Trans health waiting lists are a political choice

I’m just back from an awesome trans healthcare conference in Norway (blog on that to follow). Here I wanted to share information from a presentation by the founder of the transit trans healthcare service in Catalonia (Barcelona region), Spain. Transit is respected across the world for being a service that is leading the field in informed consent depathologised healthcare. Here I will share information on the approach, the history, how it works today and reflections on trans health waiting lists. First a quick spoiler for why you should read on: their waiting list for new referrals is 3 weeks.


The approach
The transit service was set up with a strongly trans affirming philosophy of care, building from principles including 1) a firm commitment to depathplogisation, that trans people have a right to affirmative healthcare without being under psychological or psychiatric control and without requirement for psychological assessment or diagnosis.2) commitment to Informed consent,that trans people of all ages have a right make their own decisions about their own healthcare 3) commitment to avoid diagnosis, recognising that a doctor or psychologist can never know someone’s gender identity.


The history
The transit service ran from 2012-2016 as a service running outside of state management and state funding. It ran in parallel to a state run gender clinic that was pathologising and gatekeeping. Transit was very popular amongst trans communities. The state run gatekeeper service was widely disliked. Three things happened. One, trans communities across the state united behind one clear demand and goal, to demand the closure of the state run gatekeeper service and the transfer of funding to the popular informed consent service. Two, communities organised and did activism growing support and unity behind their goal. Three, they managed to gain the support of a state politician who had the authority in a devolved spanish system to make a change. In 2016 state funding was shifted to the transit informed consent service and the gatekeeping psychology and psychiatry dominated service closed.


How it works today
Trans people always have a first appointment with a medical doctor able to prescribe hormones and never have a first appointment with a psychologist, psychiatrist or psychoanalyst. Fifty percent of patients receive hormones on that first appointment. The waiting list for the service is three weeks, meaning half of patients wait three weeks from referral to hrt.

The service does not deny hrt at first appointment for those who ask for it. For those who come to the appointment asking for hrt, they are usually well informed about her, and hrt discussions take up a very small part of the appointment, instead defining the appointment as a safe space where they can talk about any parts of their life that are difficult, with this discussion having no impact on them getting hrt which is guaranteed as it is their decision to make.  The reason people do not take hrt at first appointment is that they have not yet decided what they want and the patient themselves asks for more time, more support or other support.

The first appointment is 45 mins to one hour. There are zero required questions and no assessment of diagnosis. Doctors state that their job is not to assess or diagnose but to support their patient take decisions. The service operates what it describes as a multidisciplinary team but this means something completely different to what this term means in NHS children’s services. In transit it means that in addition to the medical doctor who takes the first appointment there are other professionals who the patient can request to see for additional support. A patient can ask to see a therapist to talk through their worries, history or mental health. A younger patient can ask to see a family support worker to get advice on getting support at school. They can choose to see a voice therapist. All of these additional professionals are offered and not required. The MDT offers value to service users,and does not operate as an abusive multi professional assessment, approval and gatekeeping gauntlet as happens in the UK. This same informed consent approach is followed for under 18s, with parents and legal guardians also involved in decision making for under 16s.

The transit service, with its three week waiting list, covers a population of 8 million, equivalent to the population of Scotland and Wales combined, or one seventh of the population of England, like one of our major regions. It has a total of 43 staff, a majority of whom are very part-time, working 6-7 hours per week for the transit service and working in other areas of healthcare the rest of the week. It has very high patient satisfaction rates. The key areas of complaint the service receives relates to the unavailability of particular formulations like injectable oestrogen, and complaints from parents who would prefer their child had gatekeeping in a slow psychological assessment and diagnosis model. The service has health provision in 8 locations across Catalonia, meaning people don’t have to travel far for an appointment.


Waiting
Last week UK trans healthcare advocates and journalists produced important work on the waiting lists for UK services. Those numbers are appalling. Whilst critiquing these ridiculous waiting lists I also hope we can do three other things:

1) Recognise the political and institutional choices that cause this waiting list: The NHS and our government choose to demand a gatekeeping psychology-led service that is the number one cause of our harmful waiting list. This is about the model of care, not about the amount of funding. In children’s care an increase in funding has led to an increase in the resources allocated to gatekeeping, not to any improvement in access to care. We should be long past arguing that increased funding is an form of solution without systemic reform

2) Recognise how easy it is to make better choices. Harmful gatekeeping services can be closed down and defunded. Respectful informed consent services can be funded and quickly expanded, delivering improved care at a smaller price. Importantly, a demand for informed consent care can and should be made for trans people of all ages, including trans children and adolescents. We need to stand together.

