The Trans Agenda: The papers target Petrillo, Sutton United & The BMA
News you need, the perspective you won't find anywhere else. The trans community's guide to UK news, media and politics and our place in it.
The Trans Agenda
[8 September 2024]
Welcome to The Trans Agenda: The papers, a newsletter that will arrive in your inbox every week if you are subscribed.
Considering that the first week I tracked anti-trans articles in the papers, there were 50 pieces across the ones I monitor, the papers are still relatively quiet after the switch of government from blue to red.
While this week saw an increase of 60% on last week, the total of 16 across all papers is equal to what The Telegraph alone produced in that first week of recording.
Two things drove the increase this week.
First, was Valentina Petrillo competing in the Paralympics. There were a lot of very disappointed journalists when Petrillo didn't even make the final, none more so than The Telegraph's Oliver Brown.
It is hard to spin a narrative that trans women competing means no cis woman will ever win again when a trans woman comes 6th in qualifying for the semi-final, before losing again in her bid to reach the final.
Still, Brown wasn't going to let that stop him and he wrote three articles on Petrillo anyway. Ian Herbert in The Mail also threw his hat on to the grift train. Herbert by name…
Brown has also taken an interest in a team playing in women football’s London and South East Regional League. It’s an odd choice for The Telegraph's chief sports writer, who doesn't seem interested in any other women's league, not even the hugely popular WSL, where the likes of Arsenal play in front of crowds of 60,000. Sutton United, however, who play in the fifth tier in front of a crowd of around 100 people on a good day, are where it's at for Olly. He had two pieces on them. Can you guess why?
The second factor in the increase is the effort of anti-trans activists to ensure the Cass Report is not subjected to any of the scrutiny that comes with all other scientific reports and reviews, at least not within the UK.
In the same week that an Australian review found that puberty blockers are safe, effective, and reversible (who knew?), the papers I monitor published three articles criticising the BMA for questioning Cass.
To be fair, this has been happening since the start of August (Ella Whelan had a piece on 2nd August while Sonia Sodha had hers out two days later). This week, it was mostly The Observer catching up, publishing two self-cannibalising articles based on the views of a frustrated radiologist who doesn’t seem to like that the vast majority of the BMA doesn’t agree with her views on trans kids.
Something else that is notable is that it feels as if less effort is being put into demonising trans people, even if they still seem intent on still doing it.
Take, for instance, the piece on the Green Party in Saturday’s Daily Mail. That amounts to not much more than a NiB. It’s not unreasonable to say that, pre-election, that would have been a double-page spread.
The Telegraph also continue to move their anti-trans content out of the main paper and into their Sports and Features supplements.
There was one day this week with no anti-trans content (Friday).
THE PAPERS Monday 2nd September - Sunday 8th September 2024
Monday 2nd Total: 3
The Guardian [0]
The Times [1]
![Jenrick: Single-sex spaces not biggest priority for voters Geraldine Scott - Senior Political Correspondent, Shayma Bakht Kemi Badenoch will “focus on renewal” when she launches her leadership campaign Protecting single-sex spaces is not top of the agenda for 90 per cent of people, Robert Jenrick has suggested, as he warned the Conservatives could not be a one-issue party if they want to win back votes. The Tory leadership contender told an event for young Conservatives that he did not want his party to “go down a rabbit hole of culture wars” as he said the public were more worried about the cost of living and public services than gender issues. Jenrick, who was addressing an online meeting of young Conservative members of the Blue Beyond group on August 19, said it was an issue he was personally worried about but to win back voters, especially from the Liberal Democrats, the Tories need to be a “full spectrum” party. His comments come as two more Tory leadership hopefuls are set to officially launch their campaigns today. Kemi Badenoch, the shadow communities secretary, will tell supporters that British voters are “yearning for something better, and this Labour government is not it”. James Cleverly, the shadow home secretary, will say: “The solutions of the left don’t and won’t work.” Jenrick, the former immigration minister, held a campaign event in central London yesterday. He vowed to oppose Rachel Reeves’s “war on the middle classes” as she prepares to deliver her first budget next month. He promised to create a “new Conservative Party”, vowing he would deport small boat migrants “within hours”, cut taxes and shrink the size of the state if he led the Tories back into power. Addressing supporters, some wearing “we want Bobby J” baseball caps, Jenrick said: “It will shortly dawn on our prime minister that the highest-earning pips have already been squeezed. So, the next target is you. The next target will be tax raids on working families.” In a recording leaked to The Times, Jenrick said: “I don’t want the Conservative Party to just be a one-issue party, or to just go down a rabbit hole of culture wars. I’m as concerned as the next person about what my kids are being taught [in] school or how we’re approaching sensitive issues like safe spaces for women and trans. “But that is not what 90 per cent of the public are thinking about. Most of the time, people are concerned