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?
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