UK High Court finally acts to block unsupervised use puberty blockers on children

[gay_Aleks]

Tragically, you seem to lack basic self-awareness, because you are aiding exactly the right-wing reaction you "fear", you complete fool.

 

[Ajidica]

@innonimatu was the author saying that, or were they quoting someone? I don't remember the author making any declarative statements on the issue besides "its complicated and messy".

However, introducing the court into what is a medical issue gets complicated fast. I am currently on medically prescribed medication for psych stuff, and have been on them since my early teens. I consider them pretty essential to being able to live my life how I want. If I had to go through a court to be prescribed them would be a very intrusive and quite probably dehumanizing affair.

 

[Synobun]

So what do you do then?

Shouldn't LGBTQ kids be allowed to divorce their parents? Who looks after them? Who pays for it?

Here it actually contravenes the bill of rights act.

You allow children the agency of pursuing decisions like these themselves, under the supervision of medical professionals. Parental consent should really not even be a part of this equation. Minorities who break from the family norm are regularly abused or stifled, and even "not terrible" parents will likely say no to such a decision. The fact of the matter is that it shouldn't be the parents' decision what gender their child lives as, and puberty blockers are a step toward allowing the child to figure it out. If they decide they aren't truly trans, they stop taking them. If they decide they are, they're an adult by this point and can start serious transition. The key here is that they weren't forced to develop as a certain sex when there's a good chance that they feel the other sex best represents them.

 

[Angst]

I think Bell's story is tragic, nobody should make this journey twice. However, I am appalled that she chose to blame her prescription at age 16 when she was making irreversible choices as an adult aged 20. If transgender people are rare (I happen to be the first transgender person most of my very queer friends even know), de-transitions are a lot rarer. I think those staff reports and the rate of clinicians leaving is concerning. They raise points that I don't know are valid or just spiteful but certainly are deserving of greater scrutiny. What seems necessary here is to conduct an investigation into how the centre operates rather than blanket banning minors from accessing as powerful a tool as hormone blockers.

In my opinion, depending on the rarity of detransitioning and/or regretting transitioning, it's arguable that allowing easier transition is worth the cost of these, because of the rarity.

 

[innonimatu]

I wonder, with such a tone, why would you think that people in the Ask a Trans Person thread might be hostile to you. It is clear you have absolutely no compassion for transgender people, not unlike the same way reactionaries lacked such when gay people were dying in droves from AIDS while the governments did nothing, as it was just the "gay plague". I don't know if you're straight or not - doesn't f-n matter, honestly - but I scorn your "concern" for the way spaces have been commodified by capitalism. This, my friend, isn't the fault of trans people, and to blame them is like blaming the workers for making profits for the capitalists, i.e, complete nonsense. Shut the hell up and talk to some trans people, and I pray to God you will learn some empathy.

There's some to whom it's pointless to answer here, Cloud and Crezth have been around for years spewing the same open hatred of anyone who disagrees with their views. Ironically themselves complaining of being victims of hate.

You've not been around here for years. I'm not going to explain myself to you, only say I'm much older and have seen stuff you probably don't even imagine. It's called life experience, you're not the only one with it. The "gay plague" is something that touches home, and that is not a closed chapter. But the really important thing you ought to see is that these dramas repeat themselves generation after generation, only with some variations... as do the certainties of the young. Which is why you don't see it.

You're looking at being transsexual politically. Hey gay men have been there, done that previously... I do know about it. The world is not conspiring against you. The fact is most people don't care and won't care about transgender people, and even less about you personally. I can tell you that you're not receiving either compassion or hate from me, my compassion is reserved for friends and acquaintances and my hatred for people who deliberately go around doing harm to others and did it to someone close. Generally I sympathize with the oppressed but that does not blind me to the political realities. In this case: transsexuals as a social category are pawn in political games, a target to put out to ritual attack (mostly for the tribe of the religious right, currently), or a tool to look compassionate, for the PC centrist social liberals. I don't lower myself to those political theatrics, of one kind or another. So don't try to ascribe any such intentions to me. I'm concerned about the backlash because it will affect innocent people (including the trans!), bit because I am part of the trans social group. I don't do tribal politics.

What does concern me, to try to go back on-topic, in this was the gung-ho attitude of many people in the medical community about children or teenagers and transitioning. So I believe this court decision is a good one. You can persuade me that it wasn't, with rational arguments and real examples. You won't change my mind with attempted shaming for things I have no reason to feel ashamed of. This you should take as a lesson in basic politics if you are at all concerned with activism, trans or any other kind.

On calling the current high number of people seeking services for transitioning a fad and the answer a medical fashion: that is an opinion and we're still entitled to discuss matters of opinion. In fact what else is to discuss?
On that to I may be wrong and you can change my mind wither with numbers now or in due time. How many people start this process and then change their minds? What percentage has regretted doing it and how that been evolving over the past three years?
I admit I do not know, not can find reliable data on this. I'll be happy to look into any you can provide, as well as your arguments.

