A significant Court of Appeal decision that would have been impossible prior to the Cass Review. Hopefully indicates that childhood medical transition will from now on be subject to proper scrutiny.
Thanks for bringing us this very important decision, Sarah though, as you say, a shame they didn't designate medical 'transition' as a special category of treatment.
Sarah, is it possible to politely challenge the Court of Appeal over the wording of the judgement in respect of the Cass commentary, ie to ask for a clarification?
I'm sure that, protocol wise, the answer is no, but this is a new area of involvement for the courts, the landscape is shifting rapidly and the so called 'controversy' is a perceived rather than an actual one.
We saw in the Supreme Court how the judiciary is having to wrestle with very new (and ultimately nonsensical) concepts around the whole notion of 'transgender' and the history of this case more than amply shows that understanding and legislative approaches are evolving. I'd like to think that our legal system is able to reflect on and respect this, including by being willing to consider that it may have not had the knowledge to fully understand all the implications of its statements.
I don’t hold out much hope that the court will stop treatment by GenderPlus. They are self-styled ‘experts’ in the field and are doing their best to do things by the book. Oh, and the CoA saying the Cass review is controversial makes my blood boil!!
If a court considers a child competent to undergo transition “ because he or she is over 16 and of sound mind”. A bit strange really. Gender Dysphoria, being a psychiatric condition, how could it be said that he or she, so suffering is of sound mind? I don’t think so. Can’t wait for this hazardous craze is over.
Lack of capacity for Mental Capacity Act requires a disease or injury to the brain. Having gender dysphoria doesn’t mean you automatically lack capacity to make decisions. I think it’s more relevant that these are children.
Thanks for bringing us this very important decision, Sarah though, as you say, a shame they didn't designate medical 'transition' as a special category of treatment.
Have cross posted.
https://dustymasterson.substack.com/p/the-snowman
Happy Christmas and thanks for all your hard work for the Terven!😊
Dusty
That's great news, Sarah, and, as you say, very significant. Congratulations! Do you have the full case-name, please?
Haven’t yet got a link to judgment - will have a look
https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/o-v-p-and-q-2/
Sarah, is it possible to politely challenge the Court of Appeal over the wording of the judgement in respect of the Cass commentary, ie to ask for a clarification?
I'm sure that, protocol wise, the answer is no, but this is a new area of involvement for the courts, the landscape is shifting rapidly and the so called 'controversy' is a perceived rather than an actual one.
We saw in the Supreme Court how the judiciary is having to wrestle with very new (and ultimately nonsensical) concepts around the whole notion of 'transgender' and the history of this case more than amply shows that understanding and legislative approaches are evolving. I'd like to think that our legal system is able to reflect on and respect this, including by being willing to consider that it may have not had the knowledge to fully understand all the implications of its statements.
I would like to think it would support a ground of appeal - such an odd and misinformed comment.
Here’s the link to the judgement https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/o-v-p-and-q-2/
Thanks! will add to post.
I don’t hold out much hope that the court will stop treatment by GenderPlus. They are self-styled ‘experts’ in the field and are doing their best to do things by the book. Oh, and the CoA saying the Cass review is controversial makes my blood boil!!
But there is no book. That’s the point, which this court at least recognised. So it will help the JR.
Thank you!
The Fact remains that no medical procedure can change a biological female into a male.
can't be done, and the entire idea is totally UNNATURAL, so some people are asking the courts to endorse an UNNATURAL ACT.
If a court considers a child competent to undergo transition “ because he or she is over 16 and of sound mind”. A bit strange really. Gender Dysphoria, being a psychiatric condition, how could it be said that he or she, so suffering is of sound mind? I don’t think so. Can’t wait for this hazardous craze is over.
Lack of capacity for Mental Capacity Act requires a disease or injury to the brain. Having gender dysphoria doesn’t mean you automatically lack capacity to make decisions. I think it’s more relevant that these are children.