Author:
Blog About:
Six months after her report into gender care for children, BBC Women's Hour interviewed Hilary Cass
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0023q2z
What I hear in this interview is not what I expected after reading much of what I read about the report.
She appears to believe that gender questioning children should get care for all their needs, including puberty blockers where appropriate. One of her reasons for saying that they may not be appropriate is that currently the average age to *start* them is fifteen, which is too late for these to be useful to many of them. She says it might be better for people that age to go straight to gendered hormones !
Comments
Limited self-determination
Given that the “International Convention on the Rights of Children and Adolescents” considers that children are below the age of fourteen, adolescents are between the ages of fourteen and eighteen, and adults are age eighteen and above.
The Convention states that children have no criminal liability, while adolescents have limited criminal liability. Most countries have incorporated those standards into their own national legislation. Including among others Paraguay and Germany.
In Germany that means, that any perpetrator younger than fourteen years of age is absolutely immune from criminal prosecution. Even for murder! A few months back, there was a very tragic case where two girls age 12 and 13 led their 12 year old “friend” and class-mate into a secluded forest and stabbed her to death, apparently out of jealousy over some kind of electronic gadget. Those girls can not be prosecuted because they are underage. But both they and their families got relocated by the authorities to a different location. And both the girls, as well as their parents, are subject to intense psychological counseling and monitoring until the girls reach adulthood at 18 by the local child protection agency “Jugendamt”. It is also likely that both girls might spend at least some time in a psychiatric institution or some kind of foster care. Even if they have no criminal record, they carry a psychological and social stigma and trauma.
Another case that made headlines not to long ago, was a youth gang with migrant or refugee background. The ring-leaders aged 14 to 16 would recruit children as young a 9 to do the break-ins and steal electronic gadgets. So even if they get caught by the police, because of their age they are immune from criminal prosecution. Given the migrant background, with many parents just barely able to communicate in German and often having a disregard for the social contract and values of western democracies, it is difficult to nearly impossible to get parental cooperation for corrective educational measures.
Given how easy even young children have almost full access to the internet and entertainment media, and how violent crimes get committed by progressively younger adolescents and children, there is a call to analyze if the age for limited criminal liability should be lowered and by how much. Educators, social workers and psychologists are asked to find a consensus recommendation for a change of law.
So if children can have a limited criminal liability starting at a certain age, then starting from that same age they should also have the [limited] right to self-determination and access to gender affirming care.
In 1993 two ten-year-old boys
In 1993 two ten-year-old boys killed a two-year-old in England. They were convicted of murder..
But in the interview Cass does not say that anyone, whether you call them children or adolescents, should not have self-determination or gender affirming care.
While I agree that there are other views about the quality of evidence about puberty blockers, Cass seems to think more treatment would be better in some cases. Talking about the fifteen-year-olds put on them at the Tavistock, at 09:55 she says "It might have been better to start thinking about whether masculinising or feminising hormones were the right thing for them." Followed up with the claim that "as many young people felt worse on puberty blockers as felt better ..."
...
...
Why are you believing anything that comes out of that liar's mouth?
She got the job FOR being a transphobe
She happily worked with Known conversion "therapists" and known fascist organisers
She Deliberately refused to speak to anyone trans until after that was a specific concern raised from the interim report
And now she's doing the "my work is being missused" routine to try and protect her reputation in the eyes of the cis, and saying things to taunt the trans youth she is directly culpable in the harming of
(Also, why are you trusting anything the uk press says about us?)
Did you listen to the
Did you listen to the interview ?