UK High Court Rules Transgender Children Can Be Prescribed Puberty Blockers….But (updated)
(Please scroll down to the bottom of the page for updates)
The outcome of the Keira Bell vs Tavistock & Portman Gender Clinic case has been announced today.
The case was brought to try and stop the use of puberty blocking drugs for trans young people in the UK, by attacking a legal ruling known as Gillick Competency, where a young person under the age of 18 must show that they understand the results and consequences of medical treatment they consent to.
Gillick Competency is a fundamental underpinning of the right to bodily autonomy for women and young people, affecting not only puberty blockers but a host of other medical interventions, including contraception and abortion.
The court ruled in favour of the use of puberty blockers and Gillick Competency, which is unsurprising to those that actually know anything about this subject. However, the ruling very much sits “on the fence” and upholds the current status quo, and could be argued actually makes access to treatment more difficult by declaring that those under 16 years of age would be “unlikely” to be able to consent.
It is also worth noting that the court refused to hear any evidence from trans young people or those who support them, which would seem to indicate some anti-trans bias from the outset.
Puberty Blockers have been in use across the world for around 50 years, and their effects are well understood and documented.
Contrary to what is often reported, Kiera Bell did not "transition" as a child, but commenced puberty blockers at 17. At 18, as a legal adult, she started on cross sex hormones, and had elective surgery at 22.
Those who detransition account for 1% of those who a undergo transition, according to figures from the NHS, but those who detransition are often "weaponised" against the transgender community by anti-trans activists and bigots.
While its sad that transition didn't work for her and we wish her all the best on her journey, it should be noted that her experience is not reflective of the other 99% of trans people (adults, young people and children) who benefit enormously from transitioning away from their assigned birth gender to live as their authentic selves.
The case was brought by anti-trans groups and presented by a lawyer who has links to hard right, evangelical religious groups in the USA, further demonstrating the influence these groups are having on LGBT+ equality across Europe, where they are thought to be behind the attacks on LGBT+ rights in Poland and the removal of trans rights in Hungary.
Update 3/12/20
Well, the dust has settled a bit, and its a very dark day for trans young people.
Despite the ruling appearing to uphold the status quo, it would appear that the NHS Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS), the only clinic in the UK that actually deals with trans young people under 18, have decided that it means that all young people must get a court order before starting puberty blocking treatment.
But it gets so much worse.
They have cancelled every single future referral and withdrawn treatment for anyone currently on it, effectively forcing trans young people with severe Gender Dysphoria to undergo a puberty that will make things worse for them long term, and severely affecting their mental health now.
And have callously told families affected by the decision they have made that its effectively their problem, and to seek help for the distress caused elsewhere.
GIDS have been seen as problematic since inception by service users, many of which see it as unfit for purpose, but this complete disregard for the health and wellbeing of those under its “care” show that the management of this service are completely incompetent, and the service itself is a barbaric relic that should be discarded and rebuilt from the ground up.
This view is further reinforced from other evidence that has come to light from GIDS handling of this Judicial Review.
It turns out that, despite the wealth of scientific evidence available (I know of at least 35 studies of puberty blockers and their proven benefits), GIDS decided to present just one as evidence.
On top of that, part of the evidence presented by those against the use of this medication was a small study done on sheep.
You read that correctly. A study of sheep was taken as greater evidence than a study of humans.
It’s becoming very clear that this case was biased from the start with an intended anti-trans outcome, and all the court have managed to do is muddy the waters further, and cause great harm to generations more trans people.
Once again, it has been shown that many cisgender people do not understand trans people, do not want to understand trans people, and will do anything in their power to harm trans people.
If you have a young person in your life affected by this, we would advise contacting either Mermaids (Helpline 0808 801 0400, or text MERMAIDS to 85258), or Gendered Intelligence.
To end on a positive note, Mermaids are appealing this ruling (as opposed to GIDS), and there are several other legal challenges in the pipeline challenging both GIDS and the NHS handling of trans healthcare.