Hormones to children: UK judges wash their hands of them. Court of Appeal ruling on Keira Bell case

In response to the Tavistock Clinic's appeal on the Keira Bell ruling, the Court threw the ball back to the doctors: it is they, not the courts, who must decide whether a minor is able to give consent to experimental 'therapy' that blocks development and initiates transition. But the debate is now open. And the fear of lawsuits by repentant minors -detransitioners- induces the medical class to caution.
Please be aware that the translation of contents, although automatic, has a cost to Feminist Post but is provided to you without any charge. Please consider making a contribution via the "Support us" page if you intend to use our translation service intensively.
The contents of this site are translated using automatic translation systems without the intervention of professional translators.
Translations are provided for the sole purpose of facilitating reading by international visitors.
Share this article

The English Court of Appeal partially overturned the judgement that had found in favour of the young detransitioner Keira Bell (here her story) against the Tavistock Clinic, which had rushed her into puberty blocker therapy when she was 16.

With a pilatesque judgment and merely formalistic, the Court threw the ball back to the doctorsIt is up to them, and not to the courts, to decide whether a minor can have access to this 'therapy' with hormone blockers. Doctors and not judges must take responsibility for deciding. whether or not the child has what is known as the Gillick Competence, or the maturity to assess the consequences of hormone treatments, which are irreversible.

Transactivists welcomed the ruling, but the time of easy transitions for minors is over anyway. As we are seeing all over the world (read here) in the face of the increasing number of gender non-conforming former children who, once adults, regret the irreversible changes caused by puberty blockers, especially Faced with the risk of lawsuits for damages -follow the money- more and more doctors and clinics are adopting a principle of caution. Thus it will be increasingly difficult for a child under 16 to be experimentally initiated into transition according to the 'affirmation only' principle - in essence, blockers are not denied to anyone-. In short, the number of children treated with blockers will in any case decrease.

The era of acting in a derelict manner to follow an ideology and not correct medical practice is over. Keira Bell, who asked to be allowed to address the Supreme Court, commented: "My case has opened a global debate, although much remains to be done. It is a deeply disturbing fantasy that a doctor could believe that a 10-year-old child could consent to the loss of his or her own fertility".

Marina Terragni


The following is the comment from the website Transgendertrend after the judgment of the Court of Appeal.

We are disconcerted by the decision in which the Court of Appeal today upheld Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust's appeal against the first instance decision of the Court of Justice in London in the case of Bell and Mrs A v Tavistock.

The appeal was upheld on the basis that the Court of First Instance did not rule that the use of puberty blockers to treat gender dysphoria was unlawful, and that the ruling and directions issued by the Court of First Instance related to contested facts, expert evidence and medical opinions that could not be examined and assessed in court proceedings.

The Court of Appeal ruled that the principles expressed in the GILLICK case are based on medical assessments, and it is not for the court to decide on the capacity of children under 16 to give valid consent to medical treatment.

Underlying the Tavistock appeal is the argument that, in its judgment, the Court of First Instance relied on the principles set out in the Gillick case, which state that children under the age of 16 are capable of making valid decisions if deemed competent to do so by their treating doctor after a specific individual assessment.

Tavistock had objected that the Court '.trespassed into the area of decision-making reserved for doctors, patients and their parents, where it had not previously ventured.".

In essence, the Court of Appeal held that "the Court of First Instance ruled on an improper restriction on the use of the Gillick competency tests"

The appeal judges rejected the idea that the use of puberty blockers for gender dysphoria is a borderline case.

In paragraph 76 of the judgment it is even stated that consent to puberty blockers is no different to consent to contraception:

"Nothing about the nature or implications of treatment with puberty blockers allows a real distinction to be made between the assessment of contraception in Gillick and puberty blockers in this case, bearing in mind that, when the Gillick case was decided 35 years ago, the issues raised in relation to contraception for under-16s were highly controversial in a way that is difficult to imagine today."

On the whole, the judgement, while paying lip service to the fact that there are widespread opposing views on the issue, takes Tavistock's evidence at face value without elaborating.

For example: the assertion that only 16% of children are subsequently treated with puberty blockers when in earlier testimony Dr Polly Carmichael suggested that the percentage overall is rather 41-45%; the assertion that only 55% of children treated with puberty blockers then go on to treatment with hormones of the opposite sex when on the same GIDS site the percentage indicated is 98%; and the assertion that "the primary purpose of puberty blockers was to give the patient time to reflect on his or her gender identity" e "treatment with puberty blockers was separated from subsequent treatment with opposite-sex hormones"when the Health Research Authority, in its reviews of Tavistock's Early Intervention studies, determined:

"Confusion would have been reduced if the description of the purpose of the treatment had made it clear that it was offered specifically to children who demonstrated strong and persistent gender dysphoria at an early stage of puberty, so that the suppression of puberty itself would allow subsequent treatment with hormones of the opposite sex to avoid resorting to surgery to change or otherwise mask the undesirable physical effects of puberty in the birth gender."

Although much emphasis has been placed on the consideration that it is not the role of the courts to evaluate medical evidence, it is inevitable that the courts will be influenced by the evidence made available to them.

In the case of puberty blockers, the evidence (provided by Tavistock) is weak, the ethical considerations involved very serious, and in any case Tavistock has never made available alternative, less invasive treatments. Not even the supervisory bodies have ever questioned the ideological basis of the 'affirmative' approach.

The first instance judgment in Bell & Mrs A v Tavistock is quoted extensively from the Court of Appeal's decision and none of its points are contested except from a purely legal/formal point of view.

