New York Times has an article just today exposing Dr. Olsen-Kennedy (the American Queen of child butchery) for not publishing the data she's collected on the effects of puberty blockers because the findings "might fuel the kind of political attacks that led to bans of youth gender treatments in more than 20 states". In other words, there was no evidence of benefit (and probably evidence of harm) IN HER OWN DATA. She chose to withhold the data so that people could not make evidence based choices that contradict her ideology. Data, schmata, she just feels she's right and she's going to go right on butchering kids and telling parents that the kids will die without her "help." This is the state of medical "science" in 2024.
Wonderful. Love UnHerd. I also love JK Rowling's (typically brilliant) way of putting it: 'We must not publish a study that says we're harming children because people who say we're harming children will use the study as evidence that we're harming children, which might make it difficult for us to continue harming children.'
I expect some significant malpractice suits in the future for Canadian Drs who went along with this insanity. I hope these suits start sooner rather than later, Id like to see a few Drs bankrupted by this insanity, which might be the only way the rest will come to their senses. I know that sounds terrible but something needs to be done to wake these people up, money has that power if nothing else.
The way malpractice works in Canada is that the sued doctor would be represented by a malpractice co-operative, which in most cases would pay any damages awarded by a Court or that were agreed to in an out-of-Court settlement. It is impossible to sue any doctor into personal or business bankruptcy over a malpractice claim. If you did you wouldn’t get any money. (I realize that’s what Donald Trump’s numerous tormentors have been trying to do but he’s not covered by malpractice insurance and pays damages personally.)
The other difficulty for plaintiffs is that if a doctor shows he adhered to the standard of care prevailing at the time he gave the treatment, he will not usually be found liable or at fault for damages suffered by the plaintiff patient. The exact nature of the standard of care is hashed out during litigation but ultimately it’s what other ordinary doctors (not necessarily experts) would do in a situation similar to the patient’s. If the patient demanded the treatment and the doctor sincerely believed, based on his knowledge and experience at the time, that the treatment would improve the patient’s health and if he provided it in a competent manner, he will probably be found not negligent or liable for damages claimed.
If the various medical societies escape the thrall of trans ideology and come out with evidence-based recommendations that altering sex characteristics with drugs and surgery is NOT a good treatment for mental illness, especially in children, then we will see the standard of care shift. Lawsuits begun for treatment given after that would be more likely to succeed. Of course no one wants to recommend anything that sounds like conversion therapy as you can go to prison for that.
It is hard to overstate the grip that the trans activists have on our collective ba...Er, souls.
The way this ends in NA is with lawsuits in the U.S. (which are beginning). As you point out this won't happen in a meaningful way in Canada. But once this blows up in the U.S. (and it will) then this BS will grind to a halt here as well. Enabling doctors should lose their licenses - but they won't sadly.
The best that can be hoped for is that doctors will just stop doing it and then pretend that none of them ever did it. Another “false memory.” Something that someone will bring up over a glass of wine together....dead silence then someone else will laugh nervously and change the subject.
Pretty convoluted -- need to be a Philadelphia lawyer to follow all the ins and outs. 🙂
But definitely encouraging, although, as I've argued on one of "Unyielding Bicyclist's" posts, I think the WDI are kind of shooting themselves in the feet by peddling feminist dogma as far as sex and gender are concerned:
WDI: "Sex is grounded in material reality, whereas 'gender' (including linguistic derivatives like 'gender identity,' 'transgender' and 'cisgender') is grounded in regressive sexist stereotypes."
Those stereotypes are not entirely "regressive", and as Substacker Lee Jussim argued some years ago, "Stereotype Accuracy is One of the Largest and Most Replicable Effects in All of Social Psychology":
There are significant differences, on average, in the personalities and behaviours of men and women, many of which might reasonably come in under the rubric of "gender".
Another 'trend' that I hope will soon stop. Does anyone even question why there is such a number of young people who are confused about their gender/sex? All the hormones in our food etc may be a starting point. Growing up I never knew anyone who was 'confused', nor in my children's friends to this day.
just as an observation with some personal experience thrown in, it seems like this is just another avenue of opportunity that's been thrown open to misfits. A bit harsh, but it seems like it's another group that someone who doesn't belong to another group can join. So peer pressure plays a part. Social pressure to "fit in" in some way. the head of the Australian psychiatric association wrote an article on this quite a while ago, 2017 or 2018. he said peer pressure was almost solely the cause of the gender "thing." He was railroaded out as head and of the profession. His article was based on a large cohort study.
👍 ICYMI, some more people being willing to read the writing on the wall. Popular Substacker and gay columnist Andrew Sullivan has been thinking of voting for Trump as a result of the Levine case:
"Rachel Levine Must Resign: A case study in politics and ideology overruling science. With children as victims. .... I have to say that the news this week has made me reconsider voting for Kamala Harris."
New York Times has an article just today exposing Dr. Olsen-Kennedy (the American Queen of child butchery) for not publishing the data she's collected on the effects of puberty blockers because the findings "might fuel the kind of political attacks that led to bans of youth gender treatments in more than 20 states". In other words, there was no evidence of benefit (and probably evidence of harm) IN HER OWN DATA. She chose to withhold the data so that people could not make evidence based choices that contradict her ideology. Data, schmata, she just feels she's right and she's going to go right on butchering kids and telling parents that the kids will die without her "help." This is the state of medical "science" in 2024.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/23/science/puberty-blockers-olson-kennedy.html
Good article in Unherd today on this:
https://archive.ph/2024.10.23-210126/https://unherd.com/newsroom/why-are-gender-clinicians-withholding-research/
Wonderful. Love UnHerd. I also love JK Rowling's (typically brilliant) way of putting it: 'We must not publish a study that says we're harming children because people who say we're harming children will use the study as evidence that we're harming children, which might make it difficult for us to continue harming children.'
