Top Irish clinicians file formal complaint over dangerous care of gender-confused kids

[Vambram]

Top Irish clinicians file formal complaint over dangerous care of gender-confused kids

The Republic of Ireland must stop driving gender-confused kids down the path of ‘sex-swap’ procedures, top clinicians have warned.

www.christian.org.uk

The Republic of Ireland must stop driving gender-confused kids down the path of ‘sex-swap’ procedures, top clinicians have warned.

In a formal complaint to the Health Information and Quality Authority, Prof Donal O’Shea and Dr Paul Moran of the National Gender Service criticised the Health Service Executive (HSE) for referring gender-confused children to ‘trans-affirming’ clinics overseas.

The clinicians highlighted “a series of cases as examples of harm and risk caused to Irish children by these services”. Dr Moran warned that if a clinic does not address a child’s other issues, then it can heighten problems such as “social avoidance” and “functional impairment”.

Tavistock​

Ireland does not have specialist psychological services for gender-confused children. Instead they were referred to the notorious NHS Tavistock clinic in London, until it stopped accepting new referrals in October 2022. According to the HSE, 229 children were referred to the Tavistock between 2015 and 2022.

Prof O’Shea said that in 2016 the National Gender Service started to see young adults who were “clearly not ready” for the procedures they started at Tavistock.

He said: “Individuals that we did not think were ready were well under way with their transition and having great mental health difficulties as a result of that.”

The controversial London clinic is due to close in the coming months after an independent report by Dr Hilary Cass found it was not a “safe or viable long-term option”. The HSE intends to refer children to the two regional hubs that will replace Tavistock, which are set to operate under interim guidance informed by the Cass Review’s findings.

‘Incredible risk’​

In September, Prof O’Shea criticised the HSE for inviting activists to create a trans-affirming clinical pathway, which would be “dangerous and goes against all emerging evidence of the need to be safe and careful”.

Under its proposals, children would be referred to a Belgian clinic by Dr Vanessa Lacey, a former senior manager at the trans-affirming Transgender Equality Network Ireland.

Despite previously being reprimanded for raising concerns over the referral of Irish children to the Tavistock clinic, Prof O’Shea said: “It’s more important to speak out when there is a culture in an organisation that is prepared to lie, intimidate, mislead” and use “funds to put vulnerable individuals at incredible risk”.

 

[RileyG]

Good. Children don’t need sex change survey. Let boys be boys and girls be girls.

 

[OldAbramBrown]

The alleged criteria for gender identity promoted by these contractors were fashion statements invented by prayerless theologians of the body. Before them, people were too busy living like they had to. Lots of boys and girls wore similar clothes (with a bit of attention to fit). These contractors now shame the young based on their emotions and tastes, as did prayerless religion. Their "solution" is the "consolation prize". Entrapment of the innocent inarticulate is by leading questions.

Furthermore, long practice showed (if anyone noticed) that premature "treatment" based on any external ambiguities was often a bad thing.

There is a ghoulish faction that likes nothing better than when christians talk about children's private parts.

Much of the focus of the Tavistock organisations was psychoanalysis based which was largely poisoned by fixation with private organs (as is faithless moralising).

 

[OldAbramBrown]

In a completely different milieu some of the people I have something in common with call themselves non binary for a variety of very good reasons and in their case it is not about letting themselves be used against others.

 

[OldAbramBrown]

Fear is struck in inarticulate family members who find that quango culture has turned their own into memes, and that is mistaken for hostility. (The loved ones are human shields for the quangoes.) I remember when we all knew we were original and officialdom was (more or less) content to leave us that way. There are lots of crossover style cues such as contrasting trim. Boys could perhaps copy (actual) tomboys and girls could wear paisley cravats just for example.

At one time no-one nagged us about our emotions - that is an intrusion copied from bad theology from 1980 onwards (most people of religion can't remember that far back so secular authorities now don't either). The most crucial point yet to be seen is whether children will have the strength of mind to tell authorities not to convert their bodies. 20 th century religion bought into the obsessions that sadly dogged most versions of psychoanalysis, and has in turn reinforced mainstream institutions thereby.

