EP105 - A Cass-astrophic Review (Part One)

[@bellarosethorne]

not even just "patient discrimination against NHS staff" - it could straight up result in attempts to force people to reveal confidential medical information. Like no, you don't get to force the hospital to tell you whether or not someone is trans. That's not information you are owed. You can assume someone is trans all you like, but noone should be under any obligation to state that, to confirm it, or anything.

[@janerogers190]

I am not sure you have read the report. On suicide, for example, she considered all the viable scientific studies and found that suicidality was not at the high rate(ie 48%), so often quoted. That figure, so widely promoted, is actually based on a study of just 27 people.

[@itcouldbelupus2842]

The UK is considered a hostile country for trans people especially for trans children (Madrigal-Borloz, Citation2023). Trans healthcare under the UK’s National Health Service (NHS) has long been criticized for causing harm to trans people, with reports of pathologization, coercion and harm in NHS healthcare services (Horton, Citation2022d, Citation2022a; Pearce, Citation2018). Since the launch of the Cass Review in 2020, the situation for trans children in the UK has continued to decline (Madrigal-Borloz, Citation2023). In 2022 the UK Minister for Health called for clinicians to look for evidence of “what has caused children to be trans,” citing the Cass Review to claim that “identifying as trans” is likely to be a response to “child sex abuse” (Milton, Citation2022). The Cass Review was cited by the British government to justify plans to exclude trans people from legislation to ban conversion therapy (British Psychological Society, Citation2022) Despite the incredibly strict requirements for existing research to be considered in the systematic reviews, the final report trades freely in citations of poor quality or/and politically motivated work, and even incorrectly cites literature in order to support their desired outcome. The report repeatedly cites Ken Zucker (1985)[11] to support its assertions about the number of people who regret transition. Zucker is widely known for his heavily criticised claim that 80% of young people ‘desist’ from being trans, as well as his use of practices likened to conversion therapy. They back this up with Thomas Steensma’s (2013)[12] study on factors associated with desistance and persistence. Steensma has clarified publicly that the study should not be used to calculate rates of persistence or desistance[13], as its research design (aimed at studying characteristics of persisting trans patients) risks inflating the number of desisters. The Cass Report uses it to do just this several times. It's a terrible review written by people with anti trans bias and relies on bad science.

[@onetwo19]

Do those who reject the results of the Cass Review have anything to say about the systematic reviews carried out in Scandinavia and Europe in countries like Finland and Sweden? They came to the same conclusions. Many european countries have stopped giving hormones or doing surgeries on minors. Are they all just transphobic?

[@itcouldbelupus2842]

You mean the reviews in Finland and Sweden that have been widely criticized by scientists, academics, human rights and health organisations and the families of trans people? Those reviews? Yes, it very much does seem like transphobia is the motivating factor behind those reviews.

[@katywalker8322]

What surgeries were being done on trans minors prior to the Cass review?

[@Caldera01]

How are you not green named on Shinigami Eyes app? Allow me to grant you the greatest honor in my power; t-friendly green name marking on Shinigami Eyes.

[@ashleyashleym2969]

So if a trans man whos not comfortable with cis or trans women delivering my care, that just doesnt matter, i cant say no?