All 'concerns' still exist.

The Court of Appeal states:

"Doctors will inevitably have to take great care before prescribing treatment to a child, and be wise enough to ensure that the consent obtained from both child and parents has been preceded by adequate information about the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed treatment, in the light of evolving research, and a clear understanding of the implications and long-term consequences of such treatment. Great care is needed to ensure that the necessary consents are properly obtained. As Gillick has made clear, doctors may still be subject to disciplinary and civil action when problems arise in individual cases."

The original court ruling and subsequent appeal brought the issue of puberty prevention in children into the public eye, and the attention of the medical and political world.

Keira Bell opened the confrontation.

Authorisation for further appeal to the Supreme Court will be sought.

(translation by La Crissy)

here the original article

here the High Court ruling


Much of the news published by Feminist Post you will not read elsewhere. That is why it is important to support us, even with a small contribution: Feminist Post is produced solely by the voluntary work of many people and has no funding.
If you think our work can be useful for your life, we will be grateful for even the smallest contribution.

You can give us your contribution by clicking here: Patreon - Feminist Post
   - or -
You can send to: ASSOCIAZIONE CULTURALE BLU BRAMANTE
Obligatory reason: FEMINIST POST
IBAN: IT80C0200812914000104838541
You might also be interested in
1 February 2023
Holland: if you block the development of girls and boys you push them to become trans
The protocol - pausing puberty to allow minors to 'choose' their sex - they invented. But even the Dutch now admit that in 9 out of 10 cases blockers no longer give time to 'decide' but are the start of the transition. A self-fulfilling prophecy. And that the effects of these drugs are by no means reversible
Amsterdam University Clinic UMC, a pioneer in the use of puberty blockers, has admitted that children taking these drugs may find themselves locked into increased medicalisation. The admission comes following the publication earlier this month of a new retrospective study examining 20 years of hormonal interventions known as the 'Dutch protocol', conducted on 1,766 children and adolescents between 1972 and 2018 at the famed Amsterdam clinic and published in The Journal of Sexual Medicine. But [...]
Read now
30 January 2023
GenerAzioneD, Italian association of parents of minors who define themselves as 'trans', is founded
A guidance and information site to support and accompany mothers and fathers going through this complex experience: testimonies, interviews, and links to contribute to an in-depth debate that today does not find space in the mainstream media
The cultural, apolitical, non-denominational and non-profit association GenerAzioneD has been established. The association's primary aim is to inform about the problems of gender dysphoria/incongruence in children, adolescents and young adults. Through the dissemination of testimonies, news, national and international articles in translation and the promotion of opportunities for discussion, GenerAzioneD aims to foster the transparency necessary to ensure the best possible care for those affected. GenerAzioneD was in fact born from the meeting of some parents who shared the experience of having children [...]
Read now
27 January 2023
Transgender' children: it's social contagion. Even the largest trans association admits it
Tik Tok, Youtube and others: the president of WPATH, the world association for trans health, forced to admit that influencers play a large part in the epidemic of transitions among minors, a phenomenon denied by Western progressives who brand every alarm as transphobia. But they do not stop pushing for medicalisation and early surgery
The Honourable Alessandro Zan, first signatory of the infamous bill on gender identity, which ended up in the knighthouse, had denied the dizzying increase in cases of transition of girls and boys, calling the news a 'dangerous statement'. In 2021 there were already numerous statistics indicating the extent of the problem, but apparently Zan was not aware of it - which is unacceptable - or pretended not to know, or more likely ideologically believed that the mere fact of posing the question should be considered proof [...].
Read now
24 January 2023
Sex and gender: JK Rowling's essay
In her text, the writer explains in detail the reasons why she felt the need to address the trans issue, defying the violence of activists. A manifesto-writer for gender critical feminism translated into Italian by Alessandra Asteriti
Attacking JK Rowling can now also be a business. The latest initiative is that of a young Canadian imbecile art book creator who has decided to de-rowling Harry Potter by publishing a special edition of the saga on the cover of which the author's name disappears: $170 per copy for a despicable abuse of power. Let him keep all the copies in stock. Back to the serious stuff: in June 2020 JK Rowling published an essay on her website detailing her position [...].
Read now
22 January 2023
Femelliste, a gender critical 'sister' platform is born in France
Harassed, insulted, mocked, threatened: French feminists have collected and catalogued the attacks transactivists have suffered for years. And they have set up an information and training site against the dictatorship of transgender ideology
The name of the site is a play on words that cannot be translated into Italian. The site's creators inform that it has already been used by animal feminists such as Posie Parker, Nicole Roelens and the Boucherie Abolition collective. It would make one think of anti-specism, it is actually more and in some respects a little different. 'Femelle' in French means the female animal (for the human one, the same word as woman, femme, is used). Since they fight for sexual rights [...]
Read now
21 January 2023
The debate on puberty blockers also opens in Italy - finally!
Breaking the silence is the Italian Psychoanalytic Society, which is calling for an open scientific debate on these treatments, which it defines as 'experimental', not supported by adequate studies and at great ethical risk because they predetermine the fate of girls and boys
Much later than in the Great North of Europe, Great Britain, Australia, and some US states - which have abruptly put the brakes on the use of puberty blockers as a 'therapy' for girls and boys with gender non-conforming behaviour - Italy too is finally breaking its silence with a letter addressed to the government by the Italian Psychoanalytic Society, which calls for caution and the opening of a public scientific discussion. Below we reproduce interviews conducted by Marina Terragni for Il Foglio and [...].
Read now
1 2 3 ... 46