3. Recognise that the way in which we measure our waiting list matters. I hope we can move away from centring the metrics that our NHS and government think matter, and focus more on the metrics that actually matter. I would argue, that the key metric we should be counting, is a metric of the minimum expected time from referral to first getting a prescription for endocrine care, broken down by different characteristics including age and neurodivergence. Measuring a waiting list for access to a first appointment is entirely without merit in a service where the gap between first appointment and endocrine care is measured in years.

The UK children’s service has long had a waiting list of over 6 years for a first appointment. That statistic is likely to reduce. Trans under 18s are being forcibly discharged from the service for not attending identity exploration sessions, trans young people and families are ‘choosing’ to ask to be deregistered from a service that they find harmful and know won’t help them, trans young people and families are deregistering from the waiting list, and reforms to the referral system have made it increasingly impossible to get a new referral. But if that waiting list for the service goes down, does that matter? When those are the end of that wait have to wait for many year more, perhaps until they are 18 (or 25…) for approval for endocrine care.

For adults there has long been a minimum 1+ year delay from the end of the waiting list to getting endocrine care. That is part of the waiting. For many that wait is far longer than one year, and some people go years or never receive NHS approval for endocrine care. We need to focus less on the wait for a first appointment and more on the wait for endocrine care. This data could be collected, by the NHS or by ourselves.

Questions could be asked at the point of a first prescription including:
1. How long did you wait between referral and getting this prescription ?
2. How much of that wait was spent doing things that you found beneficial (counselling you chose to pursue before hormones, time for thinking, time for working through other issues including housing , employment and social transition that you chose to pursue before hormones, time to work through other mental health issues you chose to pursue before endocrine care, time to understand medical transition options). This can be defined as acceptable and patient-centred waiting for healthcare.
3. How much of that wait was not beneficial or harmful to you? (This can be defined as unacceptable waiting for care). Unacceptable and unwanted waiting for essential healthcare is a systemic inequality. Where this this number is counted in months or years rather than weeks, it is a form of state violence against trans people.

Huge waiting times for trans healthcare in the NHS, both in children’s and adult services, are there by design. Better political and institutional decisions in locations like Spain have removed this waiting list, delivering far better outcomes at a fraction of the cost. We demand better from our national healthcare.

NHS Failing Transgender Children

Another day waking up to a national broadsheet newspaper accusing me of child abuse. Painting my child as mentally ill and a threat to others when she is neither.

“Under the banner of transgender equality children are being subjected to a form of child abuse by an adult world that is failing to treat or even wilfully exacerbate an often transient confusion” Melanie Philips, The Times, 3rd October 2017

The fact that we live in a country where these lies, this hate, this prejudice is regularly printed in a national daily broadsheet defies belief. I cannot imagine any other area where parents following evidence based best practice to support their children are so accused. Surely there would be an outcry if columnists accused parents of child abuse for vaccinating their children? These lies damage transgender children. These lies are themselves a form of child abuse.

Worse still than the fact that ill-informed bigots can write lies in the national press, is the knowledge that these lies will go unchallenged. Bigots in the media know that transgender children cannot speak up. They know that parents of transgender children dare not speak up. We just bow our shoulders, avoid looking people in the eye, wonder which of the judgemental faces on the playground have read the latest attack piece and believe we are abusing our child.

Where are our allies standing up for transgender children?

Where are the NSPCC, articulating the evidence based consensus that supporting transgender children is in their best interests, and that to reject and stigmatise transgender children is a form of child abuse? Where are the journalists who were so vocal when Trump was calling out for Trans service people to be kicked out of the US military? Where is the Stonewall poster saying:

“Some Children Are Trans: Get Over it”.

somechildrenaretrans

Where is the challenge from the experts in the NHS?

The NHS Gender Identity Service (GIDS) understands that public ignorance and prejudice is the number one barrier to the happiness and wellbeing of transgender children. The NHS Gender Identity Service is, as per its own guidelines, supposed to advocate for transgender children. In other countries, such as America and Australia, Gender Experts devote a portion of their time to public advocacy, defending and educating about transgender children – publically challenging lies and misinformation. They do this because they are all too aware of the impact of societal stigma, created, developed and perpetuated by a media of misinformation and fake news.

In the media appearances of UK NHS Gender Specialists, more care is given to defending their Gender Service to sceptics and transphobes, emphasising how some children are not really trans, emphasising how much caution they have, how slow and conservative their support is. They fail in their moral and legal duty of educating the public and advocating for transgender children. When media lies, misinformation and prejudice appears, instead of ignoring or fuelling this, they need to be challenging it clearly, fiercely and publically.