Everybody with differences needs a tactful environment which is not furnished by stereotype and counterstereotype ridden weaponising and counter weaponising by those in charge. I always found men and women of all shapes and tastes doing the same things and able to participate in the same ranges of thinking, until recently. Toys and games weren't political at all.

 

[rjs330]

Top Irish clinicians file formal complaint over dangerous care of gender-confused kids

The Republic of Ireland must stop driving gender-confused kids down the path of ‘sex-swap’ procedures, top clinicians have warned.

www.christian.org.uk

The Republic of Ireland must stop driving gender-confused kids down the path of ‘sex-swap’ procedures, top clinicians have warned.

In a formal complaint to the Health Information and Quality Authority, Prof Donal O’Shea and Dr Paul Moran of the National Gender Service criticised the Health Service Executive (HSE) for referring gender-confused children to ‘trans-affirming’ clinics overseas.

The clinicians highlighted “a series of cases as examples of harm and risk caused to Irish children by these services”. Dr Moran warned that if a clinic does not address a child’s other issues, then it can heighten problems such as “social avoidance” and “functional impairment”.

Tavistock​

Ireland does not have specialist psychological services for gender-confused children. Instead they were referred to the notorious NHS Tavistock clinic in London, until it stopped accepting new referrals in October 2022. According to the HSE, 229 children were referred to the Tavistock between 2015 and 2022.

Prof O’Shea said that in 2016 the National Gender Service started to see young adults who were “clearly not ready” for the procedures they started at Tavistock.

He said: “Individuals that we did not think were ready were well under way with their transition and having great mental health difficulties as a result of that.”

The controversial London clinic is due to close in the coming months after an independent report by Dr Hilary Cass found it was not a “safe or viable long-term option”. The HSE intends to refer children to the two regional hubs that will replace Tavistock, which are set to operate under interim guidance informed by the Cass Review’s findings.

‘Incredible risk’​

In September, Prof O’Shea criticised the HSE for inviting activists to create a trans-affirming clinical pathway, which would be “dangerous and goes against all emerging evidence of the need to be safe and careful”.

Under its proposals, children would be referred to a Belgian clinic by Dr Vanessa Lacey, a former senior manager at the trans-affirming Transgender Equality Network Ireland.

Despite previously being reprimanded for raising concerns over the referral of Irish children to the Tavistock clinic, Prof O’Shea said: “It’s more important to speak out when there is a culture in an organisation that is prepared to lie, intimidate, mislead” and use “funds to put vulnerable individuals at incredible risk”.

This will be interesting to see where it goes. Ireland has become a very strong trans affirming country. Perhaps stronger than many. But some very important clinicians in Ireland are speaking up and moving forward to stop the affirmative care model for kids which is nothing but a direct pathway to gender surgeries. They are working for a psychological model to deal with the comorbitities and other issues kids may be facing including your typical teen angst over growing up and finding yourself and a place to belong.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I do see some parallels between this, and how we had the sharp uptick of children getting prescribed ADHD meds.

I think it's a scenario in which it's a phenomenon that does occur in a very small percentage of people. There are certainly people who truly feel like they, deep down, identify with the other gender. And for those people (back 15-20 years ago, when the diagnostic criteria for it was much stricter), they found that affirmation approaches seemed to have better outcomes than existing meds they tried to repurpose and/or therapy.


However, I think a couple of factors have contributed to the sharp uptick of diagnoses and fast-tracking of this process.

1) Profit motives of the clinics offering the services. A couple of tidbits to consider. Many clinics offering such care have implemented a protocol called "FASST" (acronym) which stands for "First Assessment, Single-Session Triage" - I know, sounds like a Babylon Bee headline, but it's real, and it's implemented by some larger well-known clinics that offer this kind of care. (where they tout being able to give hormones after the first visit with no prior referral)

And, in one such high-profile case involving Cincinnati Children's Hospital Gender Clinic (the 4th largest of its kind in the nation), a judge expressed that she was concerned that the director of the hospital’s Transgender Health Clinic said 100 percent of patients seen by the clinic “who present for care are considered to be appropriate candidates for continued gender treatment.”