I expect some significant malpractice suits in the future for Canadian Drs who went along with this insanity. I hope these suits start sooner rather than later, Id like to see a few Drs bankrupted by this insanity, which might be the only way the rest will come to their senses. I know that sounds terrible but something needs to be done to wake these people up, money has that power if nothing else.
The way malpractice works in Canada is that the sued doctor would be represented by a malpractice co-operative, which in most cases would pay any damages awarded by a Court or that were agreed to in an out-of-Court settlement. It is impossible to sue any doctor into personal or business bankruptcy over a malpractice claim. If you did you wouldn’t get any money. (I realize that’s what Donald Trump’s numerous tormentors have been trying to do but he’s not covered by malpractice insurance and pays damages personally.)
The other difficulty for plaintiffs is that if a doctor shows he adhered to the standard of care prevailing at the time he gave the treatment, he will not usually be found liable or at fault for damages suffered by the plaintiff patient. The exact nature of the standard of care is hashed out during litigation but ultimately it’s what other ordinary doctors (not necessarily experts) would do in a situation similar to the patient’s. If the patient demanded the treatment and the doctor sincerely believed, based on his knowledge and experience at the time, that the treatment would improve the patient’s health and if he provided it in a competent manner, he will probably be found not negligent or liable for damages claimed.
If the various medical societies escape the thrall of trans ideology and come out with evidence-based recommendations that altering sex characteristics with drugs and surgery is NOT a good treatment for mental illness, especially in children, then we will see the standard of care shift. Lawsuits begun for treatment given after that would be more likely to succeed. Of course no one wants to recommend anything that sounds like conversion therapy as you can go to prison for that.
It is hard to overstate the grip that the trans activists have on our collective ba...Er, souls.
The way this ends in NA is with lawsuits in the U.S. (which are beginning). As you point out this won't happen in a meaningful way in Canada. But once this blows up in the U.S. (and it will) then this BS will grind to a halt here as well. Enabling doctors should lose their licenses - but they won't sadly.
The best that can be hoped for is that doctors will just stop doing it and then pretend that none of them ever did it. Another “false memory.” Something that someone will bring up over a glass of wine together....dead silence then someone else will laugh nervously and change the subject.
Thank you for this information...such a shame really!
Yes.
Thank you.
“The science is settled” is A. anti-science, and B. manifestly untrue. Therefore robust debate is critical to healthy outcomes.
Good comments. There are some heroes out there, the three you name are a start. So are you. Reality will eventually reassert itself.
Apropos of your post and of my Levine comment, a significant case in the US which may have some bearing on potential ones in Canada:
"Reading The Skrmetti Briefs As History
Because the case will make history":
https://www.thedistancemag.com/p/reading-the-skrmetti-briefs-as-history?utm_medium=reader2&triedRedirect=true
Canadian lawyer Peter Sims weighs in on both:
"Boe v. Marshall in Canada
How will the fallout from a case in Alabama affect Canadian courts"
https://substack.com/@justdad7180/p-150414902
What's happening in Alabama is fascinating.
Pretty convoluted -- need to be a Philadelphia lawyer to follow all the ins and outs. 🙂
But definitely encouraging, although, as I've argued on one of "Unyielding Bicyclist's" posts, I think the WDI are kind of shooting themselves in the feet by peddling feminist dogma as far as sex and gender are concerned:
https://badfacts.substack.com/p/the-american-academy-of-pediatrics/comment/72605049
WDI: "Sex is grounded in material reality, whereas 'gender' (including linguistic derivatives like 'gender identity,' 'transgender' and 'cisgender') is grounded in regressive sexist stereotypes."
https://karadansky.substack.com/p/wdi-usa-files-supreme-court-brief?triedRedirect=true
Those stereotypes are not entirely "regressive", and as Substacker Lee Jussim argued some years ago, "Stereotype Accuracy is One of the Largest and Most Replicable Effects in All of Social Psychology":
https://spsp.org/news-center/character-context-blog/stereotype-accuracy-one-largest-and-most-replicable-effects-all
There are significant differences, on average, in the personalities and behaviours of men and women, many of which might reasonably come in under the rubric of "gender".
Another 'trend' that I hope will soon stop. Does anyone even question why there is such a number of young people who are confused about their gender/sex? All the hormones in our food etc may be a starting point. Growing up I never knew anyone who was 'confused', nor in my children's friends to this day.
just as an observation with some personal experience thrown in, it seems like this is just another avenue of opportunity that's been thrown open to misfits. A bit harsh, but it seems like it's another group that someone who doesn't belong to another group can join. So peer pressure plays a part. Social pressure to "fit in" in some way. the head of the Australian psychiatric association wrote an article on this quite a while ago, 2017 or 2018. he said peer pressure was almost solely the cause of the gender "thing." He was railroaded out as head and of the profession. His article was based on a large cohort study.
Yes, I do believe that these can be fads too that come and go. Hopefully a lot of kids won't get so messed up that makes coming back impossible.
👍 ICYMI, some more people being willing to read the writing on the wall. Popular Substacker and gay columnist Andrew Sullivan has been thinking of voting for Trump as a result of the Levine case:
"Rachel Levine Must Resign: A case study in politics and ideology overruling science. With children as victims. .... I have to say that the news this week has made me reconsider voting for Kamala Harris."
https://andrewsullivan.substack.com/p/rachel-levine-must-resign-2d7