CAS-7310049-N4D7C9
Complaint About Inaccuracy, Bias, and Harm in The Social content presented by Kate Adair
Summary of Complaint
The content presented by Kate Adair and first published in 2016/17 contains numerous significant inaccuracies including many pertaining to medical and social interventions in children and young people. The content is therefore not duly accurate.
Adair is not a medical expert and has no relevant qualifications to opine on medical and social interventions in children and young people experiencing distress and confusion about their sexed bodies. The advice Adair offers about serious medical interventions in young people, including drugs and surgery, is not underpinned by any good evidence, and important relevant facts about the known and unknown consequences of those interventions are omitted. The content therefore has the potential to do undue harm, including to children and young people.
Adair is, and was, an activist closely engaged in lobbying for a controversial change in the law which relates to the content. This is not made explicitly clear by the BBC and alternative voices and opinions are not recognised or represented in the content or on The Social platform. The mockery Adair directs at people who do not subscribe to his belief system is not editorially justified and is not balanced by any other output anywhere in the BBC. The content is not therefore duly impartial.
My complaint references, as an example, one film called Trans Kids, but aspects of my complaint also apply to other films presented by Adair for The Social, and to the Adair strand as a body of work.
Requested Action
The Trans Kids film contravenes multiple guidelines
It is not possible to rectify its shortcomings by changing the promotional material and/or re-editing the content.
It should therefore be removed from BBC platforms.
An editorial review should be undertaken of other content presented by Adair with a view to also removing it from BBC platforms.
Sources of the information which underpins my complaint
I have relied on three main sources of information to support my complaint.
Reports in 2019 and 2020 on concerns about the NHS Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) by Hannah Barnes and Deborah Cohen for BBC Newsnight. Several are collected here.
https://www.bayswatersupport.org.uk/bbc-newsnight-coverage/
And there is also this report:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56539466
An independent analysis conducted by Prof Carl Heneghan from Oxford University for BBC Panorama in 2019 summarising the “profound scientific ignorance” about the type of treatment pathways which are endorsed in the content by Adair.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-47456938
The Interim Report of the Cass Independent Review of Gender Identity Services for Children and Young People which triggered the closure of GIDS.
https://cass.independent-review.uk/publications/interim-report/
The Cass report includes references to its own source material including NICE analyses of the evidence base for treatments for sex dysphoria.
The Interim Report was summarised by BBC News here
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60698414
Context of the contested “trans youth” idea 2015-2022
Since 2015, triggered partly by proposed reform of the Gender Recognition Act (GRA), there has been a lively political and public debate about various controversial ideas, and their influence on public life, which centre on the disputed concept of “gender identity”.
In summary, proposed changes to the GRA would make it easier for people to be treated for some legal purposes as the opposite sex, and to have a new birth certificate issued with the sex marker changed from M to F or vice versa. There is also a push to lower the age at which a Gender Recognition Certificate can be obtained from 18 to 16.
One of the controversial ideas under debate is that people can be “born in the wrong body” e.g., they are born with a male body, but are somehow female. This supposed mismatch is said to be something they feel inside. That feeling is sometimes labelled “gender identity”.
Gender identity is not an agreed concept. Arguments about its existence or otherwise, and its importance as a concept in public life, have underpinned considerable current public debate since around 2015.
A belief system, or ideology, has built up around the concept of gender identity together with a novel and ever-shifting lexicon.
Some adherents to the belief system describe gender identity as akin to a soul or essence which one is supposedly born with. They say it is fixed and innate and to try and change it is as misguided and offensive as trying to “straighten” gay people.
Others say gender identity may be fluid, changing repeatedly, even from day-to-day e.g., the comedian Eddie Izzard says his identity is “elastic” regularly switching from “boy mode” to “girl mode”.
It’s also said that gender identity does not fit into a binary model, like sex. There are, according to the belief system, potentially as many gender identities as there are people.
Examples of gender identities described by various sources range from the familiar e.g., “male”, “female”, to the less familiar e.g., “eunuch” (males who wish to be castrated).
Some people wish to be regarded as of no sex at all.
People who believe in gender identity describe people with a supposed body/identity mismatch as “transgender” or “trans”.
They believe that people can be born “trans” and as they get older, affected children may start to express their “trans identity” through, for example, preferring toys typically marketed at the opposite sex.
At some point, it’s claimed as early as toddlerhood in some, this mismatch may start to cause them distress.
The ideology holds that it may therefore be appropriate to embark on certain medical and social interventions to address this distress.
These interventions may consist of facilitating presentational changes such as clothes and hairstyles stereotypically associated with the opposite sex, crushing or “tucking” body parts such as breasts and genitals, or wearing fake body parts such as fake breasts or male genital facsimiles.
Other social interventions include “affirming” a child’s delusion they are the opposite sex by, for example, using a name and pronouns for the child or young person which are more commonly associated with the opposite sex, or using names and made-up pronoun words which indicate no sex.
Body appearance may also be altered through surgery and/or temporary and lifelong administration of drugs.
Whether fixed or fluid, it’s not known how many people believe in, or experience, “gender identity”.
Some people reject the concept of gender identity, especially as a basis for public policy and decision-making regarding children.
They say it is a regressive notion which relies on sex stereotypes to be detected and described.
They also say it is a pseudoscientific belief system akin to e.g., astrology or homeopathy. They say the gender identity belief system has cult-like features – for example, suspicion and demonisation of those who question or reject it and extreme hostility to those who first adopt, but then reject the belief system.