If we were talking about an Orthopedic surgical practice, in which the spinal surgeon said that 100% of people showing up were good candidates for back surgery, and this was being determined with a fast-tracking triage protocol, you'd better believe that surgeon would be under some serious scrutiny.


2) This is something that's presented as a mental healthcare issue in certain conversations, yet almost presented as "this is completely normal" in others... in certain instances it's even a "status-symbol" or "point of pride" where in circle social circles, there's a level of "coolness" associated with being anything other than a boring old straight/cis person. That's something that's pretty unique to this.

For instance, it's social/ideological thing when people want to create a flag to celebrate it, make it a core piece of their identity, and suggest that everyone else should have to embrace it as "completely normal"...but, when people exhibit some pushback against the social/ideological aspects, it quickly pivots to "well, this is a private healthcare/medical decision between them and their doctor, so you just need to stay out of it"


3) It's one of the few mental healthcare issues in which we prioritize the individuals feelings over any/all other countervailing interests.

For instance, two-thirds of anabolic steroid users (which ironically, are using many of the same hormone interventions that would be prescribed to a FTM trans person) have some sort of body image psychological issue (the most common being one called "muscle dysmorphia" - in which the person feels like they aren't muscular enough, and taking steroids helps them get bigger and alleviates some of the anxiety and depression -at least in the short term)

Yet, our public discourse around the two topics would be very different.

For instance, if a 16 year old female with gender dysphoria wants to transition and said "I want to take these hormones so that my outward appearance more closely matches how I feel I should look", people talk about it very differently compared to if a 16 year old male with muscle dysmorphia said the exact same thing.

In the case of the former, half of the population would say "I'm so proud of you, you're so brave to come out and admit this, we need to accommodate you however we can and anyone who pushes back against the idea is just living the past"

In the case of the latter, it would be near universal agreement that "No, absolutely not, you're not even done growing yet...not everyone is going to look like Arnold or The Rock, we're not going let you wreck your liver & kidneys and set yourself up for potential cardiovascular issues down the road just because it would make you feel better to have bigger biceps, if you're having anxiety and depression about the way you look, we'll find another way to deal with this"

 

[Vambram]

I do see some parallels between this, and how we had the sharp uptick of children getting prescribed ADHD meds.

I think it's a scenario in which it's a phenomenon that does occur in a very small percentage of people. There are certainly people who truly feel like they, deep down, identify with the other gender. And for those people (back 15-20 years ago, when the diagnostic criteria for it was much stricter), they found that affirmation approaches seemed to have better outcomes than existing meds they tried to repurpose and/or therapy.


However, I think a couple of factors have contributed to the sharp uptick of diagnoses and fast-tracking of this process.

1) Profit motives of the clinics offering the services. A couple of tidbits to consider. Many clinics offering such care have implemented a protocol called "FASST" (acronym) which stands for "First Assessment, Single-Session Triage" - I know, sounds like a Babylon Bee headline, but it's real, and it's implemented by some larger well-known clinics that offer this kind of care. (where they tout being able to give hormones after the first visit with no prior referral)

And, in one such high-profile case involving Cincinnati Children's Hospital Gender Clinic (the 4th largest of its kind in the nation), a judge expressed that she was concerned that the director of the hospital’s Transgender Health Clinic said 100 percent of patients seen by the clinic “who present for care are considered to be appropriate candidates for continued gender treatment.”

If we were talking about an Orthopedic surgical practice, in which the spinal surgeon said that 100% of people showing up were good candidates for back surgery, and this was being determined with a fast-tracking triage protocol, you'd better believe that surgeon would be under some serious scrutiny.


2) This is something that's presented as a mental healthcare issue in certain conversations, yet almost presented as "this is completely normal" in others... in certain instances it's even a "status-symbol" or "point of pride" where in circle social circles, there's a level of "coolness" associated with being anything other than a boring old straight/cis person. That's something that's pretty unique to this.