about the cost of living, housing, public services, immigration, and I wanted to be spending most of my time on those things. If we can do that, then I think we win back those Lib Dem voters.” It is understood that Jenrick is personally concerned about the issue, especially what is taught in schools, and considers himself to be hardline on the debate, but that he believes the main thrust of the Conservatives’ offer needed to be on core issues, as demonstrated by polls. Helen Joyce, director of advocacy at Sex Matters, the campaign group for sex-based rights, said: “Of course voters are most concerned about urgent, everyday problems. But it’s a mistake for politicians of any party to imagine that it’s a matter of one or the other. “Attempting to ignore the harms caused by gender ideology will solve nothing, indeed will only worsen conflicts over women’s rights and child safeguarding.” She said the group’s polling showed that voters “expect politicians to uphold and strengthen laws that exist to provide women with safety, privacy, dignity and fair competition”. She added: “They also want to make sure that schools are safeguarding children, not indoctrinating them or encouraging mental and physical ill-health. The Tory manifesto pledges on sex and gender were popular with voters across the political spectrum — including the Lib Dem supporters Robert Jenrick says he hopes to attract.” Badenoch will pledge today to “focus on renewal” if she becomes party leader. She is expected to hit out at Labour and say: “They have no ideas. At best they are re-announcing things we have already done. “And at their worst they are clueless, irresponsible and dishonest: trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the public about the state of the UK finances, placing political donors into civil service jobs, and pretending they had no plans to cut pensioner benefits before the election — and now doing so to cover the cost of pay rises for the unions with no promise of reform.” Cleverly, meanwhile, will say the Tories “must get our act together” to present solutions to “an unstable world, global migration and a crisis of confidence in capitalism”. He will say: “That means being honest and realistic about the role of the state. The state should focus on doing fewer things very well, not everything badly. We accept that the state has a primary duty to protect its people and its borders. Conservatives must be honest about the trade-offs in doing these things properly.” The field of six candidates — which also includes Mel Stride, Tom Tugendhat, and Priti Patel — will be whittled down to four by the time of the Conservative conference at the end of the month. After that, MPs will carry out further rounds of voting to select two final candidates for Conservative members to choose between, with the result announced on November 2.](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F2e5eb5d1-2b67-4cd0-b11e-d5390b830f5e_391x623.png "Jenrick: Single-sex spaces not biggest priority for voters Geraldine Scott - Senior Political Correspondent, Shayma Bakht Kemi Badenoch will “focus on renewal” when she launches her leadership campaign Protecting single-sex spaces is not top of the agenda for 90 per cent of people, Robert Jenrick has suggested, as he warned the Conservatives could not be a one-issue party if they want to win back votes. The Tory leadership contender told an event for young Conservatives that he did not want his party to “go down a rabbit hole of culture wars” as he said the public were more worried about the cost of living and public services than gender issues. Jenrick, who was addressing an online meeting of young Conservative members of the Blue Beyond group on August 19, said it was an issue he was personally worried about but to win back voters, especially from the Liberal Democrats, the Tories need to be a “full spectrum” party. His comments come as two more Tory leadership hopefuls are set to officially launch their campaigns today. Kemi Badenoch, the shadow communities secretary, will tell supporters that British voters are “yearning for something better, and this Labour government is not it”. James Cleverly, the shadow home secretary, will say: “The solutions of the left don’t and won’t work.” Jenrick, the former immigration minister, held a campaign event in central London yesterday. He vowed to oppose Rachel Reeves’s “war on the middle classes” as she prepares to deliver her first budget next month. He promised to create a “new Conservative Party”, vowing he would deport small boat migrants “within hours”, cut taxes and shrink the size of the state if he led the Tories back into power. Addressing supporters, some wearing “we want Bobby J” baseball caps, Jenrick said: “It will shortly dawn on our prime minister that the highest-earning pips have already been squeezed. So, the next target is you. The next target will be tax raids on working families.” In a recording leaked to The Times, Jenrick said: “I don’t want the Conservative Party to just be a one-issue party, or to just go down a rabbit hole of culture wars. I’m as concerned as the next person about what my kids are being taught [in] school or how we’re approaching sensitive issues like safe spaces for women and trans. “But that is not what 90 per cent of the public are thinking about. Most of the time, people are concerned about the cost of living, housing, public services, immigration, and I wanted to be spending most of my time on those things. If we can do that, then I think we win back those Lib Dem voters.” It is understood that Jenrick is personally concerned about the issue, especially what is taught in schools, and considers himself to be hardline on the debate, but that he believes the main thrust of the