One of those in 2016 who powerfully vocalised widespread scepticism about the gender identity belief system was a Scottish woman called Magdalen Burns. E.g.,
Burns’s views are commonplace and founded in the fact that human beings can’t change sex. But voices and views like hers are extremely rare in BBC output and do not appear to exist at all in The Social output.
Since around 2015, individuals and organisations repeatedly raised concerns about examples of what they saw as uncritical promotion by the BBC, and other media organisations, of gender identity beliefs such as the existence of “trans kids”, the misrepresentation of relevant facts, and the lack of alternative viewpoints.
Among those who have been raising concerns is the organisation Transgender Trend which was set up in 2015 by Stephanie Davies-Arai.
“We have set up this website with the aim of providing an alternative source of evidence-based information which questions the theory, diagnosis, and treatment of ‘trans kids.’ The mainstream media has been uniformly and uncritically accepting of the transgender diagnosis of children and in the absence of any public scrutiny the number of children referred to gender clinics has risen exponentially over the last few years.”
Transgender Trend, 2015
https://www.transgendertrend.com/transgender-trend/
In 2022 Davies-Arai was awarded an MBE in recognition of this work.
The Medical and Social Interventions Referenced by Adair
There is a scientific consensus that the drugs and surgery Adair talks about carry significant risks and have irreversible side effects.
Some people claim, despite these risks, the medical and non-medical interventions are of overall benefit. They claim they improve the mental health of individuals and may even save them from self-harm and suicide.
Adair references these claims of overall benefit as if they were facts.
But as was the case in 2016, and as reported by the BBC, there is no good evidence to support Adair’s assertions of overall benefit of these interventions.
The Absence of Good Research 2015-2022
As has been widely reported, including by the BBC, there is a lack of scientific research and evidence to justify medical and social interventions in children and young people labelled by Adair as “trans”.
In the UK, these interventions take place both within and outside NHS settings. They include:
Social transition e.g., “affirming” a child’s delusion they are the opposite sex by using the wrong pronouns, agreeing with them that they are the opposite sex, and suggesting the use of binders to crush breast tissue and “packers” worn under clothes to imitate male sex organs.
Drugs – puberty blockers followed almost always by opposite sex hormones
Surgery – including mastectomy, castration, and attempts to create facsimiles of sexual organs such as neo vaginas in males (formed by inverting penile tissue) and non-functioning phalluses in females (formed by harvesting tissue from a limb).
The absence of scientific research to underpin these interventions was as true in 2016-2017 as it is now, although little investigated and reported by media organisations.
In 2016, the editorial approach of a BBC documentary I Am Leo caused particular concern about harm, accuracy, and bias.
https://www.transgendertrend.com/uk-cbbc-childrens-tv-i-am-leo/
https://www.transgendertrend.com/i-am-leo-a-response-to-cbbc/
I Am Leo now appears to have been removed from BBC platforms.
By 2017, some clinicians at NHS gender identity clinics and in social care settings were trying to blow the whistle over their concerns that the “transing” of children amounted to child abuse and was homophobic.
This whistleblowing included bravely writing to journalists, but still there was apparently little interest.
https://www.transgendertrend.com/2017-letter-gids-clinicians-ignored-guardian/
It was in a Panorama programme in March 2019 that the BBC first reported the lack of evidence base for the interventions being promoted to vulnerable children and young people.
This was four years after Transgender Trend first started to try and alert organisations such as the BBC to the concerns of clinicians and other child experts.
https://www.transgendertrend.com/uk-news-930-rise-in-child-gender-identity-referrals/
During that time, and for several years earlier, the BBC, including The Social, appears to have been enthusiastically engaging with lobbying organisations such as Stonewall, All About Trans, and Trans Media Watch, and individuals such as Adair, all of whom promote the idea of “trans kids.”
https://onroadmedia.org.uk/events/all-about-trans-2015-2017/
It is clear from the film Trans Kids, and his other content for The Social, that Adair and BBC Social were aware in 2016 of the concerns and wider debate around the care of children experiencing distress with their sexed bodies, and that both Adair and the BBC production team knew there were opposing views to the ones he espouses.
This is evident because Adair obliquely refers to those opposing views in the content.
Relevant Editorial Guidelines
I have created a transcript of Trans Kids and marked each section with the guidelines which have been breached. The breached guidelines include:
Harm
5.3.47 (Suicide) We should consider whether to provide a link to a BBC Action Line when our output deals with such issues. The Samaritans are usually willing to be consulted by content producers about the portrayal of suicide and have published their own guidance for broadcasters. Editorial Policy should usually be consulted.
5.3.48 Care is also required when portraying those mental illnesses that are potentially imitable, in factual or fictional content, including conditions such as anorexia or bulimia. We should be aware that the vulnerable, especially the young, may imitate or emulate behaviour and techniques depicted. Care should be taken to ensure that content is responsible and appropriate for the likely audience. We should consider whether to provide a link to a BBC Action Line when our output deals with such issues.
Accuracy
(Introduction)… all BBC output, as appropriate to its subject and nature, must be well sourced, based on sound evidence, and corroborated. We should be honest and open about what we don’t know and avoid unfounded speculation.
The BBC must not knowingly and materially mislead its audiences. We should not distort known facts, present invented material as fact or otherwise undermine our audiences’ trust in our content.
We should normally acknowledge serious factual errors and correct them quickly, clearly, and appropriately.