In response to today’s Times piece they should:

  1. Put a statement on their website in an clear area where parents and journalists can see it
  2. Put out a press release
  3. Write to the Times expressing their concern
  4. Write to the Independent Press Standards Organisation outlining that lies about evidence based NHS support for transgender children is damaging and harmful

I’ll even write it for them:

 

Press release:

“Transgender people exist. Transgender people always have existed, in countries all around the world. Being transgender is widely recognised as a normal part of human diversity. Transgender people are not a threat, or mentally ill, or confused. There is a durable biological underpinning to gender identity – this is not a choice and transgender people cannot be converted. Attempting to convert transgender people into a different identity is considered unethical and ineffective and has been outlawed by all competent evidence based professionals.

Transgender children exist. Medical consensus is that transgender children thrive if acknowledged and supported to live in their identified gender. Transgender children suffer high levels of depression, self-harm and suicidality if forced to live a lie. This is not a choice. Parents who support transgender children are following evidence-based guidance and are doing what is best for their child. Spreading lies, ignorance and prejudice about transgender children is a serious threat to their well being. Media bigotry, exemplified by today’s piece in The Times, is a form of child abuse that causes significant harm and suffering to vulnerable transgender children.”

Here’s a Tweet to go with it:

tavistep up

All the evidence shows That transgender children pre-puberty who are supported at home and at school have normal levels of mental health and well-being and do not require regular appointments with medical professionals. The single biggest support that the NHS Gender Identity Service can offer to these children is clear, confident advocacy on behalf of transgender children to an ignorant and ill-informed (and often hostile) media.

Every single media communication from the UK Gender Identity Service should be designed to serve the best interests of transgender children. This is currently not happening.

Parents are fast losing patience with an NHS service that is failing our children. The NHS must do better. Clear, confident communications supporting, normalising and de-pathologising transgender children is where they need to start.

Australia Presents a Gold Standard of Care for Trans and Gender Diverse Children

Part 1. The Guidelines for Trans and Gender Diverse Children and Adolescents

Introduction

This week Australia’s Royal Children’s Hospital Gender Service has launched the “Australian Standards of Care and Treatment Guidelines for Trans and Gender Diverse Children and Adolescents”. These guidelines are compiled by the leading Australian experts, based on the best and most current evidence from around the world. These guidelines are endorsed by ANZPATH (the Australian and New Zealand Professional Association for Transgender Health) and were launched at the recent ANZPATH conference. They are now the official guidelines for all health professionals working with transgender children in Australia.

The standard is clearly written and concise and it is definitely worth reading in full. Here,  for convenience, please find below a brief synopsis of selected key extracts from the document. In Part 2 we will look at Why this standard matters, and why it should be adopted in the UK NHS.

Australian Standards of Care and Treatment Guidelines for Trans and Gender Diverse Children and Adolescents (pdf)

 aus standard care

Key extracts from the document:

Evidence Based:

“Recommendations are made based on available empirical evidence and clinician consensus”, “developed in consultation with professionals….from multiple disciplines, trans and gender diverse support organisations, as well as trans children and adolescents and their families”.

Numbers expected to increase:

“with increasing visibility and social acceptance of gender diversity in Australia, more children and adolescents are presenting ….requesting support, advice, and gender affirmative psychological and medical treatment”. with “approximately 1.2% of adolescents identifying as trans” “it is likely that referrals. ….will continue to rise in the future”.

Natural:

“being trans or gender diverse is now largely viewed as being part of the natural spectrum of human diversity”.

(This Australian guidance was completed before the latest Endocrinology guidelines, stating that “there is a durable biological underpinning to gender identity”.

Affirmative care:

“increasing evidence demonstrates that with supportive, gender affirmative care during childhood and adolescence, harms can be ameliorated and mental health and well being outcomes can be significantly improved”.

General principles for supporting trans and gender diverse children and adolescents

  • Individualise care”. Emphasises the “importance of tailoring interventions”, recognising each individual’s “unique clinical presentation” and “individual needs”.

  • Decision making should be driven by the child or adolescent wherever possible, this applies to options regarding not only medical interventions but also social transition”.

  • “Use respectful and affirming language”.

  • Avoid causing harm”. “withholding of gender affirming treatment is not considered a neutral option, and may exacerbate distress in a number of ways including depression, anxiety and suicidality, social withdrawal, as well as possibly increasing chances of young people illegally accessing medications”

  • “consider legal requirements” outlines legal requirements that are barriers to “obtaining identity documents that accurately reflects their gender”. Considers “implications for young people’s right to privacy and confidentiality when enrolling in school or applying for work”.

Children vs adolescents:

“the clinical needs (of children vs adolescents) are inherently different, and consequently we provide separate guidelines for trans and gender diverse children and adolescents”

Psychological Support for a younger child:

  • “Supporting trans and gender diverse children requires a developmentally appropriate and gender affirming approach”.

