The summary:
- The data do not support the claim that there has been a large rise in suicide in young gender dysphoria patients at the Tavistock.
- The way that this issue has been discussed on social media has been insensitive, distressing and dangerous, and goes against guidance on safe reporting of suicide.
- The claims that have been placed in the public domain do not meet basic standards for statistical evidence.
- There is a need to move away from the perception that puberty-blocking drugs are the main marker of non-judgemental acceptance in this area of health care.
- We need to ensure high quality data in which everyone has confidence, as the basis of improved safety for this at risk group of young people.
deleted by creator
Why give a shit?
Because it allows big business, and people in the media to distract the public from what they don’t want them discussing. It also gives airtime to politicians from across the political spectrum a chance to sling shit at one another to distract the public from said politicians falling short of their elected duty to their constituents.
Most people just want a respectful and peaceful existence spending the day doing something they find worthwhile, come home to a roof over their head, food in their bellies, the occasional small luxury item, and if they have kids a good future for them.
deleted by creator
It doesn’t, in fact respecting their self-image means that they feel welcome. It’s the first law of everything: don’t be a knob-head. Follow that rule and life is more pleasant generally.
Perhaps you misunderstood me.
deleted by creator
That’s not at odds with the article. The article refutes a claim that there was a surge in suicides due to inability to access puberty blockers. It doesn’t touch on broader subjects like being called what you’d like.
deleted by creator
The entire premise in the article of denying any kind of gender-affirming treatment is what I was responding to
What? Can you quote any part of the article that tries to deny “any kind of gender-affirming treatment”? Here is the central claim that they’re refuting:
The central claim, made on X (formerly known as Twitter), is that there has been a large rise in suicide by current and recent patients of the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) service at the Tavistock since an earlier restriction of puberty-blocking drugs that followed a High Court decision in a case (Bell v Tavistock) in December 2020. The rise is described as a “surge” in suicides and “an explosion”, indicating a substantial and, by implication, unequivocal increase. There are multiple references to children dying in future because they are unable to access puberty-blocking drugs.
Just refer to people the way they want to be referred to and respect their wishes. Isn’t that what we all want?
Can you quote any part of the article that conflicts with this statement?
deleted by creator
I’m not sure why the hostility? I’ve read the source, and you either didn’t read it or misunderstood it. Nowhere does it say what you’re claiming it says, you’re welcome to disprove that with quotes.
For anybody else reading this, if you doubt that the above commenter misunderstood the article, you can just read it. It’s not very long.
deleted by creator
Interesting how it says the real number is an average of two suicides a year, a small number, really guys not that big a deal.
Then goes on to say that suicide by any young person is a profound tragedy: it should be seen as an indictment of our society.
Despite the fact that kids suffering gender dysphoria are such a small minority and that some children actually do benefit from the use of puberty blockers, the Tories want you to focus on this rather than their plan to cut spending on disability benefits.
Where does it say that suicides are “no big deal”? The central claim that it’s refuting is this:
The central claim, made on X (formerly known as Twitter), is that there has been a large rise in suicide by current and recent patients of the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) service at the Tavistock since an earlier restriction of puberty-blocking drugs that followed a High Court decision in a case (Bell v Tavistock) in December 2020
The article says suicides are tragedies, but also refutes the claim about a surge in suicides.
Of course it doesn’t say that, and if you are a very literal-minded person I can see why my post might be bewildering.
If in your mind the claim about a surge in suicides is sufficiently refuted, why is it important to post an article about British children and gender dysphoria here, in a community that is devoted to American conservative politics and policies?
Maybe the reasons are to push the idea that gender dysphoria shouldn’t be taken seriously, or perhaps posting here is part of an effort to take these kinds of decisions away from parents and doctors and make legislators responsible for who gets what medical treatment.
I personally think constantly bringing up trans children is an effort to perpetuate a moral panic and keep people distracted from more pressing issues and voting against their best interests.
If in your mind the claim about a surge in suicides is sufficiently refuted,
Is it sufficiently refuted in your mind?
My grandmother once told me that answering a question with a question is being evasive.
Here’s more questions: did you know that according to the new england journal of medicine the leading cause of death among children and teens in America is firearm related injury?
Why do people in America seem to want to talk more about woke transes and puberty blockers, instead of safe storage and teaching kids not to play with guns?
My answer to yours is that I don’t know. I have heard some wild conspiracy theories about the Tavistock, and I’m not familiar with the good law project.
My wife was for many years in medical research and she says that people misinterpret, misrepresent, hide and lie about data all the time. " You can make the data tell any story you want." She says.
So really, I don’t know. I hope so.
