Exclusive | TL;DR: QueerAF can reveal that the Department of Health and Social Care has escalated its language about the use of puberty blockers for Trans+ children, in response to questions about the Health Secretary’s recent meeting with Caroline Litman.
The Department of Health and Social Care has said it was "appalling" that puberty blockers were offered to Trans+ children, in a response to questions by QueerAF about Health Secretary Wes Streeting's recent meeting with bereaved mother Alice Litman - QueerAF
QueerAF enquired this week about the Secretary's unprompted insistence in that meeting that he was not a "God botherer who has issues with trans people". The Department said the government is "committed to trans people being treated with dignity and respect within the NHS". But it went on to say that "It was appalling that children were being given medicine that was not proven to be safe or effective - the action we have taken is protecting children in future being put at such risk."
It marks an escalation of language and opposition to the use of puberty blocker drugs in children, which remain in use for cisgender children, by the Department of Health.
While Streeting has called the provision of puberty blockers a "scandal" and referred to them being "dished out willy-nilly", the use of the word “appalling” is new.
This week also saw the release of a critique of the Cass Review into gender identity services for transgender children, commissioned by the British Medical Association (BMA). The BMA found that, while the Review’s assertions that there is a lack of evidence around puberty blockers are reasonable, Cass simplified “complex findings” and focused on risks over benefits. It also criticises the implementation of Cass’ recommendations by government - BMJ
Implementations of the Cass recommendations were an “overreach”
At the time of the Cass Review’s release in 2024, the BMA called for the implementation of Dr Cass’ recommendations to be paused while it conducted its own review. Instead, the outgoing Conservative government rapidly enacted a temporary ban on puberty blockers, which Streeting went on to make permanent after Labour came into power - QueerAF
Now released two years on, the BMA’s critique says that those government actions went beyond the recommendations of the Cass Review, and that the Review provides no evidential basis for a ban. It goes on to point out that medical bodies could have continued managing prescriptions without the need for government intervention – in short, the ban was an “overreach” - BMJ
The BMA does not comment on what might have motivated that overreach, but we know that ‘gender critical’ and outright anti-trans campaign groups have been involved at several stages. Eight such groups were invited to participate in DHSC consultation on the puberty blocker ban, and Streeting ultimately sided with them in making the ban permanent – despite the majority of respondents advocating against the ban - QueerAF
Around the same time, Streeting expressed sympathy for one of those groups, the Bayswater Parents. In summer 2024 an exposé revealed that the Bayswater group encouraged abuse of trans children and advocated for conversion therapy, weeks after they had met with Streeting – and yet just a month later they were invited to participate in the consultation - QueerAF
Analysis: a “political assault”
DHSC continues to escalate its negative language around gender affirming care. One of the UK’s most highly respected medical bodies is calling government actions in the field an “overreach”. The Health Secretary has expressed sympathy for anti-trans groups, and they in turn have expressed support for him.
Oh, and he’s keen to insist that he’s definitely not a “God botherer who has issues with trans people”, even when nobody asked.
On top of all that, there’s one key fact that DHSC rarely acknowledges: the same medications that they say “are not proven to be safe and effective” have been safely prescribed to cisgender children for differences in puberty for decades.
It’s a crucial piece of the picture that undercuts the position DHSC outlined to QueerAF this week.
Chay Brown, director of healthcare at TransActual, spoke to QueerAF yesterday to describe the picture all this evidence paints:
“What's appalling is a government department actively ignoring science and medical ethics in their political assault on trans healthcare. They view puberty blockers as safe enough for cis children, so it would appear that what DHSC object to is trans children growing up to be trans adults."
Wes Streeting’s strange remarks to Caroline Litman last week and DHSC’s escalating response this week create more questions than they answer. That’s more uncertainty that young Trans+ people – who DHSC rightly say deserve “dignity and respect” – don’t need.
In politics, words can mean nothing – and everything
It might seem pedantic to focus on one word in one short statement from DHSC. But it’s only by focusing on the significance of details like these that we can build the bigger picture.
We’ve spent years tracking the change in politicians’ language about Trans+ people, from acceptance to hate, one word at a time.
It may not seem like much, but each time a dogwhistle is repeated in Parliament, or a Minister is dismissive of the need for gender-affirming care, the ‘Overton window’ of what is acceptable to say about our communities shifts.
And now we see the Department for Health saying that Trans+ youth deserve “dignity and respect” in the same statement as describing the use of gender-affirming medications – which, as evidence like that released by the Trevor Project this week increasingly suggests, can be life-saving – as “appalling”.
It’s by looking at the longer-term trends that led us here that we become clearer on what we need to do to fight back.
If you value that approach to journalism, please upgrade today. Our queer accountability journalism is a costly exercise, and we need more readers to upgrade to ensure we can keep holding power to account.
