Britain’s biggest doctors’ union has been accused of ‘falling prey to an activist agenda’ after it failed to publicly back the landmark Cass review into NHS gender identity services for children.
The British Medical Association’s governing council last night debated the inquiry’s findings more three months after they were published and widely welcomed by other experts.
But it refused to reveal the outcome of the discussion amid reports some members had called on the organisation to ‘disavow’ the review.
Leading paediatrician Dr Hilary Cass made more than 30 recommendations to overhaul NHS services in a bid to improve care offered to trans-children.
Her report, published this April, took almost four years to produce and found children ‘caught in the middle’ of a toxic row over treatment have been set on a path to irreversible change.
She warned evidence for the use of puberty blockers and hormones relied heavily on ‘shaky foundations’ and associated guidelines were not supported by science.
The British Medical Association (pictured) has been accused of ‘falling prey to an activist agenda’ after it failed to publicly back the landmark Cass review into NHS gender identity services for children
Leading paediatrician Dr Hilary Cass (pictured) made more than 30 recommendations to overhaul NHS services in a bid to improve care offered to trans-children
Its findings were backed by the Royal College of GPs and the Royal College of Psychiatrists and prompted the then health secretary Victoria Atkins to ban the prescribing of puberty blockers to trans children, a policy continued by her successor Wes Streeting.
The New Statesman yesterday reported that the BMA council was due to debate a motion that committed it to opposing the implementation of the report’s recommendations.
It said the motion also described report’s findings as ‘unsubstantiated’ and based on flawed evidence, and called on the organisation to lobby the NHS and government to ensure ‘continuity in provision of transgender health care for patients younger than 18 years old’.
The BMA last night said its council did not vote on the motion as reported by the New Statesman but refused to reveal the wording of any replacement, prompting speculation it had merely been tweaked.
Leading members of the BMA have controversially backed the use of puberty blockers on Twitter.
Fiona McAnena, director of campaigns at human-rights charity Sex Matters, said: ‘A motion that calls the Cass Review into question is clearly ideologically driven, not based on science or evidence.
Dr Hilary Cass holding her review of gender identity services for children and young people
Wes Streeting (pictured) continued with former Conservative health secretary Victoria Atkins’ decision to ban the prescribing of puberty blockers to trans children
A trans rights activist takes part in a protest against the ban on hormone blockers on April 20, 2024 in London
Trans rights activists take part in a protest against the ban on hormone blockers on April 20, 2024 in London after Dr Cass delivered her report on NHS gender identity services
‘For this to happen at the BMA is a shocking sign of the times.
‘It shows that even respectable medical organisations can fall prey to an activist agenda that is not in patients’ best interests.
‘The BMA’s lack of transparency and reluctance to come clean about what is going on with this motion is disgraceful and provides no reassurance.
‘It risks serious reputational damage to them and stokes further anxiety and confusion in this area of healthcare.
‘Young people and their families deserve better than this.’
Fiona added: ‘It is deplorable that the BMA still cannot say whether or not it backs the findings of the review three months after it was published and welcomed by other healthcare organisations.’
A BMA spokesperson said: ‘The BMA Council has discussed the Cass report and the woefully inadequate provision of services provided for vulnerable children and young adults with gender dysphoria as part of the Association’s internal processes for developing policy.
‘The motions discussed were not as reported in the misleading New Statesman article.
‘The BMA will continue with further work in this area to contribute positively to the provision of care and services to this often neglected population and will be setting out the BMA’s stance in due course.’