3.3.8 We should reserve the same scepticism for statistics as we do for facts or quotes and not necessarily take numbers at face value. When our output includes statistics, we should explain the numbers clearly, put them into context, weigh, interpret and, where appropriate, challenge them, present them clearly and attribute them. The statistics must be accurate and verified where necessary, with important caveats and limitations explained. We should use a range of evidence to put statistical claims into context and help audiences to judge their magnitude and importance. Where claims are wrong or misleading, they should be challenged.
3.3.9 The reporting of risk can have an impact on the public’s perception of that risk, particularly with health or crime stories. We should avoid worrying our audiences unduly and contextualise our reports to be clear about the likelihood of the risk occurring. This is particularly true in reporting health stories that may cause individuals to alter their behaviour in ways that could be harmful.
3.3.17 We should normally identify on-air and online sources of information and significant contributors and provide their credentials, so that our audiences can judge their status.
Impartiality
4.3.6 When dealing with ‘controversial subjects’, we must ensure a wide range of significant views and perspectives are given due weight and prominence, particularly when the controversy is active. Opinion should be clearly distinguished from fact.
4.3.8 Due impartiality normally allows for programmes and other output to explore or report on a specific aspect of an issue or provide an opportunity for a single view to be expressed. This should be clearly signposted when dealing with ‘controversial subjects. The existence of a range of views and their respective weights should be acknowledged, and neither those views nor their respective weights should be misrepresented.
4.3.15 There are some issues which may seem to be without controversy, appearing to be backed by a broad or even unanimous consensus of opinion. Nevertheless, they may present a significant risk to the BBC’s impartiality. In such cases, we should continue to report where the consensus lies and give it due weight. However, even if it may be neither necessary nor appropriate to seek out voices of opposition, our reporting should not use language and tone which appear to accept consensus or received wisdom as fact or self-evident.
We must challenge our own assumptions and experiences and also those which may be commonly held by parts of our audience. BBC output should avoid reinforcing generalisations which lack relevant evidence, especially when applying them to specific circumstances. This might occur in the fields of politics, race, charity, science, technology, medicine or elsewhere. These can present some of the most difficult challenges to asserting that the BBC does not hold its own opinion. Care should be taken to treat areas of apparent consensus with proper rigour. Where necessary, consult Editorial Policy.
4.3.17 The BBC must remain independent and distanced from government initiatives, campaigners, charities and their agendas, no matter how apparently worthy the cause or how much their message appears to be accepted or uncontroversial.
4.3.22 In achieving due impartiality, a ‘series of programmes’ may be considered as a whole.
Such content, items or webpages need to achieve due impartiality across the series and should include appropriate links or signposting.
The intention to achieve due impartiality in this way should be planned in advance and made clear in our output.
4.3.26 The audience expects artists, writers, and entertainers to have scope for individual expression in drama, entertainment, and cultural output. The BBC is committed to offering it. Where this covers matters of public policy, political or industrial controversy, or other ‘controversial subjects’, services should consider reflecting a broad range of the available perspectives over time. Consideration should be given to the appropriate timeframe for reflecting those other perspectives and whether or not they need to be included in connected and/or signposted output taking account of the nature of the controversy and the subject matter.
4.3.28 The BBC has a tradition of enabling a wide range of individuals, groups, or organisations to offer a personal view or opinion, express a belief, or advance a contentious argument in its output. This can range from the outright expression of highly partial views by a campaigner, to the opinion of a specialist or professional including an academic or scientist, to views expressed through contributions from our audiences. All of these can add to the public understanding and debate, especially when they allow our audience to hear fresh and original perspectives on familiar issues.
Such personal view content must be clearly signposted to audiences in advance.
4.3.29 Additionally, when personal view programmes and websites (for example, blogs) cover ‘controversial subjects’, especially those concerning matters of public policy or political or industrial controversy, we should:
retain a respect for factual accuracy
fairly represent opposing viewpoints when included
provide an opportunity to respond when appropriate, for example in a pre-arranged discussion programme
ensure that a sufficiently broad range of views and perspectives is included in output of a similar type and weight and in an appropriate timeframe.
Language Used in This Complaint
Sex and gender
“Gender” has historically and commonly been used as a synonym for “sex” in discussions about medical and social issues.
More recently though the meanings of those terms have become disputed.
So, for clarity, I use the term “sex” where I am talking about the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and most other living things are divided based on their reproductive functions.
When I say man or woman, I mean male and female adults respectively.
I do not use the term “gender”, except where attributed, as it has no fixed meaning.
Pronouns
Adair is a man who has been abusive to women who campaign for their sex-based legal rights under the Equality Act 2010.
His sex is therefore relevant to a full understanding of my complaint and so I have used the pronoun “he” to avoid any confusion as to his sex or as to my meaning.
Breaches of Guidelines
The Kate Adair Strand
Bias
15 films presented by Adair are currently available on the BBC website.
All but one film centres on issues involving trans identified people, “queer” people, or children experiencing distress about the sexed reality of their bodies.
They are all presented by Adair, a man who says he is a woman, and were first published in 2016 and 2017.
Adair speaks directly into the camera – a production style often used to create a persuasive connection with the audience and give the speaker authority.
Unless clearly signposted to the contrary, this style tends to suggest editorial endorsement by the BBC of what the speaker is saying.
Adair is a self-described activist and at the time of publication was campaigning on highly controversial political issues such as reform of the Gender Recognition Act.
The strand page describes Adair as an activist/advocate. The individual films do not. It is also not made clear by the BBC for whom Adair considers himself an advocate or in what sense he is an activist.
