My Lords, we know that the 18 to 25 year-olds have many of the same complex problems as the under-18s and, as the Minister has said, they need similar holistic wraparound care, although that is not necessarily yet in place. However, Dr Levy’s review had a narrower remit than mine, focused on quality improvement rather than the model of care, so as a next step would the Minister agree to ask departmental and NHSE colleagues to convene a group, which should include independent experts, representatives of professional groups and representatives of the new children’s and young people’s services as well as service users, to consider how we best understand and, importantly, improve clinical outcomes for this group of young adults?
A) That’s pretty rare (less than %1) and even for that tiny group the main reason for reconsidering are due to discrimination.
B) 18 could maybe be a fair age if blockers were still available, which they aren’t, thanks to bogus NHS claims.
Inform yoursef first before posting stuff like this, especially if it’s about something that absolutely doesn’t concern you in any way.
I found this article interesting because it discusses the complexity of regret and of estimating rates of regret, and it discusses why the estimates vary so widely depending on the methodology:
https://slate.com/technology/2024/02/transgender-youth-health-care-regret-pamela-paul-nyt-data.html
I’d trust what the NHS has to think about it over some random on lemmy
It doesn’t work that way- it is something that concerns me, because in the United Kingdom, individuals under 18 years of age don’t have full autonomy. Therefore, under 18s are the concern of those who are on the electoral register. 18 is when we have decided people can make every life altering decision, so the precedent makes sense.
Your attitude may have caused us to mistakenly build an escalator system- where only people who seem to agree with a narrative get a say in the matter. So if someone has questions regarding said matter, they are only given one side of the argument. If they indulge that side, they are only encouraged. So no, nobody should be excluded from this discussion.
My position is simply that the topic is so complicated and nuanced that it’s only fair that we let an individual reach an age of understanding in order to make a life altering and irreversible decision over their personage and body.
Agreed that you shouldn’t trust random Lemmy comments. But the NHS on this issue is very driven by politics, rather than actual evidence of what provides the best outcomes for people. Here’s a well referenced analysis from a few years ago. And for example, the Dutch Health Council has a very different position than the NHS - I mention that mostly to illustrate that any given national health organisation isn’t inherently right, but I do also believe the Dutch one follows the scientific evidence more closely.
I get where you’re coming from but I fear that by making a point about “regret”, you’ve (perhaps unwittingly) contributed to scaremongering in contradiction to the available evidence (which points to that being only a tiny fraction of trans people). I don’t think it’s unfair to ask you to check your facts before posting and/or acknowledge a correction.
Not providing healthcare is also a life altering and irreversible decision. As others have commented here, the later in life treatment is started, the more irreversible dysphoric changes will happen to that person’s body in the meantime, with generally poorer mental health outcomes. In particular, puberty blockers’ function is to pause those irreversible changes, not to cause changes.
I used to have issues with my own gender, I know people who did. My issues were ironed out. Some of my friends had their issues ironed out, and I know a few people who admitted in the past they briefly identified as transgender. Again, I also know people who still identify as transgender and I actually fully believe them when they talk about their dysphoria and bow it affects them. I can see why in this case, a sex change operation would be necessary. The latter person did say they’d also be happy if there was a cure for dysphoria to make them be happy with their sex, but there isn’t and they’re not. So I’m not too sure about all of this, as someone who was placed on a bit of an “escalator” by friends and people online when I was younger.
For what it’s worth, I do think it’s worth asking children why they want to be the opposite sex. For me it was a matter of shame. I know that some others felt similarly, that we didn’t fit society’s stereotypes. I believe this can be addressed by showing people how men/women don’t have to be conforming to xyz. At the same time, I believe genuine gender dysphoria exists and such a thing won’t work with people who have it. Which we have no known cure for. I’m basically mainly shaped by my own experience growing up in this society.
If puberty blockers truly don’t cause irreversible changes, then I don’t have an issue with teenagers being administered them if they are determined to have gender dysphoria. Some people say they do, some people say they don’t. I’m not qualified to speak on the scientific aspects, just my own ethical and moral aspects of it.
This should be shouted from the rooftops. Admittedly I know nothing on the subject, but giving kids the option to change gender at a young age seems like a slippery slope, as do puberty blockers.
I don’t agree with pushing it to 25, but 18 seems correct to me.
And we need to push therapy so much more.
I’m starting to get cussed at a lot in this post and labelled a “transphobe” because apparently I disagree with giving kids life altering hormones.
I feel like people are watering down the “transphobe” label, which actually could negatively impact trans people.
As you said puberty blockers are a slippery slope, I would disagree with you if they aren’t life altering. Some say that when you stop them, puberty just sets in as normal, so if that’s the case, I don’t see an issue. I don’t know if you have a different point though or disagree. The NHS seems to disagree but others are claiming that it’s been infiltrated by political activists.
I don’t think we know enough about the human body to be able to just postpone puberty, then carry on as normal a few years later. And even if so, there’s psychological effects to consider. Look at stuff like the contraceptive implant for women, that really fucks up hormones in some women.
There’s a bit of an echo chamber and tunnel vision on here at times.
There’s no point in talking to you about this subject. Research proper studies (including the many ones debunking the NHS bullshit), read proper LGBT articles on the matter and find out why early medical (not necessarily any kind of surgery) is very important to keep young trans people safe or just stay out of this topic. I lost too many LGBT friends thanks to terrible medical care availability, constant harassment and discrimination, and so on.
Ooof this seems a bit problematic. The NHS is a neutral, non-biased healthcare service. Their interest is on treating humans well and considering all of the evidence available. LGBT articles would of course be one sided, and are more based on presuppositions in order to find the results or defend their claims and thus organisations, as opposed to trying to figure out from scratch which position is true (the scientific method)
I’m more interested in evidence over guilt tripping. I’d trust the NHS’s conclusions, which I know they have carefully considered and adjusted over the years as new information surfaces.
The “NHS’s conclusions” are not the conclusions of the whole body of doctors and nurses and specialists that make it up. If international health bodies have disagreed with the Cass Review, and specialists within the NHS have also disagreed with it, that doesn’t really paint a unified position of “the NHS” does it? This decision is painfully political and clearly up for debate, and the people in charge have made a political decision to take such an aggressively cautious position as to effectively fall entirely on one side of the argument.
Well hopefully it gets fixed then. We should be trusting the scientists who are qualified and have done impartial studies instead of wrapping this issue up in philosophical positions