Conservatives’ offer needed to be on core issues, as demonstrated by polls. Helen Joyce, director of advocacy at Sex Matters, the campaign group for sex-based rights, said: “Of course voters are most concerned about urgent, everyday problems. But it’s a mistake for politicians of any party to imagine that it’s a matter of one or the other. “Attempting to ignore the harms caused by gender ideology will solve nothing, indeed will only worsen conflicts over women’s rights and child safeguarding.” She said the group’s polling showed that voters “expect politicians to uphold and strengthen laws that exist to provide women with safety, privacy, dignity and fair competition”. She added: “They also want to make sure that schools are safeguarding children, not indoctrinating them or encouraging mental and physical ill-health. The Tory manifesto pledges on sex and gender were popular with voters across the political spectrum — including the Lib Dem supporters Robert Jenrick says he hopes to attract.” Badenoch will pledge today to “focus on renewal” if she becomes party leader. She is expected to hit out at Labour and say: “They have no ideas. At best they are re-announcing things we have already done. “And at their worst they are clueless, irresponsible and dishonest: trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the public about the state of the UK finances, placing political donors into civil service jobs, and pretending they had no plans to cut pensioner benefits before the election — and now doing so to cover the cost of pay rises for the unions with no promise of reform.” Cleverly, meanwhile, will say the Tories “must get our act together” to present solutions to “an unstable world, global migration and a crisis of confidence in capitalism”. He will say: “That means being honest and realistic about the role of the state. The state should focus on doing fewer things very well, not everything badly. We accept that the state has a primary duty to protect its people and its borders. Conservatives must be honest about the trade-offs in doing these things properly.” The field of six candidates — which also includes Mel Stride, Tom Tugendhat, and Priti Patel — will be whittled down to four by the time of the Conservative conference at the end of the month. After that, MPs will carry out further rounds of voting to select two final candidates for Conservative members to choose between, with the result announced on November 2.")
Daily Mail [0]
Telegraph [2]
Tuesday 3rd Total: 6
The Guardian [1]
![Transgender athlete Petrillo misses out on place in final The Guardian3 Sep 2024Paul MacInnes Stade de France ▲ Valentina Petrillo said she hoped her son would be ‘proud’ of her An emotionally overwhelmed Valentina Petrillo, the Italian transgender sprinter whose participation in the Paralympic Games has caused a storm of controversy, said: “I hope my son will be proud of me,” after she failed to reach the final of the women’s T12 400m last night. Petrillo finished third in her semi-final, with only the top two going through to the final to face the might of Cuba’s Omara Durand. The 51-year-old Italian said her opponents had in the end been “stronger than me” but said she was proud of her achievements as she cut short her post-race press conference after being overwhelmed by tears. “I tried my best until the end, I didn’t make it, I missed the last straight,” Petrillo said. “I pushed more than I did this morning and I tried my best. They are stronger than me, I had to go down too much, to do a 56 [seconds]. With 57.50, I have to be happy even if I’m a little down. I’m a little down, but I hope my son will be proud of me. This is important to me because he has a trans dad, not the dad that everyone dreams of. But I hope he will be proud of me.” Petrillo competes in the T12 category for visually impaired athletes. She developed stargardt disease, a degenerative eye condition, as a child. She also underwent a gender transition in midlife after a successful career as a male para-athlete and has been the subject of scrutiny and challenge from female para-athletes. In 2021 a petition was submitted to the Italian athletics federation by more than 30 athletes calling for her to be removed from female competition. Rules established by the World Para Athletics association, however, allow for transgender athletes to compete in women’s competition if they are “recognised as female in law”. This is an approach contrary to that set by World Athletics, which determines criteria for entry into the Olympics. Lord Sebastian Coe, the World Athletics president, has said that policy was arrived at in order to “maintain fairness for female athletes above all other consideration”. After qualifying from the first-round heats earlier in the day, Petrillo had described her performance as “the realisation of history”. She said: “We are here today, on September 2nd, 2024. Let’s mark this down as a historic day. From this day forth I don’t want to hear any more talk about discrimination or prejudice for trans people. Now I’ve made it, so we can all make it if I’ve made it. I’ve done my little bit and we can all make it.” Petrillo is now poised to race again in the T12 200m heats, an event scheduled to take place on Friday morning. Article Name:Transgender athlete Petrillo misses out on place in final Publication:The Guardian Author:Paul MacInnes Stade de France Start Page:34 End Page:34](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F55369a97-566e-4b1c-aab3-7d8fad70d84d_1337x638.png "Transgender athlete Petrillo misses out on place in final The Guardian3 Sep 2024Paul MacInnes Stade de France ▲ Valentina Petrillo said she hoped her son would be ‘proud’ of her An emotionally overwhelmed Valentina Petrillo, the Italian