 

[Crezth]

A precious little white gay man from Western Europe who's decided he's above solidarity with the lesser queers and using a term like "transsexuals" really tells you everything you everything you need to know about the revolutionary credentials they love crowing about.

 

[Zardnaar]

You allow children the agency of pursuing decisions like these themselves, under the supervision of medical professionals. Parental consent should really not even be a part of this equation. Minorities who break from the family norm are regularly abused or stifled, and even "not terrible" parents will likely say no to such a decision. The fact of the matter is that it shouldn't be the parents' decision what gender their child lives as, and puberty blockers are a step toward allowing the child to figure it out. If they decide they aren't truly trans, they stop taking them. If they decide they are, they're an adult by this point and can start serious transition. The key here is that they weren't forced to develop as a certain sex when there's a good chance that they feel the other sex best represents them.

Real world doesn't work like that.

If parents want to do that that's fine if they don't that's fine.

Is it perfect? No but I can't see parents en masses voting for children being able to do whatever.

A precious little white gay man from Western Europe who's decided he's above solidarity with the lesser queers and using a term like "transsexuals" really tells you everything you everything you need to know about the revolutionary credentials they love crowing about.

Or you know it's not black and white.

 

[El_Machinae]

FTR: when I first learned about the puberty blockers, I was already a neuroscience student that had already attended lectures on the neuroanatomy of self-identifying transgender people. And, I will admit, I thought the entire concept of puberty blockers was amazing. I'd never thought of it, and it was a "omg, that's so obviously useful" moment.

You know, a simple calculation (or pair of calculations) would be pretty useful. Instead of everyone 'going by feel' on what feels right, it helps to create an internal metric.

Early on, we use puberty blockers in order to reduce psychological pain in someone experiencing distress. As options are slipping away due to body changes, any presenting dysphoria is going to be aggravated. So, an early metric to watch is "does the cohort receiving treatment experience less suffering?" It's an important question. Now, sometimes we 'force' minors to do things 'for their own good'. And sometimes this is the correct pathway. But sometimes, it works out poorly. That's a later measurement.

Later on, the question would be "what percentage of people perceive that they benefited vs were damaged by the choice they made. Because it's easier to measure the regret of a choice you made (vs. an opportunity lost), the language around these surveys needs to correct for that. So, for example, if 80% of people who didn't get puberty blockers end up experiencing lifelong psychological anguish, but 10% of people who did get blockers truly wish they hadn't, then that would be one sample set. Compare it to the opposite, where 10% of people who don't get them end up experiencing lifelong anguish, but 80% of people who got them 'regret it'. Whether we cared about the psychological pain of the teenagers will be very dependent on those numbers.

And I think it's just important to have a sense where those numbers should be. Everything else is going by feel.

By analogy, the majority of Americans think that foreign aid should be reduced to below 10% of the federal budget. That's how they feel about things. And it's important to have a gist in your head before measuring starts.

As to why the courts would be necessary in the UK, well, that would be a function of judges figuring out that the underlying medical regulations were insufficient. Honestly, I can see that happening. We're still in the early days of treating this condition, and it's not like "psychatric research" is a priority in anybody's spending patterns.

 

[innonimatu]

However, introducing the court into what is a medical issue gets complicated fast. I am currently on medically prescribed medication for psych stuff, and have been on them since my early teens. I consider them pretty essential to being able to live my life how I want. If I had to go through a court to be prescribed them would be a very intrusive and quite probably dehumanizing affair.

I agree that the check being a court procedure is also a potential problem because it can cause lengthy delays. And worse, high costs which may effectively bar poor people from assistance. It will depend on implementation.
But leaving it up to the staff of a single clinic seems also a bad solution to me.
What systems for checks on the medical assessments have been tried elsewhere?

@Zardnaar While parental oversight is a possible solution (who should know the child or teenager better?) it's not a good one because we all know plenty of cases of dysfunctional families. Parents already have a disproportional influence on their children, they have the opportunity to be the single most influential people on their lives. By the time their children are seeking to do important stuff against the parent's chosen guidance and there is a conflict they've already have had their chance at influence and failed. Time to bring in some third party to mediate and judge.
I just don't trust a single clinic (which may well be a for-profit one in some countries this interested in selling...) to be that third party.
By default we have the courts, and we already have family courts to judge on important stuff...

 

[Crezth]

Or you know it's not black and white.

It very clearly is black and white, since you've got people "spewing hate" on one side, and a court decision unilaterally blocking medical standards of care for transgender children on the other.

I don't think comfortably-living concern trolls who compare transgender activists to Nazis are in any kind of a gray area, no.

 

[innonimatu]

A precious little white gay man from Western Europe who's decided he's above solidarity with the lesser queers and using a term like "transsexuals" really tells you everything you everything you need to know about the revolutionary credentials they love crowing about.

Quoting so you can't delete or change it. Keep spewing that hatred here please. I love when the phony idpol activists make enemies of the social groups they claim to defend. I love when they expose themselves for frauds.

 

[Arakhor]

Moderator Action: Whereas I don't love all the bickering going on. Let's try not to get this thread closed in record time, shall we?