For instance, it's social/ideological thing when people want to create a flag to celebrate it, make it a core piece of their identity, and suggest that everyone else should have to embrace it as "completely normal"...but, when people exhibit some pushback against the social/ideological aspects, it quickly pivots to "well, this is a private healthcare/medical decision between them and their doctor, so you just need to stay out of it"


3) It's one of the few mental healthcare issues in which we prioritize the individuals feelings over any/all other countervailing interests.

For instance, two-thirds of anabolic steroid users (which ironically, are using many of the same hormone interventions that would be prescribed to a FTM trans person) have some sort of body image psychological issue (the most common being one called "muscle dysmorphia" - in which the person feels like they aren't muscular enough, and taking steroids helps them get bigger and alleviates some of the anxiety and depression -at least in the short term)

Yet, our public discourse around the two topics would be very different.

For instance, if a 16 year old female with gender dysphoria wants to transition and said "I want to take these hormones so that my outward appearance more closely matches how I feel I should look", people talk about it very differently compared to if a 16 year old male with muscle dysmorphia said the exact same thing.

In the case of the former, half of the population would say "I'm so proud of you, you're so brave to come out and admit this, we need to accommodate you however we can and anyone who pushes back against the idea is just living the past"

In the case of the latter, it would be near universal agreement that "No, absolutely not, you're not even done growing yet...not everyone is going to look like Arnold or The Rock, we're not going let you wreck your liver & kidneys and set yourself up for potential cardiovascular issues down the road just because it would make you feel better to have bigger biceps, if you're having anxiety and depression about the way you look, we'll find another way to deal with this"

Thank you very much, ThatRobGuy for a very thoughtful, very reasonable, and balanced post on the topic of children and the Transgender issues.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Thank you very much, ThatRobGuy for a very thoughtful, very reasonable, and balanced post on the topic of children and the Transgender issues.

I think the thoughtful aspect is often what's lacking in a lot of the conversations.

And I don't mean "thoughtful" as in "polite", I mean "thoughtful" as in careful consideration... as in, there's some major implications with this approach, how about we take a little more time than a 1-hour visit to a clinic that's operating with the same scruples as a pill-mill before we make the decision to go full speed ahead.

The fact that it's both a "social issue" and a "medical issue" is what muddies the waters. People tend to think more clearly & pragmatically about ones that fall purely in the latter because it's not going to risk any ostracization from their social circles if they come down on the "wrong side" of the debate.

For instance, when I started a thread a few months back about the topic of a few specialty weight loss clinics suggesting that we normalize and de-stigmatize bariatric surgery and Ozempic-like drugs for people as young as 14-16. There was near universal agreement that "that's crazy, no we shouldn't be going that route with people that young except for extremely rare circumstances". Yet, when discussed in the context of this topic, that thoughtful consideration seems to go right out the window.

That's compounded by the fact there's very little actual expertise out there in this particular field of medicine/study. Per Reuters, a survey conducted among MDs of internal medicine showed that while 86% were willing to provide routine care to transgender patients (up to and including routine sex-specific screenings and refilling prescriptions for hormone therapies), 2/3 said that they didn't have a good handle on the guidelines and were admittedly "undertrained" on the issue. The author of the study concluded that "willingness is not necessarily equivalent to competence".
(which is to be expected, this topic, at this large of a scale, with all of the social pressures surrounding it are uncharted territory...I'd liken it to the doctors who were trying to do what they thought was right at the beginning of the HIV/AIDS spike when people just didn't know a whole lot about it -- a lot of mistakes were made, despite the fact that doctors were trying to wrap their arms around "this very new thing")


All that being said, as noted earlier, I think there are cases where certain hormonal interventions and affirmation are the best choice and the "path of least resistance", but for major issues like this, taking time to really dig in is important, and I just don't think these are the kinds of decisions should be the "first approach"

Somehow, in a matter of a 5-10 years, we've gone from "well, let's allow them to socially transition first, see how that goes (in conjunction with regular meetings with a trained mental health expert), and if they feel the same way 2 years into the process, it may be time to consider if they want to make the leap... to the "FASST" protocol I mentioned earlier, where it's "we can get you hormones on your first visit without a prior referral".