transgender sprinter whose participation in the Paralympic Games has caused a storm of controversy, said: “I hope my son will be proud of me,” after she failed to reach the final of the women’s T12 400m last night. Petrillo finished third in her semi-final, with only the top two going through to the final to face the might of Cuba’s Omara Durand. The 51-year-old Italian said her opponents had in the end been “stronger than me” but said she was proud of her achievements as she cut short her post-race press conference after being overwhelmed by tears. “I tried my best until the end, I didn’t make it, I missed the last straight,” Petrillo said. “I pushed more than I did this morning and I tried my best. They are stronger than me, I had to go down too much, to do a 56 [seconds]. With 57.50, I have to be happy even if I’m a little down. I’m a little down, but I hope my son will be proud of me. This is important to me because he has a trans dad, not the dad that everyone dreams of. But I hope he will be proud of me.” Petrillo competes in the T12 category for visually impaired athletes. She developed stargardt disease, a degenerative eye condition, as a child. She also underwent a gender transition in midlife after a successful career as a male para-athlete and has been the subject of scrutiny and challenge from female para-athletes. In 2021 a petition was submitted to the Italian athletics federation by more than 30 athletes calling for her to be removed from female competition. Rules established by the World Para Athletics association, however, allow for transgender athletes to compete in women’s competition if they are “recognised as female in law”. This is an approach contrary to that set by World Athletics, which determines criteria for entry into the Olympics. Lord Sebastian Coe, the World Athletics president, has said that policy was arrived at in order to “maintain fairness for female athletes above all other consideration”. After qualifying from the first-round heats earlier in the day, Petrillo had described her performance as “the realisation of history”. She said: “We are here today, on September 2nd, 2024. Let’s mark this down as a historic day. From this day forth I don’t want to hear any more talk about discrimination or prejudice for trans people. Now I’ve made it, so we can all make it if I’ve made it. I’ve done my little bit and we can all make it.” Petrillo is now poised to race again in the T12 200m heats, an event scheduled to take place on Friday morning. Article Name:Transgender athlete Petrillo misses out on place in final Publication:The Guardian Author:Paul MacInnes Stade de France Start Page:34 End Page:34")
The Times [2]
Daily Mail [1]
Telegraph [2]
![The trans row tearing apart Britain’s doctors’ union Medics are warning that a ‘cult of ideology’ has seized the British Medical Association. By Sanchez Manning The Daily Telegraph3 Sep 2024 Trans action: a march in London against the ban on puberty blockers The anger is palpable in the voice of Prof Dame Clare Gerada as she demands to know why Britain’s biggest doctors’ union thinks it can thwart the Cass review – the landmark report on NHS child gender services which found that children had been let down by a lack of research into medical interventions – after it announced it would lobby against implementing the recommendations. “Cass took four years and did thousands of interviews, eight independent systematic reviews, had endless consultations and has come up with a very good report,” she says. “Then along comes the British Medical Association [BMA] in a meeting that no one is really invited to and makes this ruling. “What right has the BMA to second-guess the Cass review, the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges – which represent our professional values – and the three major royal colleges covering psychiatry, paediatrics and GPs?” Published in April by leading paediatrician Dr Hilary Cass, the review found that there is “remarkably weak evidence” about the long-term impact of puberty-suppressing hormones, known as “puberty blockers”. Last month, the Government renewed a temporary ban on the drugs’ prescription to children not already taking them. But while the review has been accepted and supported by most of the medical establishment, the BMA announced on July 31 that it would lobby against the implementation of its recommendations. The union said that following a motion passed by the BMA council it would set up a “task and finish” group to “publicly critique” the review. It went on to condemn the Government’s restrictions on puberty-blocker prescriptions. Now the BMA’s membership is at risk of being split by this decision – and more than 1,400 doctors have signed an open letter expressing their “dismay” at the union’s position. Among them are 70 professors and 23 former or current presidents of medical royal colleges and clinical leaders. Gerada, a former president of the Royal College of General Practitioners, is one of them. She says: “Why is the BMA doing this? I prescribe medicines to children and adults and every single one of those medicines has been through rigorous clinical studies. All the Cass review is doing is saying, we need to do the same for puberty blockers. This is about making medicines safe for children.” Dr Az Hakeem, a consultant psychiatrist, has specialised in treating patients with gender dysphoria. He resigned his BMA membership some years ago and today has his own view on the union’s stance. “The BMA has been taken over by a brigade of people wearing red braces and putting pronouns in their bios who have turned their back on evidencebased medicine in favour of a cult of ideology,” he says. Other doctors, current members of the BMA, feel just as strongly about the