Only NHS Clinic Providing Gender Identity Services for Young People Shutting Down; ‘Not Safe’ for Children

 

After decades of shaking my fist and barking at the moon, I’ve concluded that there is something, even if just one thing, to be said for the NHS and its laughable paucity of actual medical services.  I say this as a person whose brother-in-law is still waiting, a full year after a serious medical episode, for any sort of definitive diagnosis.  It took over six months for him to get an MRI at what seems to be the Scottish Highlands’ only imaging center–a day’s trip from his home–and a further month after that for a (telephone) conversation with the consultant, at which he was given the result.  The community hospital closest to my sister and her husband boasts, on its little web page, that it “[has] an X-ray machine.”

The good thing (I think)  that can be said in favor of this almost criminal scarcity of medical resources in a first-world country is that a diligent researcher who’s after the truth of the matter, should find it relatively easy to determine, to describe, and to address.  After all, there really aren’t that many places to go looking for it.

Such seems to be the case with the interim report of the  Cass Review, an independent investigation being led by Dr. Hilary Cass, former president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, and one which was commissioned by the NHS itself  to explore and “to make recommendations on the services provided to children and young people exploring their gender identity.”

The effect of the interim report–which was published in April–is that the only clinic providing “gender identity services” to young people in the entire UK will, in a few more months, be shut down.

Some choice morsels from the Telegraph article:

NHS England will move young people who believe that they are trans into regional centres which will take a more “holistic” approach to treatment and look at other mental health or medical issues they may have.

… [the] Cass Review, which warned that medics in the Tavistock had felt “under pressure to adopt an unquestioning affirmative approach” to gender identity rather than going through the normal process of clinic assessment with young people.

NHS England have also committed to follow Dr Cass’s recommendation that they carry out “rapid” research on the use of puberty blockers by young people after it was noted there is currently “insufficient evidence” on their impact.

There were concerns over a sharp rise in referrals to the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) run by the Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust – over 5,000 in 2021/2 compared to 250 a decade earlier and long waiting lists.

The article goes on to note that NHS officials have also noted that “significant numbers” of children presenting as trans seem to have “neurodiversity and other mental health needs and risky behaviors which…need to be better understood.”

The review was ordered due to fears that “doctors were too quick to affirm a child’s new identity without looking at other mental health or medical issues,” and was also specifically charged with investigating “marked changes” in the trans patient population–from that of those who are born men and would like to become women to “girls in their early teens claiming that they were born in the wrong body.”

I’m waiting for the inevitable backlash (on both sides of the Atlantic), and in the meantime, I’m celebrating this outbreak of common sense from a country that maybe–just maybe–is waking up.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 33 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill
    @CarolJoy

    She (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Instugator (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):
    Cheaper that way. Think of all the expensive treatment that they didn’t have to pay for.

    While, at the same time, forbidding any sort of private medical services.

     

    Unless you can afford to fly somewhere where private medical services are still legal.

    But if they do that, don’t they forfeit NHS benefits (such as they are) for some number of years, perhaps permanently?

    I think the conversation here is about Canada. Plenty of private medical services in the UK. And, no.

    Hmm, maybe it was something I read about proposed changes then, that didn’t get passed.

    There’s always been a thriving, parallel, private health care system in the UK. People with the means to do so bounce back and forth between it and the NHS as it advantages them. I’m not aware of any efforts to amend that.

    Canada does not have a parallel system, and citizens are prohibited from contracting for and paying for the provision of services privately if they are covered for those services under the government plan. (Doctors can set up private clinics for things that are not funded by government healthcare, such as dentistry and cosmetic surgery. And there are certain “luxury” add ons for things like hospital stays that can be paid for privately.) I believe that certain entities like Veterans Affairs can pay extra to get their clients expedited access, but Canada, generally, ranks near the bottom of nations when it comes to availability of key services and wait times to obtain them.

    I’m not sure how the the Canadian government would know if a Canadian citizen left the country for heart surgery or an appendectomy, or something like that, if they weren’t told. Canadian health care doesn’t travel with the patient outside the country. And there are restrictions on how long a Canadian citizen can be outside the country and still keep his healthcare.

    I have several friends in Canada and they continually pay for certain medical interventions out of pocket as the Medical Establishment there is in the dark about how to treat ailments like Lyme disease and other auto immune conditions. So far, none of my friends have been forced out of the national insurance plan as the items they have sought would not have been encouraged by the traditional doctors in that network.

    • #31
  2. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator
    @Instugator

    She (View Comment):
    Canada does not have a parallel system, and citizens are prohibited from contracting for and paying for the provision of services privately if they are covered for those services under the government plan. 

    My understanding is that this changed about a decade ago when a Court ruled that government funding of healthcare did not equal access to healthcare. This was because the waiting times had gotten too long and people had sued the government because the government had not provided enough facilities. The plaintiffs won and private entities were allowed to set up clinics that could then receive government funding for the procedures.

    This came up in a previous Ricochet argument I was involved in. My position was that there was no private health care allowed and I was shown to be wrong.

    • #32
  3. She Member
    She
    @She

    Instugator (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):
    Canada does not have a parallel system, and citizens are prohibited from contracting for and paying for the provision of services privately if they are covered for those services under the government plan.

    My understanding is that this changed about a decade ago when a Court ruled that government funding of healthcare did not equal access to healthcare. This was because the waiting times had gotten too long and people had sued the government because the government had not provided enough facilities. The plaintiffs won and private entities were allowed to set up clinics that could then receive government funding for the procedures.

    This came up in a previous Ricochet argument I was involved in. My position was that there was no private health care allowed and I was shown to be wrong.

    Interesting, thanks.  I’ve been looking for clarification on this myself.  @torywarwriter @misthiocracy ?

    • #33
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.