Bombshell report said it should be harder for a child to switch gender – so why does Labour want to make it easier?
ONE thing that last month’s Cass Review made clear is that there is a case to be made for the diagnosis of gender dysphoria to be much stricter, more specialised, and objective.
Why, then, is Labour doing precisely the opposite by promoting a policy that would make the transition process even easier than it already is?
Those working in so-called gender services have cautiously suggested that taking cross-sex hormones and under- going surgery on healthy body parts are all “last resort” actions.
I would argue that such actions are more than just unnecessary — they are always the wrong course of action.
We need only look at what happened in the early 2000s, when a small group of people were supported by a psychiatrist who fast-tracked them through to irreversible sex change treatments.
The GMC later found the doctor guilty of serious professional misconduct.
No doubt these people were suffering from chronic body dysmorphia, but was surgery to remove healthy appendages really the way forward?
Absolutely not.
They were suffering from a mental health condition, as are those who genuinely feel they are trapped in the wrong body.
It is beyond belief that Labour now plans to make it easier than ever to access treatment, euphemistically known as “gender affirming care”, by allowing a single family GP to rubber-stamp the gender recognition process.
Currently, a panel of doctors and lawyers have to sign off gender recognition certificates so that the individual can be legally recognised as the opposite sex to all intents and purposes.
You don’t even need a GRC to change a driving licence or passport.
It beggars belief that a family GP — who may be in the grip of transgender ideology, or could live in fear of being deemed “transphobic” by colleagues or some patients — could single-handedly endorse a legal sex change.
A condition as complex as so-called gender dysphoria is not something GPs are qualified to deal with.
Any future government must consider whether or not the notions of living in the wrong body, and the availability of sex change treatment, should be entertained at all.
Now the myth that withholding treat-ment including puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgery from a young person or adult can lead to suicide attempts has been thoroughly debunked, everyone can see that it is as pernicious as it is untrue.
Falling for lies
In fact, there are studies showing the exact opposite — as the number of medical interventions increases, so does the incidence of depression and serious mental health problems.
As the result of a huge backlash from feminists and other concerned citizens some time ago, Labour dropped the notion of self-identification — which would have meant that all anyone had to do to be accepted as being the opposite sex was declare themselves as such.
It was pointed out that this would lead to the total destruction of single-sex services such as rape crisis centres, domestic violence refuges and hospital wards.
Yet this new proposed amendment looks a lot like self-identification to me.
What is to stop anyone going to a private GP — perhaps even one of those set up for the very purpose of prescribing puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones — and getting an instant sign-off for irreversible treatment?
In the midst of a public backlash against this gender madness that is coming from leftists, Conservatives and everyone in between, Labour is backsliding.
They need to be told that it is over — most UK citizens are no longer falling for these lies.
As a lifelong Labour voter, my worry is that if even the Cass Review hasn’t forced party leaders into a massive retreat on what has been exposed as one of the greatest medical scandals of modern times, I don’t know what will.
If Labour can be as stupid on this issue as it has been, it can be similarly stupid on other crucial matters.
If the party is to earn the trust of the electorate, it must roll back on this ridiculous plan.
Labour Party chair Anneliese Dodds said: “We want to see the process for gender recognition modernised, while protecting single-sex spaces for biological women.”
But this is an impossibility.
There is evidence that a number of trans-identified male sex offenders placed in women’s prisons have gone on to sexually assault female inmates.
A paedophile, who was born male, was allowed to reside in a domestic violence refuge for women and children for several weeks.
I would like to hear from the Labour Party exactly how it would ensure that single-sex spaces and services can be safely provided.
Women are deserting Labour in droves, on the basis that if they cannot be trusted on this issue then they cannot be trusted on others either.
From Sir Keir Starmer’s statement that “99.9 percent of women do not have a penis”, through to the Shadow Secretary of State for International Development Lisa Nandy’s support for the notion of transwomen rapists being placed in female prisons, they are on the wrong side of history on this issue.
It may yet cost them dearly.