issue. Dr Stella Kingett, who heads a group on women and mental health in the Royal College of Psychiatrists, argues that the union hasn’t “protected debate”. “As doctors we should be used to having difficult discussions and appraising the evidence dispassionately, and I’m just disappointed that that’s not been done better,” she says. The letter from medics against the BMA’s position – first revealed by journalist and author Hannah Barnes in the New Statesman – accuses the union of failing to represent doctors. Titled “not in my name”, the correspondence criticises the union of being “opaque and secretive” in passing the motion on the review. It stresses that no information has been released on how many of the BMA’s council members voted for the proposed “critique”, adding that the result does “not reflect the views of the wider membership, whose opinion you did not seek”. Consultant psychiatrist Dr Lenny Cornwall, who has been a member of the BMA since 2016, argues that the incident has exposed the “outrageous way” the doctors’ union is operating. “I hadn’t quite realised how it [the BMA council] operates in terms of it being so secretive,” he says. “It is taking an ideological decision when the Cass report is a scientific review. That is not an appropriate thing for a medical union to do.” A spokesman for the union says: “The BMA will not be re-doing the Cass review; rather, we are at the start of what will be an impartial, neutral and evidence-led process – critical analysis and understanding of published evidence against accepting it on face value is hugely important.” One of the questions Cornwall has is why the council voted for this motion when so many of its members have since vocally opposed it. Speaking about past BMA council elections, he recalls: “Last time round, there was a slate of people standing who were saying ‘please vote for me’ and taking a more radical position, mainly with regards to junior doctors’ terms and conditions. “I don’t know who voted on this motion [about the Cass review], but my guess would be that it’s a group of largely younger doctors,” he speculates. The BMA council has 69 members who can vote, all elected by the union’s membership, with a geographical mix as well as five seats designated to ethnic minority members. Council members are intended to represent all branches – from GPs, consultants and specialists to public health medicine and academics, as well as junior and retired doctors. At present 22 of the 69 members are listed as “Junior Doctor”. A further five are medical students. The motion was reportedly tabled by Vassili Crispi, a junior doctor in Yorkshire, and consultant anaesthetist Dr Tom Dolphin, who was previously a chairman of the BMA’s junior doctors committee. Dolphin, who has acted as a media spokesman for striking doctors, has previously boasted of charging the NHS £1,870 for a single cover shift during the strikes. Later he donated the sum to the BMA’s strike fund, writing on social media that the war chest “supports people to strike, meaning the strike is stronger and the win will come sooner”. Last October, in another online post, he described the Conservative government’s decision to ban trans women from female hospital wards as “cruel, unworkable and almost certainly illegal”. Crispi, meanwhile, who was also said to have been active in driving the doctors’ strikes, is the coauthor of a paper, published in a medical journal, that called for the adoption of “gender-neutral terminology”, and demanded that LGBTQ+ education be “embedded” in the undergraduate curricula for doctors and “regularly revisited during postgraduate training”. For many medics, one of the greatest surprises isn’t the motion to challenge the Cass review but the number of doctors willing to oppose the BMA’s stance publicly. Gerada and Cornwall point out that previously many were fearful of speaking out on issues of child gender treatments. “This has fired up doctors in a way that I hadn’t quite grasped when I signed the letter,” Cornwall says. “When the signatories go up to more than 1,000 you realise that actually there’s a massive strength of feeling here. That’s because the Cass review was seen as such a relief because people have been so frightened to challenge gender-affirming care for children for fear of being called a bigot.” The longer-term impact on the BMA remains to be seen. It has prompted Kingett, a member since 1999, to consider her future with the union, despite being chairman of a local committee. “I have considered leaving the BMA,” she admits. “But [for now I will] try to get my voice heard and see if the senior BMA leadership will listen and change course somewhat. I think the BMA is worth fighting for.” ‘The BMA has been taken over by a brigade of people putting pronouns in their bios’ Article Name:The trans row tearing apart Britain’s doctors’ union Publication:The Daily Telegraph Start Page:6 End Page:6](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F77511e5c-b4b1-4554-8262-da7aade4e0c9_580x723.png "The trans row tearing apart Britain’s doctors’ union Medics are warning that a ‘cult of ideology’ has seized the British Medical Association. By Sanchez Manning The Daily Telegraph3 Sep 2024 Trans action: a march in London against the ban on puberty blockers The anger is palpable in the voice of Prof Dame Clare Gerada as she demands to know why Britain’s biggest doctors’ union thinks it can thwart the Cass review – the landmark report on NHS child gender services which found that children had been let down by a lack of research into medical interventions – after it announced it would lobby against implementing the recommendations. “Cass took four years and did thousands of interviews, eight independent systematic reviews, had