Cass Review: Difference between revisions
better source for chair |
→Responses: Completely inappropriate to link to the conversion therapy page. |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
=== Responses === |
=== Responses === |
||
Some criticisms of the operation of GIDS that the [[Association of Clinical Psychologists UK]] (ACP-UK) drew from the Cass interim report were: GIDS took an approach that was predominantly [[Transgender health care#Gender-affirming care|affirmative]], rather than |
Some criticisms of the operation of GIDS that the [[Association of Clinical Psychologists UK]] (ACP-UK) drew from the Cass interim report were: GIDS took an approach that was predominantly [[Transgender health care#Gender-affirming care|affirmative]], rather than exploratory; assessment was not standardised; mental health and neurodevelopmental assessments were not conducted comprehensively, leading to ‘diagnostic overshadowing’ whereby gender dysphoria was attended to without taking into account any co-existing diagnoses; safeguarding processes were lacking.<ref>{{cite web |title=The Cass Review and its Implications: Psychologically Informed Considerations for the Future|date=October 2022 |url=https://acpuk.org.uk/the-cass-review-and-its-implications-psychologically-informed-considerations-for-the-future/ |website=acpuk.org.uk |publisher=Association of Clinical Psychologists |access-date=15 February 2023}}</ref> In response, an open letter signed by more than forty clinical psychologists described the statement by the ACP as ‘misleading’ and said that it ‘perpetuates damaging discourses about the work and gender-diverse identities more broadly’. Roughly half of the signatories were current or former senior employees at GIDS.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Brooks |first1=Libby |title=Gender identity specialists accuse psychology body of 'contributing to fear'|date=2 November 2022 |url=https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/nov/02/gender-identity-specialists-accuse-psychology-body-of-contributing-to-fear |website=theguardian.com |publisher=Guardian |access-date=15 February 2023}}</ref> |
||
== References == |
== References == |
||
Revision as of 13:40, 9 April 2024
The Independent Review of Gender Identity Services for Children and Young People (commonly, the Cass Review) was commissioned in 2020 by NHS England and NHS Improvement[1] and is due to report on 10 April 2024.[2] It appointed as lead Hilary Cass, a retired consultant paediatrician and former President of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health.[3]
History
The interim report of The Cass Review was published in March 2022.[4] It said that the rise in referrals had led to the staff being overwhelmed, and recommended the creation of a network of regional hubs to provide care and support to young people. The report noted that the clinical approach used by GIDS "has not been subjected to some of the usual control measures" typically applied with new treatments, and raised concerns about the lack of data collection by GIDS.[5][6]
The interim report also said that Cass considered that GPs and other non-GIDS staff felt "under pressure to adopt an unquestioning affirmative approach" to children unsure of their gender, "overshadowing" other issues such as poor mental health. The Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust said "being respectful of someone's identity does not preclude exploration", and "We agree that support should be holistic, based on the best available evidence and that no assumptions should be made about the right outcome for any given young person."[7]
The Cass Review is due to be published on 10 April 2024 and will include an analysis of scientific literature on the effects and outcomes of social transitioning.[2]
Responses
Some criticisms of the operation of GIDS that the Association of Clinical Psychologists UK (ACP-UK) drew from the Cass interim report were: GIDS took an approach that was predominantly affirmative, rather than exploratory; assessment was not standardised; mental health and neurodevelopmental assessments were not conducted comprehensively, leading to ‘diagnostic overshadowing’ whereby gender dysphoria was attended to without taking into account any co-existing diagnoses; safeguarding processes were lacking.[8] In response, an open letter signed by more than forty clinical psychologists described the statement by the ACP as ‘misleading’ and said that it ‘perpetuates damaging discourses about the work and gender-diverse identities more broadly’. Roughly half of the signatories were current or former senior employees at GIDS.[9]
References
- ^ commissioning, NHS. "NHS commissioning » Independent review into gender identity services for children and young people". www.england.nhs.uk. Retrieved 9 April 2024.
- ^ a b Turner, Camilla (2024-04-06). "Children allowed to 'socially transition' face psychological harm, review warns". The Telegraph. ISSN 0307-1235. Retrieved 2024-04-06.
- ^ "The Chair – Cass Review". cass.independent-review.uk. Retrieved 9 April 2024.
- ^ Cass, Hilary (2022-03-10). "Independent review of gender identity services for children and young people: Interim report". The Cass Review. Retrieved 2023-01-15.
- ^ Brooks, Libby (10 March 2022). "NHS gender identity service for children can't cope with demand, review finds 10 March 2022". Guardian. Archived from the original on 13 March 2022. Retrieved 13 March 2022.
- ^ Bannerman, Lucy (10 March 2022). "Tavistock gender clinic not safe for children, report finds". The Times. Archived from the original on 29 March 2022. Retrieved 29 March 2022.
- ^ Crawford, Angus (23 April 2022). "Sajid Javid to review gender treatment for children". bbc.co.uk/news. BBC. Archived from the original on 24 April 2022. Retrieved 24 April 2022.
- ^ "The Cass Review and its Implications: Psychologically Informed Considerations for the Future". acpuk.org.uk. Association of Clinical Psychologists. October 2022. Retrieved 15 February 2023.
- ^ Brooks, Libby (2 November 2022). "Gender identity specialists accuse psychology body of 'contributing to fear'". theguardian.com. Guardian. Retrieved 15 February 2023.