Adair wants to change the law to allow people to declare themselves the opposite sex for all practical and legal purposes. The highly political and controversial nature of his activism is not made clear.
Some of the videos are labelled “101”. 101 is slang for “a beginner’s course in the basics”. The promotional words on the Adair page say the films are designed to be “informative”.
This misleadingly implies any information imparted will be accurate and non-contested. (See my detailed complaint about Trans Kids below for evidence of inaccuracies.)
This misleading idea is reinforced in BBC marketing of the films by terms such as “lowdown”, and the now deleted (following my Stage 1 complaint) “full lowdown” i.e., true, pertinent facts which only experts or insiders might know.
Some films in the Adair strand are labelled (one retrospectively) as a “personal view”. This is misleading because the films overwhelmingly consist of Adair imparting supposed facts.
Labelling content “personal view” does not absolve the BBC of its obligations to due accuracy and impartiality. The “views” of Nigel Lawson on climate change platformed by the BBC were found not to be based on fact, leading to the upholding of complaints.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-40899188
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-43699607
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41744344
“As with all topics, we must make clear to the audience … whether they (contributors) are speaking with authority from a scientific perspective – in short, making their affiliations and previously expressed opinions clear.”
BBC Internal Guidance on Reporting Climate Change, 2018
There are a few occasions where Adair may be giving his opinion rather than stating fact, but it is not self-evident, and these elements are not clearly signposted as opinion (see complaint below about Trans Kids for examples).
Where Adair may be giving his opinion on what is, and was at the time of publication, a controversial subject, there is no due challenge or inclusion of voices with other views, either within the content, or in the strand as a whole. (See Trans Kids complaint below for examples).
Neither the page, nor any of the films signpost to any alternative points of view, on the BBC website or from external sources, or correct the factual errors.
I cannot find any other content published by The Social which offers reliable, properly sourced, facts about the medical and child welfare issues Adair talks about or reflects any view on the existence or otherwise of “trans youth” which counters Adair’s position.
Accuracy
This complaint deals with accuracy by way of a sentence-by-sentence analysis of one film Trans Kids: below.
Harm
The promotional words say the aim of the films is for them to be “accessible to all people”. This wording conspicuously does not exclude children from the intended audience.
They are produced in a “Tik Tok” style which does not seem aimed at adults.
In at least one film, Adair directly addresses what he presumes is a child audience.
Some of the films offer advice about medical and mental health matters involving children, based on supposed facts.
Children are widely accepted to be more vulnerable to suggestion, misrepresentation, and lies than adults and the BBC therefore has a special responsibility to ensure content directed at them is duly accurate, impartial, and not unduly harmful.
Adair repeatedly misrepresents the facts (see examples from Trans Kids below) and has no relevant qualifications to offer such advice. His lack of any medical or safeguarding expertise is not made clear.
Several of the films, including one which directly addresses a child audience, make multiple references to fragile mental health, self-harm, and suicide in children and young people.
The suicide claims are not supported by the evidence, oversimplify the issue, and speculate about triggers, contrary to Samaritans reporting guidance. (See Trans Kids example below for evidence)
https://www.samaritans.org/about-samaritans/media-guidelines/10-top-tips-reporting-suicide/
Neither the page nor any of the films signpost any sources of reliable medical information, advice, and support.
There is no signposting to any sources of support or advice for children on the medical and mental health topics covered by Adair.
Adair has publicly referred to women with opposing views to him on the safeguarding and legal rights of children and women in derogatory, extreme, and highly offensive terms.
He mocks those views in the content. Mockery is an entirely valid editorial technique for exposing stupidity, hypocrisy, bigotry, and other types of wrongdoing. But there is no good evidence the targets of his mockery have demonstrated any of those behaviours.
Adair’s abuse of women who oppose his views on the health, wellbeing, and safeguarding of children does not seem to have been a barrier to the BBC cultivating him as a presenter and regarding him as a suitable person to offer advice on the health and welfare of vulnerable children and young people.
Trans Kids – An Example.
1.Hello again, you lovely people, at the social,
Bias
Despite the opening salutation, Adair evidently does not regard all potential viewers as “lovely people”.
Adair openly regards women who do not agree with his ideology and campaigning position – he calls them by the slur “terfs” (trans exclusionary radical feminists) - akin to Nazis.
The subjects of this unwarranted abuse are unlikely to find him “funny and accessible.” They are likely to find him bullying, threatening, and intimidating.
Adair is a self-described activist and at the time this film was published by the BBC was publicly campaigning for controversial reform of the Gender Recognition Act in Scotland.
The directly political nature of his activism is not signposted alongside or in the content.
The film’s original promo material said Adair is giving the “full low down”. “Lowdown” is slang for true, pertinent facts which only experts or insiders might know.
It suggests the content comes from a position of relevant expertise, includes multiple relevant perspectives, and is factually based. None of that is the case.
A similar tag - “the low down” - currently promotes other films Adair has made for The Social.
Retrospectively labelling any of this content a “personal view” is not adequate signposting under the guidelines for a political campaigner with opinions so extreme, he publicly condemns dissenters as bigots and fascists, and blocks them, so he is not exposed to their views.
It is not, in any case, accurate to characterise this film as “a personal view”.
Adair misleadingly positions himself as an expert on medical matters in this content and other films in the series e.g., https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06jqvcr .
Many of his statements purport to be facts but they are inaccuracies and distortions, and he omits important relevant facts.