 

[rjs330]

I am sure there are people who have gender dysphoria, where they feel that they are the opposite sex for whatever reason. Which is a mental health disorder. They are a very small percentage of the population. We have mental health disorders of other kinds like schizophrenia, bi-polar, anorexia etc. where people experience reality differently that the rest of us. We treat them through psychological means.

What we have seen however id an explosion of transgender kids who claim they are transgender. The treatment for them is radically different than for other mental health disorders. One issue is there is NO screening process under which kids are screened for other disorders or other issues in a child that actually may be the issues as to why they feel or want to be considered trans. If they say they are trans then they are trans. There is no psychological screening for other things.

The second issue is the sociological impacts of this as Rob mentioned. The impact on kids that have transitioned is totally unknown at this time.

We are literally experimenting on kids when we don't even know if they are really dysphoric or not.

Secondly we are not exploring any other avenues of treatment in the US and Canada. I think Ireland has been the same way.

 

[rjs330]

I think the thoughtful aspect is often what's lacking in a lot of the conversations.

And I don't mean "thoughtful" as in "polite", I mean "thoughtful" as in careful consideration... as in, there's some major implications with this approach, how about we take a little more time than a 1-hour visit to a clinic that's operating with the same scruples as a pill-mill before we make the decision to go full speed ahead.

The fact that it's both a "social issue" and a "medical issue" is what muddies the waters. People tend to think more clearly & pragmatically about ones that fall purely in the latter because it's not going to risk any ostracization from their social circles if they come down on the "wrong side" of the debate.

For instance, when I started a thread a few months back about the topic of a few specialty weight loss clinics suggesting that we normalize and de-stigmatize bariatric surgery and Ozempic-like drugs for people as young as 14-16. There was near universal agreement that "that's crazy, no we shouldn't be going that route with people that young except for extremely rare circumstances". Yet, when discussed in the context of this topic, that thoughtful consideration seems to go right out the window.

That's compounded by the fact there's very little actual expertise out there in this particular field of medicine/study. Per Reuters, a survey conducted among MDs of internal medicine showed that while 86% were willing to provide routine care to transgender patients (up to and including routine sex-specific screenings and refilling prescriptions for hormone therapies), 2/3 said that they didn't have a good handle on the guidelines and were admittedly "undertrained" on the issue. The author of the study concluded that "willingness is not necessarily equivalent to competence".
(which is to be expected, this topic, at this large of a scale, with all of the social pressures surrounding it are uncharted territory...I'd liken it to the doctors who were trying to do what they thought was right at the beginning of the HIV/AIDS spike when people just didn't know a whole lot about it -- a lot of mistakes were made, despite the fact that doctors were trying to wrap their arms around "this very new thing")


All that being said, as noted earlier, I think there are cases where certain hormonal interventions and affirmation are the best choice and the "path of least resistance", but for major issues like this, taking time to really dig in is important, and I just don't think these are the kinds of decisions should be the "first approach"

Somehow, in a matter of a 5-10 years, we've gone from "well, let's allow them to socially transition first, see how that goes (in conjunction with regular meetings with a trained mental health expert), and if they feel the same way 2 years into the process, it may be time to consider if they want to make the leap... to the "FASST" protocol I mentioned earlier, where it's "we can get you hormones on your first visit without a prior referral".

This is another very thoughtful approach which is often missed in the conversation. There are places on line when you can get a referral with just a short on line conversation. This is the one situation where the patient dictates what is factual. "I'm transgender" is all that is needed and no one says, "Hmm... let's explore that." No it's "Since you say you then you are. Here's puberty blockers and you are on your way to the hormones.".

And if you call for a much more critical approach you are a transphobe and a bigot.

I've been listening to Genspect videos. They had a conference last year in the US. Two of the clinicians, who treat trans kids, mentioned that there are some papers that will be coming out from WPATH that reveal the real problems with that organization and what they have been doing. Whistle blower stuff. I guess we'll see what happens.