An independent review said the language used around the issue on social media was dangerous.

“There is no evidence of a large rise in suicides in young patients attending a gender identity clinic in London, an independent review has found.”

"Prof Appleby’s review concludes “the data do not support the claim”.

And he added that the way the issue had been discussed on social media was “insensitive, distressing and dangerous”.

“A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said decisions on children’s healthcare must follow the evidence at all times.”

  • flamingos-cantEnglish
    126·
    5 months ago

    I’ve said this before and I doubt it will be the last, but this ban is not about child safety. It’s about reducing the number of trans kids because they’re a political inconvenience to a slice of the establishment. If it was about how unsafe they are, it wouldn’t only be for kids experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. The ban would extend to intersex adolescents:

    However, [Streeting] overlooks the fact that this ban does not include teenage patients with a difference of sex development (DSD), more commonly known as intersex. These individuals are prescribed puberty-blocking medication when they unexpectedly commence a puberty that is at odds with their gender identity. DSD patients are taking the medication for much the same reason as transgender patients – ie the puberty they are undergoing is causing distress, and pressing pause will probably manage that distress and minimise harm while a continuing care plan is developed. If we follow Streeting’s logic, the medication would also be banned for this patient cohort.