I have highlighted in blue the words in the transcript which might (on a generous reading) be said to comprise a view, rather than assertion of fact. They represent a very small proportion of the overall content.
Furthermore, Adair ignores or mockingly dismisses relevant and reasonable views which are counter to his own.
Adair misrepresents those views as absurd, dangerous, and delusional and unfairly suggests they carry no weight.
In other words, this is propaganda, and the BBC has failed to identify it as such and either challenge or not publish it.
2.My name's Kate, and this week we are talking about trans youth.
Bias
The terms “trans youth” and “trans kids”, are used by Adair throughout the film and directly by the BBC in its branding and promotion of the content. The film is titled in a large bold font on the opening screen “Trans Kids”.
“Trans youth” and “trans kids” – and, later, “trans guys” - are not editorially neutral terms.
They are disputed terms which are used by some people to describe children who experience distress related to their sexed bodies.
There is no credible scientific research that children are “trans”.
The term is promoted for use about children by adherents of controversial gender identity theory.
Gender identity theory posits the controversial and pseudoscientific notion that everyone has a different and innate (i.e., formed in utero) sense of masculinity or femininity, or both, or neither, and that this identity can sit somewhere on a “spectrum” of “gender” from GI Joe to Barbie.
This regressive idea, dressed up as progressive, has been promoted by, among others, the “trans kids” charity Mermaids (which is now under investigation by the Charities Commission over safeguarding concerns).
The ideology also posits that gender identity should trump sex in matters of law such as the right to single sex spaces currently enshrined in the Equality Act 2010.
For example, a man who says he is a woman should have the same legal rights to women to access women’s changing rooms, hospital wards, prisons, sports teams and so on.
Adair, a male, who wishes to be regarded as female, campaigns for the above.
According to gender identity ideology, a child can be “born in the wrong body” and the appropriate course of action therefore is to use drugs and surgery to correct what is essentially a birth defect.
In one of his films, Adair seems to reject the “born in the wrong body” idea. But in the next breath suggests that’s exactly what has happened.
“…this is what my body should be like, so I make the change. That’s all trans people are doing. Adjusting things to match their identity…”
Kate Adair, BBC The Social
Gender identity proponents suggest between 2%-5% of the population is “trans”. Activist definitions of “trans”, “gender” and “gender identity” are unfixed and tend to be circular.
All this is highly controversial and since 2015 has been the subject of high-profile political, legal, and public debate.
Much of the debate centres on language, including attempts to change the meanings of widely accepted words such as “woman”, and the labelling of children as “trans”.
One concern among some child health professionals is that normal childhood and adolescent feelings have been recast as caused by medical anomalies which need to be fixed by drugs and surgery.
These medical pathways have irreversible consequences and side effects, including premature death and infertility.
Another concern is that the cohort of children presenting to the NHS and private clinics in England and Scotland is not representative of the population as a whole.
The cohort includes disproportionate numbers of autistic, looked after and abused children, wildly disproportionate numbers of girls, disproportionate numbers of children with co morbidities such as anorexia and depression, and disproportionate numbers of children who are gay.
This presents a significant challenge to the theory of innate “transness”.
There is also no evidence base for the medical and social interventions which have been applied to this cohort – in other words, these children have been subjected to a medical and social experiment.
Although, as Cass points out, it is an experiment without the usual protocols and safeguards.
“There has been considerable discussion about whether the treatment is ‘experimental’; strictly speaking an experimental treatment is one that is being given as part of a research protocol, and this is not the case with puberty blockers, because the GIDS research protocol was stopped in 2014. At that time, the treatment was experimental and innovative, because the drug was licensed for use in children, but specifically for children with precocious puberty.”
Cass Interim report, 2022
The term “trans” is conspicuously never used by Cass about children.
The term “trans kids” and “trans youth” are therefore controversial, disputed, and studiously avoided by one of the UK’s leading experts in children’s health.
There is a reasonable and widely debated view that the use of such language in respect of children is part of what Cass calls “social transition”.
“Social transition – this may not be thought of as an intervention or treatment, because it is not something that happens within health services. However, it is important to view it as an active intervention because it may have significant effects on the child or young person in terms of their psychological functioning. There are different views on the benefits versus the harms of early social transition. Whatever position one takes, it is important to acknowledge that it is not a neutral act, and better information is needed about outcomes.”
Cass Interim report, 2022
When the BBC uses the term “trans” about children, or uncritically platforms someone who suggests “trans” children exist, it is endorsing, and may be contributing to, the “social transition” of children.
Therefore, in the interests of impartiality and accuracy, the notion of a “trans” child should not be presented as an undisputed concept as it is here by the BBC.
3.Now, in the past few years, there's been a significant rise in children and families seeking support as more and more kids come out
Bias, Inaccuracy
This is a statement of purported fact.
The phrase “come out” is also used by Adair but also by the BBC in its introductory material to this video.
The phrase “come out” should not be used by the BBC in this context because it is not an editorially neutral term and there is no evidence of innate “transness”.
“Cone out” draws on the language of sexuality, implying that all children have an innate “gender identity” which in some cases is suppressed by malign forces.
This is a highly controversial view founded in contested gender identity ideology.
The ideology holds that all human beings have an innate gender identity in the same way some people believe all human beings have a soul.
See point 1 for a fuller explanation of why this is not an ideological, not a scientific, concept.
A neutral and accurate form of words would be “There's been a significant rise in families seeking support because of feelings of distress in some children about their sexed bodies.”