endless consultations and has come up with a very good report,” she says. “Then along comes the British Medical Association [BMA] in a meeting that no one is really invited to and makes this ruling. “What right has the BMA to second-guess the Cass review, the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges – which represent our professional values – and the three major royal colleges covering psychiatry, paediatrics and GPs?” Published in April by leading paediatrician Dr Hilary Cass, the review found that there is “remarkably weak evidence” about the long-term impact of puberty-suppressing hormones, known as “puberty blockers”. Last month, the Government renewed a temporary ban on the drugs’ prescription to children not already taking them. But while the review has been accepted and supported by most of the medical establishment, the BMA announced on July 31 that it would lobby against the implementation of its recommendations. The union said that following a motion passed by the BMA council it would set up a “task and finish” group to “publicly critique” the review. It went on to condemn the Government’s restrictions on puberty-blocker prescriptions. Now the BMA’s membership is at risk of being split by this decision – and more than 1,400 doctors have signed an open letter expressing their “dismay” at the union’s position. Among them are 70 professors and 23 former or current presidents of medical royal colleges and clinical leaders. Gerada, a former president of the Royal College of General Practitioners, is one of them. She says: “Why is the BMA doing this? I prescribe medicines to children and adults and every single one of those medicines has been through rigorous clinical studies. All the Cass review is doing is saying, we need to do the same for puberty blockers. This is about making medicines safe for children.” Dr Az Hakeem, a consultant psychiatrist, has specialised in treating patients with gender dysphoria. He resigned his BMA membership some years ago and today has his own view on the union’s stance. “The BMA has been taken over by a brigade of people wearing red braces and putting pronouns in their bios who have turned their back on evidencebased medicine in favour of a cult of ideology,” he says. Other doctors, current members of the BMA, feel just as strongly about the issue. Dr Stella Kingett, who heads a group on women and mental health in the Royal College of Psychiatrists, argues that the union hasn’t “protected debate”. “As doctors we should be used to having difficult discussions and appraising the evidence dispassionately, and I’m just disappointed that that’s not been done better,” she says. The letter from medics against the BMA’s position – first revealed by journalist and author Hannah Barnes in the New Statesman – accuses the union of failing to represent doctors. Titled “not in my name”, the correspondence criticises the union of being “opaque and secretive” in passing the motion on the review. It stresses that no information has been released on how many of the BMA’s council members voted for the proposed “critique”, adding that the result does “not reflect the views of the wider membership, whose opinion you did not seek”. Consultant psychiatrist Dr Lenny Cornwall, who has been a member of the BMA since 2016, argues that the incident has exposed the “outrageous way” the doctors’ union is operating. “I hadn’t quite realised how it [the BMA council] operates in terms of it being so secretive,” he says. “It is taking an ideological decision when the Cass report is a scientific review. That is not an appropriate thing for a medical union to do.” A spokesman for the union says: “The BMA will not be re-doing the Cass review; rather, we are at the start of what will be an impartial, neutral and evidence-led process – critical analysis and understanding of published evidence against accepting it on face value is hugely important.” One of the questions Cornwall has is why the council voted for this motion when so many of its members have since vocally opposed it. Speaking about past BMA council elections, he recalls: “Last time round, there was a slate of people standing who were saying ‘please vote for me’ and taking a more radical position, mainly with regards to junior doctors’ terms and conditions. “I don’t know who voted on this motion [about the Cass review], but my guess would be that it’s a group of largely younger doctors,” he speculates. The BMA council has 69 members who can vote, all elected by the union’s membership, with a geographical mix as well as five seats designated to ethnic minority members. Council members are intended to represent all branches – from GPs, consultants and specialists to public health medicine and academics, as well as junior and retired doctors. At present 22 of the 69 members are listed as “Junior Doctor”. A further five are medical students. The motion was reportedly tabled by Vassili Crispi, a junior doctor in Yorkshire, and consultant anaesthetist Dr Tom Dolphin, who was previously a chairman of the BMA’s junior doctors committee. Dolphin, who has acted as a media spokesman for striking doctors, has previously boasted of charging the NHS £1,870 for a single cover shift during the strikes. Later he donated the sum to the BMA’s strike fund, writing on social media that the war chest “supports people to strike, meaning the strike is stronger and the win will come sooner”. Last October, in another online post, he described the Conservative government’s decision to ban trans women from female hospital wards as “cruel, unworkable and almost certainly illegal”. Crispi, meanwhile, who was also said to have been active in driving the doctors’ strikes, is the coauthor of a paper, published in a medical journal, that called