 

[Zardnaar]

It very clearly is black and white, since you've got people "spewing hate" on one side, and a court decision unilaterally blocking medical standards of care for transgender children on the other.

I don't think comfortably-living concern trolls who compare transgender activists to Nazis are in any kind of a gray area, no.

Did the court block the treatment completely or just block kids getting treatment unsupervised?

It sets a precedent and imho kids shouldn't be able to have at will access to prescription drugs.

Parents aren't perfect but the other option is really have courts over ruling there ability to control access to drugs. Would also violate other laws here not sure about UK.

It's not a trans right issue it parental rights. One can replace hormone blockers with other medications from a legal pov.

And yeah if it's a national health service who pays for it? Anyone paying tax gets a say.

 

[Crezth]

Quoting so you can't delete or change it. Keep spewing that hatred here please. I love when the phony idpol activists make enemies of the social groups they claim to defend. I love when they expose themselves for frauds.

Okay boomer.

 

[Synobun]

Real world doesn't work like that.

If parents want to do that that's fine if they don't that's fine.

Is it perfect? No but I can't see parents en masses voting for children being able to do whatever.

The "real world" didn't work like that for just about any minority... until it did. You force progress and leave the regressive conservatives behind in the dust. Expecting goodwill from the oppressor has never been a winning strategy, ever, in the history of mankind. There is no reason to expect it now.

@Zardnaar While parental oversight is a possible solution (who should know the child or teenager better?)

Might just be me, but in questions of personal identity, I'm thinking that the individual is the greatest authority and knows best. Certainly more than an outside observer. Even in normal households, children obscure their identity from their parents. The idea that parents know their children better than the children themselves is an antiquated joke of an idea.

 

[El_Machinae]

Anyone paying tax voting gets a say.

(though, I'll admit, wrong thread)

NHS actually has, imo, a pretty good system for whether a treatment happens. We try to measure the success of the intervention in 'mitigated suffering' (specifically DALYs), and then fund stuff that's sufficiently cost-to-benefit worthy. And, as a citizen, it makes it pretty easy to help. Just figure out a way of getting an intervention's cost down, and then it will be included in what's offered.

 

[Zardnaar]

The "real world" didn't work like that for just about any minority... until it did. You force progress and leave the regressive conservatives behind in the dust. Expecting goodwill from the oppressor has never been a winning strategy, ever, in the history of mankind. There is no reason to expect it now.



Might just be me, but in questions of personal identity, I'm thinking that the individual is the greatest authority and knows best. Certainly more than an outside observer. Even in normal households, children obscure their identity from their parents. The idea that parents know their children better than the children themselves is an antiquated joke of an idea.

Well you need to convince enough people to support that view.p

I'm not sure what's covered here but they do fund some things at least including surgery.

It always comes down cost benefit though. And even if the money is available doesn't mean the specialists are.

 

[Ajidica]

I agree that the check being a court procedure is also a potential problem because it can cause lengthy delays. And worse, high costs which may effectively bar poor people from assistance. It will depend on implementation.
But leaving it up to the staff of a single clinic seems also a bad solution to me.
What systems for checks on the medical assessments have been tried elsewhere?

That was one of the major issue the Atlantic article looked into, and there isn't any clear cut process. On one hand, it should be a medical issue handled by medical professionals. On the other, especially with minors, there should be some sort of brakes/pushback, but that has a long history of doubting that people are actually trans or disregarding their concerns. It is a messy, complicated issue that has no good answers.

Which, of course, is completely separate from your frankly strange assertions that there is some sort of shadow cabal trying to turn people gay/trans in order to further corporate interests.

 

[El_Machinae]

I am not agreeing that there's a shadow cabal, but I also think that people should be cautious about believing anything the pharmaceutical companies put out about this. Or, with strongly guarded caution, at the very least.

In my Society, I have noticed a proclivity for liberals to be over-diagnosing teenagers (and younger). And then spreading their opinions to each other. It strikes me that this can also be potentially harmful. On the one hand, you're trying to balance a safe environment with the harm of creating all types of confusion in a young person from someone they respect.

The only analogy I have personally, was Church elders discussing evidence of the supernatural. I believed them, and therefore I believed their moral foundations. At least they never helped me talk myself into life-altering decisions.

 

[Synobun]

I am not agreeing that there's a shadow cabal, but I also think that people should be cautious about believing anything the pharmaceutical companies put out about this. Or, with strongly guarded caution, at the very least.

In my Society, I have noticed a proclivity for liberals to be over-diagnosing teenagers (and younger). And then spreading their opinions to each other. It strikes me that this can also be potentially harmful. On the one hand, you're trying to balance a safe environment with the harm of creating all types of confusion in a young person from someone they respect.

The only analogy I have personally, was Church elders discussing evidence of the supernatural. I believed them, and therefore I believed their moral foundations. At least they never helped me talk myself into life-altering decisions.

I think this is a different problem than allowing for puberty blockers. If you have a fundamental mistrust in the healthcare institutions of your country, then it's not a question of whether or not puberty blockers should be allowed, but instead a question of how you can force the healthcare system to become trustworthy again.