Here, and throughout the content, and based on zero relevant expertise, Adair appears to be offering a definition, or diagnosis, of “transness” in children.
“Trans child” is not a diagnosis recognised by the NHS.
A condition in children which is recognised by the NHS is “gender dysphoria”. This diagnosis is in itself disputed and controversial, but the NHS says it is characterised by “lasting and severe distress, which gets worse as they get older.”
According to the NHS, gender dysphoria is not characterised by children preferring toys and clothes typically marketed at the opposite sex.
“A diagnosis of gender dysphoria in childhood is rare. Most children who seem confused about their gender identity when young will not continue to feel the same way beyond puberty. Role playing is not unusual in young children.”
NHS Website
4.and before you start. No, it's not because they're being brainwashed by some secret Illuminati trans agenda,
Bias
This is a statement of purported fact.
Adair is mocking the legitimate and widely held concerns of people – which were being publicly debated from at least 2015 onwards - who think gender identity ideology promoted by, among others, activists such as Adair, is harming children.
It is against the BBC editorial guidelines for the BBC to give a platform to someone to suggest there is only one legitimate school of thought – theirs - on a matter of public interest about which there are several main strands of alternative opinion.
Mocking reasonable and evidence-backed dissenting voices, especially in the context of child and young people’s welfare, is a tactic used by bullies and cults.
5.but because there's been a significant change in attitudes, especially amongst younger people, allowing them to be more open and discuss their gender issues,
Inaccuracy. Bias.
This is a statement of purported fact.
This is an unevidenced assertion.
Nobody knows why there has been a huge rise in children and young people presenting at clinics such as the NHS Gender Identity Service.
That’s because the relevant research has not been done. This absence of evidence is identified in the Cass report.
Adair does not therefore have the evidence to say that the rise in children and families seeking support is due to a “change in attitudes, especially amongst younger people”.
This unevidenced claim is also repeated by the BBC in its introductory material to the film.
The known facts are that there is an over representation in the cohort of children presenting at NHS gender clinics of girls, of children with autism, looked after children, children who have suffered abuse, and children with co morbidities such as anorexia.
“The mix of young people presenting to the service is more complex than seen previously, with many being neurodiverse and/or having a wide range of psychosocial and mental health needs. The largest group currently comprises birth-registered females first presenting in adolescence with gender-related distress.”
“As previously indicated, the epidemiology of gender dysphoria is changing, with an increase in the numbers of birth-registered females presenting in early teens. In addition, most children and young people presenting to GIDS have other complex mental health issues and/or neurodiversity. There is also an over-representation of looked after children.”
Cass Interim Report, 2022
There are also widely voiced concerns about body hatred among girls and young women due to sexism, misogyny, sexual violence, and coercion, internalised and external homophobia, the influence of social media in promoting the gender industry, and the influence of media organisations such as the BBC where some departments and staff have adopted the language and key tenets of gender identity theory in some of their output.
Other BBC journalists, taking an investigatory approach, have highlighted concerns over the reasons why so many children were presenting as “trans” including the influence of homophobia.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51806962
“Homophobia in families attending GIDS is mentioned in all the transcripts Newsnight has seen.
As well as seeing young people struggling with their sexuality, staff say some parents appeared to prefer their children to be transgender and straight, rather than gay.
In one example, a GIDS clinician describes a young person who had come out as a lesbian and faced homophobic bullying, "within the family and quite openly in school".
"Suddenly the young person changed their mind, and they started identifying as trans."
In some of these cases, clinicians thought that it wouldn't be appropriate for the patient to be referred for puberty blockers, with one child apparently saying: "My mum wants the hormone more than I do."
But staff could be overruled by GIDS director Polly Carmichael, the transcripts suggest.”
BBC Newsnight, 2019.
Although he is evidently aware of them, such concerns and misgivings about the care of this vulnerable cohort are omitted by Adair, except to be mocked.
This omission and mockery results in inaccuracy and bias which labelling the content “a personal view” does not rectify.
6.which can only be a good thing because what parent doesn't want their child to be able to come to them and speak about issues that are troubling them in their life and even younger than that, children sometimes as young as three or four, are starting to express discomfort with the gender that they are assigned at birth.
Bias, Inaccuracy
The second half of this sentence is a statement of purported fact.
Sex is recorded at birth. “Gender..assigned at birth” has no clear meaning. That’s because it is activist language associated with the pseudoscientific and ideological “born in the wrong body” narrative.
There is no good evidence that children as young as three or four experience “discomfort” because of their “gender”.
Now I know what you're saying. How can a child know anything? Children are too young to understand. Mine still believes in Santa, the Easter Bunny and that there is only two genders. None of these things are true.
Inaccuracy, bias:
This is a statement of purported fact.
It is unclear what Adair means by “gender” at this point. The idea a child young enough to believe in the Easter Bunny would have formed views about the number of “gender identities” is unevidenced and somewhat absurd.
A young child might have formed the view that there are only two sexes. In which case, that would be true, since there are only two sexes in humans, and Adair’s statement is false.
There is no evidence that innate ‘gender identity’ exists. In fact, the evidence shows that most children with body dysphoria grow out of it.
8.There's actually a ton of research out there that shows that gender is determined before birth,
Inaccuracy:
This is a statement of purported fact.
Adair appears to be talking about “gender identity”. In which case this is an unevidenced claim.
Gender identity is a concept akin to astrology or religious notions of a soul. There is no good “research” to suggest innate gender identity (i.e., formed in utero) exists.