for the adoption of “gender-neutral terminology”, and demanded that LGBTQ+ education be “embedded” in the undergraduate curricula for doctors and “regularly revisited during postgraduate training”. For many medics, one of the greatest surprises isn’t the motion to challenge the Cass review but the number of doctors willing to oppose the BMA’s stance publicly. Gerada and Cornwall point out that previously many were fearful of speaking out on issues of child gender treatments. “This has fired up doctors in a way that I hadn’t quite grasped when I signed the letter,” Cornwall says. “When the signatories go up to more than 1,000 you realise that actually there’s a massive strength of feeling here. That’s because the Cass review was seen as such a relief because people have been so frightened to challenge gender-affirming care for children for fear of being called a bigot.” The longer-term impact on the BMA remains to be seen. It has prompted Kingett, a member since 1999, to consider her future with the union, despite being chairman of a local committee. “I have considered leaving the BMA,” she admits. “But [for now I will] try to get my voice heard and see if the senior BMA leadership will listen and change course somewhat. I think the BMA is worth fighting for.” ‘The BMA has been taken over by a brigade of people putting pronouns in their bios’ Article Name:The trans row tearing apart Britain’s doctors’ union Publication:The Daily Telegraph Start Page:6 End Page:6")
Wednesday 4th Total: 1
The Guardian [0]
The Times [0]
Daily Mail [0]
Telegraph [1]
Thursday 5th Total: 1
The Guardian [0]
The Times [0]
Daily Mail [0]
Telegraph [1]
Friday 6th Total: 0
Saturday 7th Total: 3
The Guardian [0]
The Times [1]
Daily Mail [1]
Telegraph [1]
Sunday 8th Total: 2
Observer [2]
![BMA’s stance on Cass review has ‘damaged its reputation’ The Observer8 Sep 2024Denis Campbell The BMA called Hilary Cass’s review of transgender care ‘unsubstantiated’. The British Medical Association has threatened the reputation of all UK doctors by rejecting the findings of the landmark Cass review of transgender healthcare, a leading member of the BMA has told the Observer. Dr Jacky Davis claims that the doctors’ union’s stance on the Cass review is “irrational”, has created a “fracture” between its leadership and the grassroots doctors it represents and left the medical profession “in an uproar”. The BMA refused to endorse the findings of Dr Hilary Cass, whose review was published in April and was widely welcomed. It claimed the review contained “unsubstantiated recommendations” and its council called on members to “publicly critique” it. Last month, the BMA also called for the ban on prescribing puberty blockers for under-18s to be lifted. The BMA is the only medical organisation in Britain to not accept and to find fault with Cass’s findings, which were accepted by the last government and its Labour successor. It has said that it wants to carry out its own evaluation. Doctors on the BMA’s ruling council who have dared to challenge its criticism of the Cass review have been subject to “abuse” and its decision-making body is now shrouded in “a climate of fear and intimidation”, Davis claims. Writing in the Observer, Davis, who has been a member of the association’s council for 18 years, says: “The BMA now finds itself isolated in its opposition to Cass, and with its reputation and integrity damaged.” Other council members, talking on condition of anonymity, have shared similar concerns about the organisation’s standing, and the potential harm it could suffer over its internal strife on trans issues. The “toxic atmosphere” around BMA council debates has left some of its 69 members fearful of speaking up to share their views on the issue, Davis says. Its refusal to endorse Cass’s findings means the reputation of the entire medical profession is now “threatened”, she adds. The BMA’s position, decided at a council meeting on 17 July, has led to around 1,500 doctors, including former heads of medical royal colleges, signing a letter of protest and some longstanding members resigning. The union has adopted its position on Cass because a campaign group called DoctorsVote, which has led the junior doctors’ pay strikes, has used political “entryism” to gain a significant influence over the BMA and dictate its policy, Davis alleges. Davis, an NHS consultant radiologist, challenges the union’s leadership to “embrace democracy” and put its stance to a consultation of its estimated 185,000 members. “If it fails to do this, one would be forced to conclude that it is afraid of the views of its wider membership,” she writes. She also claims in her piece that those driving the union’s “anti-Cass” policy “are sincere in their beliefs [but] have no hard evidence for their opposition”, and that the union is in danger of undergoing what one critic describes as “descent into madness”. Responding to Davis, the BMA said it respected differences in opinion during its internal debates, which were “fair and open”. It denied that DoctorsVote was behind the controversial motion. A spokesperson said: “We do not accept any form of bullying, or inappropriate behaviours, and where these are brought to our attention due process is followed if further investigation is needed. “We are not aware of any bullying complaints from Dr Davis or supporters of her position through BMA channels or processes. “This is in contrast to the frankly abhorrent transphobic and homophobic abuse directed at BMA members and staff on social media in response to our work on the Cass review.” The union, which has spoken for the medical profession since 1832, did not respond to Davis’s claim that it has harmed its reputation as a result of its stance on Cass. DoctorsVote did not