The Current State of Paediatric Gender Dysphoria in Australia

The Tavistock’s Gender Identity Development Services (also known as GIDS) has closed at last. Australian Genspect parents  are very pleased  for our colleagues in the UK, and hope that the recommendations of The Cass Review will be followed properly, and that gender questioning young people in the UK  will now have access to proper, comprehensive  care, which is not driven by ideology.

But our celebrations are bittersweet. Here in Australia, children are still being treated using the “affirmation approach” which has been rightly condemned in the UK, and there is no progress being made towards this changing. As reported in The Australian, Australian gender clinics doubled down on their support for this unevidenced, harmful approach in response to the news of the GIDS closure.

Numbers of gender distressed young people continue to skyrocket in this country. In the state of Victoria, referrals to the state’s paediatric gender service at the Royal Children’s Hospital (RCH) increased from under 500 in 2020 to over 800  in 2021. Note the lack of any curiosity on the part of either the RCH clinician or the ABC  journalist in the linked article as to why this might be, and the continued promotion of puberty blockers as a “safe and proven pause button” – which they are not.

The RCH paediatric gender service is Australia’s largest. Their internally generated guidelines are badged as “standards of care” despite having a dubious claim to that status. The document is promoted for use throughout Australia and recommends the exclusive use of a child-led version of the “affirmation approach” – despite the guidelines themselves acknowledging the lack of an evidence base for this.

In fact, in some respects the RCH gender clinic is considerably more gung-ho about the affirmation approach than the Tavistock, as explained by Australian journalist Bernard Lane. The clinic has campaigned (unsuccessfully) to offer mastectomies to minors at the RCH, and makes  liberal use of the emotive, misleading suicide narrative, something the Tavistock has not done. Paediatric gender clinics in other parts of Australia also use the “gender affirming” approach, too, which can be learned more about here and here.

Unlike in the UK, there is little public awareness of what is going on. Since the excellent coverage of journalist Bernard Lane was muzzled by a complaint from the head of the RCH gender service in 2021, there has been insufficient media scrutiny until very recently, although The Australian newspaper (which is paywalled), and Sky News have offered some coverage. A brave Australian parent of a young woman who bitterly regrets being rushed onto testosterone at the age of 18 (when she was suffering severe mental illness) has also recently been able to gain some media attention.

Australia’s trusted, taxpayer-funded public broadcaster, the ABC, regularly and uncritically showcases the “affirmative approach.” This includes promulgating the harmful suicide narrative, and denying the fact that affirmation is experimental. Yet , the ABC initially failed to report on the closure of the Tavistock GIDS clinic, an event which  should lead to serious questions about the veracity of its regular glowing endorsement of affirmation.

In recent days, there have been big shifts in the media landscape in Australia. In a stunning development, veteran ABC journalist Paul Barry harshly criticized his own organization for their bias on this issue, and for ignoring the Tavistock closure, in his longstanding “Media Watch” segment.

Just a couple of days later the ABC provided coverage on the controversies around paediatric medical transition for the first time when they interviewed psychiatrist Dr Phillip Morris, who called for a more thoughtful, exploratory approach.  (Note Dr Morris’ pointed comments about the length of the delay, which certainly unsettled the interviewer!)

However, within days they had reverted to type, producing a long article painting a glowing picture of medical and surgical transition. This article purported to cover the Tavistock GIDS closure but in fact misrepresents the message from Dr. Cass entirely, and claims that the model that she proposes is already in place in Australia, merely on the basis that Australian gender clinics are based within children’s hospitals. This in incorrect. A quick comparison of the “Australian Standards of Care” and the material on the NHS website about the new UK approach demonstrates the stark differences. One  involves exclusive affirmation. The other involves a truly cautious, multidisciplinary approach which acknowledges the controversies, concerning developments like the skyrocketing numbers, and the shifting landscape in this field.

There is a cautionary tale here for the UK. Establishing paediatric gender services within children’s hospitals as Dr. Cass recommends, even when they are as renowned as the RCH, does not ensure more holistic care. The RCH governance team has publicly stated their support for their gender clinic with its aggressive affirmation model. Ideological capture is the problem. Until that is broken, no amount of shifting the deckchairs will rectify the woeful state of paediatric “gender medicine” wherever it is practiced.

In other media developments, there have been two  Australian detransitioners interviewed in just  the last few days (one of whom is suing her psychiatrist for approving her transition). An article in the Daily Telegraph blew the whistle on the highly concerning links between ACON (Australia’s Stonewall), and multiple government departments and big organizations – including the ABC. In addition, a disturbing article appeared in the Daily Mail featuring interviews with distraught parents whose families are being harmed by the draconian “conversion therapy law” in the Australian state of Victoria.  

Following on from the news that a class action is being launched against the Tavistock Clinic which may involve up to 1000 former patients, The Australian newspaper has reported that legal action is also in the wind in Australia. Watch this space for more promising developments in the coming weeks and months. It seems the tide may be turning in Australia at long last. It is early days yet, but at least some sort of robust public debate now seems possible.

Australian Genspect parents have sent the Genspect Open Letter to Paediatric Gender Clinics to all the Australian paediatric gender services, with an attached letter from us calling on them to respond to the letter answering the questions therein, and to cease using the “affirmative approach” in their care of gender questioning young people. Our letter reads, in part:

“It is a matter of public record that this approach (affirmation) has no robust evidence base behind it and causes multiple serious side effects (including sterility,  anorgasmia, and osteopenia)….. It is also a matter of public record that large  numbers of young people are coming forward to testify that they been seriously harmed by these interventions, and now regret them. They also testify to the rampant social contagion of gender distress, and to undue influence by social media  and adult activists. We parents have seen this occurring with our own eyes. …….

This is no longer just a brewing  medical scandal – the scandal has now broken internationally, and  it is  only a matter of time before the same happens here. It does appear that  gender clinics  such as yours have two choices. You can  either choose to  rectify  the situation now –or wait until matters are taken out of your hands.  Of course the latter course of action will lead to considerably more  reputational damage, as well as  substantial  legal  costs.“

Those interested in following events  in Australia, as well as the gender clinic debate around the world, are advised to subscribe to the excellent Substack of Australian journalist Bernard Lane. One of the best things you can do to help Australia is to read his journalism and spread it far and wide on social media. All his content can be accessed for free, but please take out a paid subscription if you can.  As explained above, he has paid the price (like many others) for speaking the truth about the realities   of  “affirmative care.”