9.and that children as young as three or four are very aware of their own gender identity.
Inaccuracy
See point 6-8 for response.
But because society is still enforcing such a strict gender binary, many children might not speak up about this or suppress their feelings because they believe that they are wrong, because that is what they hear around them. So listen to me, Trans kids, there is nothing wrong with being yourself and there is nothing wrong with being trans.
Harm, bias:
The first sentence is a statement of purported fact.
The second sentence is a direct appeal by a political activist, and a male adult, who is pretending to be a female adult, to children who may well be highly vulnerable, to regard him as an arbiter of the truth. This is gaslighting of children of the highest order.
“Personal view” is not adequate signposting for someone who is a self-described activist. He is pushing an ideological belief system which includes the disputed concept of a “trans kid”.
The BBC should not expose anyone, never mind children and young people, to such blatant propaganda without explicitly identifying it as such and clearly signposting to alternative views and appropriate sources of information, advice, and support.
11. You do you. Okay, good. Others, however, might just come out and say it bluntly. They might say you something like, Mommy, I'm not a guy, I'm a girl.
Inaccuracy, harm:
This is a statement of purported fact.
A boy describing himself as a girl is not evidence he is a girl (this is an impossibility) or a “trans kid” i.e., it is not evidence of the sort of medical condition which might merit a referral to NHS child services such as GIDS.
It is also a deeply sexist, and therefore offensive, notion that a boy who is “really” a girl must therefore be attracted to playing with Barbies and wearing tutus.
Childhood gender non-conformity and cross-sex identity is more predictive of gay or lesbian sexual orientation in adulthood than transsexualism, so labelling children ‘transgender’ and setting them on a path of medication and sterilisation for life can be seen as a form of gay conversion therapy and therefore homophobic.
Gender dysphoria during childhood does not inevitably continue into adulthood. In follow-up studies of prepubertal children (mainly boys) who were referred to clinics for assessment of gender dysphoria, the dysphoria persisted into adulthood for only 6-23% of children (Cohen-Kettenis, 2001; Zucker & Bradley, 1995).
Boys in these studies were more likely to identify as gay in adulthood than as transgender (Green, 1987; Money & Russo, 1979; Zucker & Bradley, 1995; Zuger, 1984).
Newer studies, also including girls, showed a 12- 27% persistence rate of gender dysphoria into adulthood (Drummond, Bradley, Peterson-Badali, & Zucker, 2008; Wallien & Cohen-Kettenis, 2008).
In other words, many children grow out of negative feelings and confusion about their developing bodies.
One “official” criteria for diagnosis of gender dysphoria, known as DSM-5, comes from the American Psychiatric Association and is controversial. As identified by Cass, the criteria are seen as out of date by some.
“In clinical practice, a diagnosis of gender dysphoria is currently based on an operational definition, using the criteria set out in DSM-5 (Appendix 3). Some of these criteria are seen by some as outdated in the context of current understanding about the flexibility of gender expression.
At primary, secondary and specialist level, there is a lack of agreement, and in many instances a lack of open discussion, about the extent to which gender incongruence in childhood and adolescence can be an inherent and immutable phenomenon for which transition is the best option for the individual, or a more fluid and temporal response to a range of developmental, social, and psychological factors. Professionals’ experience and position on this spectrum may determine their clinical approach.”
Cass Interim Report 2022
The DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for Gender Dysphoria in Children referenced by Cass are:
A. A marked incongruence between one’s experienced/expressed gender and assigned gender, of at least 6 months’ duration, as manifested by at least six of the following (one of which must be Criterion A1):
1. A strong desire to be of the other gender or an insistence that one is the other gender (or some alternative gender different from one’s assigned gender).
2. In boys (assigned gender), a strong preference for cross-dressing or simulating female attire; or in girls (assigned gender), a strong preference for wearing only typical masculine clothing and a strong resistance to the wearing of typical feminine clothing.
3. A strong preference for crossgender roles in make-believe play or fantasy play.
4. A strong preference for the toys, games, or activities stereotypically used or engaged in by the other gender.
5. A strong preference for playmates of the other gender.
6. In boys (assigned gender), a strong rejection of typically masculine toys, games, and activities and a strong avoidance of rough-and-tumble play; or in girls (assigned gender), a strong rejection of typically feminine toys, games, and activities.
7. A strong dislike of one’s sexual anatomy.
8. A strong desire for the primary and/or secondary sex characteristics that match one’s experienced gender.
B. The condition is associated with clinically significant distress or impairment in social, school, or other important areas of functioning.
Even relying on the contested DSM-5 definitions, Adair’s diagnostic criteria for a child to be “trans” is absurdly, offensively, and irresponsibly simplistic.
12. They might even show discomfort around single gender groups of friends or stereotypically gendered toys.
Inaccuracy
See point 11 above.
13.This isn't to say that girl wanting to play with an action man means that she must be a trans guy.
Inaccuracy:
This is a statement of fact.
But Adair is contradicting himself since he has just suggested the exact opposite.
“Trans guy” is ideological language, in a cutesy form, designed to appeal to young people.
14.Toys are toys after all. Everyone can play with whatever they want, but typically trans children may be more vocal about it.
Inaccuracy:
This is a statement of purported fact.
A child expressing a “vocal” preference for toys typically marketed at the opposite sex is not evidence they are a “trans child” i.e., it is not evidence of the sort of distress and confusion which might result a referral to child mental health services such as GIDS.