reply to a request for comment. Article Name:BMA’s stance on Cass review has ‘damaged its reputation’ Publication:The Observer Author:Denis Campbell Start Page:24 End Page:24](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Ffba0431a-e794-4236-b9c0-edcb7d0e28e4_247x701.png "BMA’s stance on Cass review has ‘damaged its reputation’ The Observer8 Sep 2024Denis Campbell The BMA called Hilary Cass’s review of transgender care ‘unsubstantiated’. The British Medical Association has threatened the reputation of all UK doctors by rejecting the findings of the landmark Cass review of transgender healthcare, a leading member of the BMA has told the Observer. Dr Jacky Davis claims that the doctors’ union’s stance on the Cass review is “irrational”, has created a “fracture” between its leadership and the grassroots doctors it represents and left the medical profession “in an uproar”. The BMA refused to endorse the findings of Dr Hilary Cass, whose review was published in April and was widely welcomed. It claimed the review contained “unsubstantiated recommendations” and its council called on members to “publicly critique” it. Last month, the BMA also called for the ban on prescribing puberty blockers for under-18s to be lifted. The BMA is the only medical organisation in Britain to not accept and to find fault with Cass’s findings, which were accepted by the last government and its Labour successor. It has said that it wants to carry out its own evaluation. Doctors on the BMA’s ruling council who have dared to challenge its criticism of the Cass review have been subject to “abuse” and its decision-making body is now shrouded in “a climate of fear and intimidation”, Davis claims. Writing in the Observer, Davis, who has been a member of the association’s council for 18 years, says: “The BMA now finds itself isolated in its opposition to Cass, and with its reputation and integrity damaged.” Other council members, talking on condition of anonymity, have shared similar concerns about the organisation’s standing, and the potential harm it could suffer over its internal strife on trans issues. The “toxic atmosphere” around BMA council debates has left some of its 69 members fearful of speaking up to share their views on the issue, Davis says. Its refusal to endorse Cass’s findings means the reputation of the entire medical profession is now “threatened”, she adds. The BMA’s position, decided at a council meeting on 17 July, has led to around 1,500 doctors, including former heads of medical royal colleges, signing a letter of protest and some longstanding members resigning. The union has adopted its position on Cass because a campaign group called DoctorsVote, which has led the junior doctors’ pay strikes, has used political “entryism” to gain a significant influence over the BMA and dictate its policy, Davis alleges. Davis, an NHS consultant radiologist, challenges the union’s leadership to “embrace democracy” and put its stance to a consultation of its estimated 185,000 members. “If it fails to do this, one would be forced to conclude that it is afraid of the views of its wider membership,” she writes. She also claims in her piece that those driving the union’s “anti-Cass” policy “are sincere in their beliefs [but] have no hard evidence for their opposition”, and that the union is in danger of undergoing what one critic describes as “descent into madness”. Responding to Davis, the BMA said it respected differences in opinion during its internal debates, which were “fair and open”. It denied that DoctorsVote was behind the controversial motion. A spokesperson said: “We do not accept any form of bullying, or inappropriate behaviours, and where these are brought to our attention due process is followed if further investigation is needed. “We are not aware of any bullying complaints from Dr Davis or supporters of her position through BMA channels or processes. “This is in contrast to the frankly abhorrent transphobic and homophobic abuse directed at BMA members and staff on social media in response to our work on the Cass review.” The union, which has spoken for the medical profession since 1832, did not respond to Davis’s claim that it has harmed its reputation as a result of its stance on Cass. DoctorsVote did not reply to a request for comment. Article Name:BMA’s stance on Cass review has ‘damaged its reputation’ Publication:The Observer Author:Denis Campbell Start Page:24 End Page:24")
Sunday Times [0]
Mail on Sunday [0]
Sunday Telegraph [0]
TRANSWRITES YOU MIGHT HAVE MISSED
Trans Kids Deserve Better letter to Secretary of State for Education, by Gemma Stone
Are teachers really being sacked for misgendering? (No and The Press is in on the lie), by Sarah Clarke
Will those who defended Imane Khelif also defend Valentina Petrillo at the Paralympics? By Lee Hurley
Trans Kids Deserve Better and need your help right now, by Jess O’Thompson
When was the T added to LGBT? A quick history, by Sarah Clarke
Trans people are the greatest assault on women in JK Rowling’s life time, apparently, by Gemma Stone
NHS & puberty blockers: Former GIDS patients reflect on long wait times, invasive assessments, by Sasha Baker.
SUPPORT THE TRANS AGENDA
Tired of the same old news narratives? Get 'The Trans Agenda' delivered right to your inbox – news with the trans community at the forefront. Subscribe now!
The Trans Agenda also needs your help. Your donation powers my reporting efforts, amplifying trans voices and keeps you in the know. Support independent trans journalism. Help keep in-depth reporting in 'The Trans Agenda' available and accessible by donating today!
CALL FOR STORIES
Seen something newsworthy related to the trans community in the UK? Send me a tip! I’m always looking for leads and underreported stories.