  • “for children, family support is associated with more optimal mental health outcomes”

  • “trans or gender diverse children with good health and wellbeing who are supported and affirmed by their family, community and educational environments may not require any additional psychological support beyond occasional and intermittent contact with relevant professionals in the child’s life such as the family’s general practitioner or school support”.

  • “others may benefit from a skilled clinician working together with family members to help develop a common understanding of the child’s experience”.

  • “when a child’s medical, psychological and/or social circumstances are complicated by co-existing mental health difficulties, trauma, abuse, significantly impaired family functioning, learning or behavioural difficulties …. a more intensive approach with input from a mental health professional will be required”.

Social Transition for a younger child:

  • “social transition should be led by the child and does not have to take an all or nothing approach”.

  • “provision of education about social transition to the child’s kindergarten or school is often necessary to support a child who is socially transitioning to help facilitate the transition and minimise …bullying or discrimination”.

  • “social transition can reduce a child’s distress and improve their emotional functioning. Evidence suggest that trans children who have socially transitioned demonstrate levels of depression, anxiety and self-worth comparable to their cisgender peers”.

  • “The number of children in Australia who later socially transition back to their gender assigned at birth is not known, but anecdotally appears to be low, and no current evidence of harm in doing so exists”.

Key roles for a clinician of younger child:

  • Supportive exploration of gender identity over time

  • Work with family to ensure a supportive home environment

  • Advocacy to ensure gender affirming support at school

  • Education (to child and family) on gender identity and signposting to support organisations for child and for parents

  • If child is expressing desire to live in a role consistent with their gender identity, provision of psycho-social support and practical assistance to the child and family to facilitate social transition

  • Referral to endocrinologist ideally prior to onset of puberty

Supporting Adolescents:

[For] “adolescents with insistent, persistent and consistent gender diverse expression, a supportive family, affirming educational environment and an absence of co-existing mental health difficulties, the adolescent and parents may benefit from an initial assessment followed by intermittent consultations with a mental health clinician”

Supporting Parents of Adolescents:

“adolescents often encounter resistance from their parents when their trans or gender diverse identity is first disclosed during adolescence”. “For the clinician, investing time for parent support… will assist in creating a shared understanding….and enable optimisation of clinical outcomes and family functioning”

Fertility Counselling for Adolescents:

“Although puberty suppression medication is reversible and should not in itself affect long term fertility, it is very rare for an adolescent to want to cease this treatment to conduct fertility preserving interventions prior to commencing gender affirming hormones. It is therefore necessary for counselling to be conducted prior to commencement of puberty suppression or gender affirming hormones”

Commencement of puberty suppression

“Puberty suppression is most effective in preventing the development of secondary sexual characteristics when commenced at Tanner stage 2”. ”reduction in the duration of use of puberty suppression by earlier commencement of stage 2 treatment must be considered in adolescents with reduced bone density to minimise negative effects.”

Commencement of gender affirming hormone treatment

  • “The ideal time for commencement of stage 2 treatment in trans adolescents will depend on the individual seeking treatment and their unique circumstances” “adolescents vary in the age at which they become competent to make decisions that have complex risk-benefit ratios”. “The timing…will also depend on the nature of the history and presentation of the person’s gender dysphoria, duration of time on puberty suppression for those undertaking stage 1 treatment, co-existing mental health and medical issues and existing family support”

  • “While later commencement of hormone treatment during adolescence provides time for further emotional maturation and potentially lessens the risk that the adolescent will regret their decision, this should be carefully balanced by the biological, psychological and social costs to the adolescent of delaying treatment”.  “Biological implications of delaying hormones include ….relative osteopenia, and (for) trans females …linear growth…” “Psychological costs may include the negative contribution treatment delay may have on an adolescent’s sense of autonomy and agency, and may contribute to, or exacerbate, distress, anxiety or depression with subsequent increase in self-harm or suicide risk”. “Social costs of delayed treatment include peer group and relationship difficulties with pubertal development occurring significantly behind expected norms”

Surgical interventions

  • “Chest reconstructive surgery may be appropriate in the care of trans males during adolescence”.

  •  “delaying genital surgery until adulthood is advised”

Transition of care to adult care providers

“the young person’s GP is vital in facilitating a smooth process and many GPS continue as the primary doctor involved in hormone prescribing and monitoring of mental health after engaging in a shared care agreement during paediatric treatment”.

 

In Australian Standard of Care Part 2. (Below) we discuss:

  • Why this standard matters, 
  • Why it should be adopted in the UK NHS
  • A comparison between the Australian Standard and UK Service Specification
  • A comparative analysis of the evidence base underpinning the Australian and UK approaches