The ethics of subjecting children to an untrialled medical intervention that includes use of off-label hormonal therapy and mutilating irreversible sterilising surgical procedures, all in the absence of an appropriate clinical trial to confirm safety and efficacy is unethical.
The fact that the ever expanding cohort lining up for this process harbour a high prevalence of a multitude of mental health conditions including: Autism spectrum disorders, anxiety and depressive disorders, eating disorders.
The fact that a multiple studies of ‘desistance’ (individuals who spontaneously no longer questioning their birth) is in the range of 60-95%, meaning they ‘grow out of’ their gender dysphoria.
Bring on the legislation and ban this shameful process.
Bernard and Vincent, while the ALP holds government federally and in all states except Tasmania, Alex Antic , federally and Moira Deeming in Victoria will never get the numbers to be able to introduce such legislation. The ALP introduced its policy of obligatory affirmative treatment protocol at its 2018 federal conference, and unless there was revision to that policy at the 2023 federal conference, in Brisbane (if it was even revisited at the conference ?) all state jurisdictions remain bound to ALP policy positions.
Health being a State responsibility, then maybe a change to an LNP government in Queensland next year should give an opportunity to change course? Intuitively it would be a vote winner, not only for the general electorate, but I suggest, most Queensland child and adolescent psychiatrists, and paediatricians would be in furious agreement. Any such recalibration of treatment protocol will take political championing, State by State, as the colleges have been basically been bluffed by the threat of punitive legislation and the regulatory body AHPRA has abrogated it’s charter ( to protect patients, here, minors, from inappropriate or dangerous treatments) when it’s recent position was stated as being simply following “ orders”, i.e., by being informed by current legislative requirements. The activists have always been prepared to fight harder and have also bluffed the ( lay) legislators, along with key clinicians’ training institutions and medical regulators
I agree, Andrew. I think the momentum is there. Hard to predict when this issue gets such political salience that a Labor administration cannot simply dismiss expressions of concern as "hateful" because the nature of those concerns will be reported accurately in media outlets with large reach.
"If you think that what we are doing in Victoria [where the gender-affirming medical model has a de facto monopoly] is world class and top notch, you have nothing to fear from an inquiry and you have nothing to fear from this being examined and scrutinised,” he said."
Exactly. And calling someone names is not addressing the issue. If it works so well, let's see all the outcomes, long term, for instance the 9 year outcomes of those 211 from the clinic in 2014? How are they doing now? Or they could use all the long term outcomes from elsewhere...oh, hm, nothing to see here.
Would these people support a drastic sterilizing treatment on their kids for cancer if no one had checked whether it actually worked past the standard remission time for the cancer?
The ethics of subjecting children to an untrialled medical intervention that includes use of off-label hormonal therapy and mutilating irreversible sterilising surgical procedures, all in the absence of an appropriate clinical trial to confirm safety and efficacy is unethical.
The fact that the ever expanding cohort lining up for this process harbour a high prevalence of a multitude of mental health conditions including: Autism spectrum disorders, anxiety and depressive disorders, eating disorders.
The fact that a multiple studies of ‘desistance’ (individuals who spontaneously no longer questioning their birth) is in the range of 60-95%, meaning they ‘grow out of’ their gender dysphoria.
Bring on the legislation and ban this shameful process.
Well, Vincent, I think the momentum is building -- even if it's not yet strong enough to carry this bill through to enactment.
Bernard and Vincent, while the ALP holds government federally and in all states except Tasmania, Alex Antic , federally and Moira Deeming in Victoria will never get the numbers to be able to introduce such legislation. The ALP introduced its policy of obligatory affirmative treatment protocol at its 2018 federal conference, and unless there was revision to that policy at the 2023 federal conference, in Brisbane (if it was even revisited at the conference ?) all state jurisdictions remain bound to ALP policy positions.
Health being a State responsibility, then maybe a change to an LNP government in Queensland next year should give an opportunity to change course? Intuitively it would be a vote winner, not only for the general electorate, but I suggest, most Queensland child and adolescent psychiatrists, and paediatricians would be in furious agreement. Any such recalibration of treatment protocol will take political championing, State by State, as the colleges have been basically been bluffed by the threat of punitive legislation and the regulatory body AHPRA has abrogated it’s charter ( to protect patients, here, minors, from inappropriate or dangerous treatments) when it’s recent position was stated as being simply following “ orders”, i.e., by being informed by current legislative requirements. The activists have always been prepared to fight harder and have also bluffed the ( lay) legislators, along with key clinicians’ training institutions and medical regulators
I agree, Andrew. I think the momentum is there. Hard to predict when this issue gets such political salience that a Labor administration cannot simply dismiss expressions of concern as "hateful" because the nature of those concerns will be reported accurately in media outlets with large reach.
"If you think that what we are doing in Victoria [where the gender-affirming medical model has a de facto monopoly] is world class and top notch, you have nothing to fear from an inquiry and you have nothing to fear from this being examined and scrutinised,” he said."
Exactly. And calling someone names is not addressing the issue. If it works so well, let's see all the outcomes, long term, for instance the 9 year outcomes of those 211 from the clinic in 2014? How are they doing now? Or they could use all the long term outcomes from elsewhere...oh, hm, nothing to see here.
Would these people support a drastic sterilizing treatment on their kids for cancer if no one had checked whether it actually worked past the standard remission time for the cancer?
Thank you for all your informative reporting!
Thank you Bernard for your tireless efforts to have this issue debated. I feel progress is being made!