and shamed into accepting a male. I'm sorry but women's trauma isn't your opportunity to cosplay and 'reeducate' , you absolute weirdo (that guy, not you). Good on jk Rowling for putting her own money down to set up a refuge for women only. Anyone who has been through it knows how essential that is.

LOL I presume the poster meant attacked them verbally. Wadhwa called rape victims "bigots" for asking to be assigned a female counsellor and said they had to expect to be challenged on their prejudices on a "Guilty Feminist" podcast, among other places. Here's some of the transcript with a link to the audio:

And see how Wadhwa makes it all about Wadhwa, who is of course the real victim here. Rape victims being "

But if you bring unacceptable beliefs that are discriminatory in nature, we will begin to work with you on your journey of recovery from trauma. But please also expect to be challenged on your prejudices, because how can you heal from trauma and build a new relationship with your trauma, because you can’t forget, and you can’t go back to life before traumatic incident or traumatic incidents. And some of us never, ever had a life before traumatic incidents. But if you have to reframe your trauma, I think it is important as part of that reframing, having a more positive relationship with it, where it becomes a story that empowers you and allows you to go and do other more beautiful things with your life, you also have to rethink your relationship with prejudice. 

I'd call that an attack, in the circumstances. It's not as though they're posting on a discussion forum after all - they're looking for appropriate counselling after trauma.

Interestingly I notice that even after Wadhwa's departure, ERCC is still refusing to guarantee that abused women can access female-only spaces

And see how Wadhwa makes it all about Wadhwa, who is of course the real victim here. Rape victims being "

Who do you imagine the ‘us’ is referring to in that context? It’s definitely not Wadhwa making it all about Wadhwa. You only have to think back to the previous page or two where you presented a study which identified certain characteristics were demonstrated to be more prevalent among survivors of rape and sexual abuse.

Neither services for men, nor services for women are impacting upon each other. The problem with ERCC is that they didn’t adhere to national standards in Scotland and upon being presented with service users who expressed a preference for the sex of the counsellors assigned to their case, instead of referring those service users to more appropriate service providers within the Rape Crisis Scotland network, they provided a service that was inappropriate for services users needs. That wasn’t the case with the employee in question who is, as some people would refer to them - a biological woman.

Service providers in Scotland are not limited to service providers for women only, and the organisation founded by JK operates outside of the regulations of that network, in the private sector, as opposed to the charity sector, which provides appropriate services for all service users in accordance with their preferences and needs:

https://www.rapecrisisscotland.org.uk/news/blog/supporting-lgbtq-survivors/