Adair has no medical or other expertise to describe a “typical” presentation of a child with sex dysphoria.
It is also a sexist, and therefore offensive, notion that a boy who is “really” a girl must therefore be attracted to playing with Barbies and wearing tutus.
15.And there's evidence to show that parents are noticing more and more gender variance in children when they're still in nursery or primary school.
Inaccuracy:
This is a statement of purported fact.
There is no citation for this “evidence”. It is entirely unclear what Adair means by “gender variance”.
16.And if you speak to many a trans person, they might tell you that they felt that there was something different about themselves and their gender from around the same age.
Inaccuracy, bias:
This is a statement of purported fact.
The nature of memory is to project current awareness backwards in time to affirm a present belief, so this must be considered when we hear such experiences.
In any case, it is reverse logic to say that because some people ‘always knew’ they were trans this means that every child exhibiting behaviour which does not correspond to sex stereotypes must also therefore be “trans”.
Many adults (particularly gay and lesbian adults) also have childhood memories of fiercely believing themselves to be the opposite sex, but they came to terms with their sex during adolescence.
Their stories support the significant body of evidence that children grow out of feelings of unease about their sexed bodies, but their voices are not reflected by Adair or by The Social.
17.In fact, figures show that there has been a steady rise in referrals in young people to gender identity clinics year on year.
Inaccuracy
This is a statement of purported fact.
Adair has now moved from talking about children (who he labels as “trans”) expressing a preference for clothes and toys commonly marketed at the opposite sex, to the treatment of distressed children and young people in a clinical setting.
Adair seem to be suggesting this rise in referrals is because of increasing social “acceptance” of “trans kids”. There is no good evidence for this assertion.
No one knows why there has been such a huge increase in referrals, the reasons are likely to be many and complex, and the film entirely omits the known facts about the cohort of presenting children.
18. Now, this doesn't mean that children are being referred, going to a gender clinic, being thrown through some sort of gender-amatic, having hormones and surgery being packed on their way before their 18th birthday. It literally doesn't work like that.
Bias, Inaccuracy
This is a statement of purported fact.
Adair uses mockery and hyperbole to dismiss legitimate alternative perspectives around the activities of the GIDS clinic, the Tavistock, and Scotland’s Sandyford clinic.
The former is being shut down and has been the subject of investigations by the BBC which found evidence that, at the time BBC Social first platformed Adair’s mocking dismissal of the concerns he was evidently aware of, children were indeed being rushed into life-altering and possibly unnecessary medical pathways.
“From the point of entry to GIDS there appears to be predominantly an affirmative, non-exploratory approach, often driven by child and parent expectations and the extent of social transition that has developed due to the delay in service provision.”
Cass Interim Report, 2022
In the transcripts, staff are damning in their assessment of some parts of the service
"Let's pray that I am wrong because if I am not wrong, very many vulnerable children have been very poorly treated and will be left with, potentially, a lifetime of damage here," one says.
"The reality is, by not doing anything, children are potentially still being medically mismanaged."
Puberty blockers stop a young person's body developing breasts, periods, facial hair, or a deeper voice.
Recently updated NHS guidance on puberty blockers acknowledges that little is known about their long-term effects, or what impact they might have on children's brains and bones
NHS England says young people should only be referred for this treatment after a minimum of three sessions.”
However, the review heard from several staff that one member of the GIDS leadership, Sarah Davidson, would sometimes refer children for treatment after only one or two appointments.
"Absolutely it should never happen because this is a pathway that will lead to huge, huge changes for this young person, potentially, infertility," one GIDS clinician said.
Such a quick referral, staff claim, could risk putting young people on potentially life-changing medicines who may have been struggling with issues such as their mental health and sexuality.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51806962
“Doctors at a child gender clinic raised concerns about the use of puberty blockers 15 years ago - an issue that was also discussed by staff last year.
An internal review conducted in 2005, obtained by BBC Newsnight, says some clinicians felt pressured to refer patients for the treatment too quickly.”
“The document details concerns raised by some clinicians at that time about alleged pressure on staff to refer patients for treatment with puberty blockers, a lack of a robust evidence base underpinning this treatment, and the apparently troubled backgrounds of some young people referred. These included past sexual abuse and trauma.”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54374165
BBC Newsnight reports, 2020
19.The facts are that for trans children up until puberty, there is no medical intervention.
Inaccuracy:
This is a statement of purported fact.
Adair appears to be suggesting that all pre-pubertal children who fit his ideological definition of “trans” eventually end up having medical intervention. This assertion has no basis in fact.
There is strong evidence that children as young as nine have received significant medical intervention, not age 12 as Adair is about to suggest.
20.Past talkative therapy, the counsellor will speak and listen to them. They may even be offered as a family support and advice on social transition if that's what they wish to do, because remember, rule number one when dealing with a trans child is listen to the child.
Inaccuracy:
There is no such “rule number one” regarding children with sex dysphoria in counselling or any other health setting.
Adair has invented this “rule”. If it is meant to be “opinion” it is not clearly identified as such. Adair has no medical or other relevant qualification to opine on a matter of child medical care.
21. Now, as puberty begins, medical intervention may take place around the age of 12, and even then, they won't be prescribed hormones or any surgical options whatsoever.
Inaccuracy, harm:
This is a statement of purported fact.
There is strong evidence this is not true.
Children as young as nine have received significant medical intervention from both the NHS and private providers including puberty blocking drugs.
https://www.bmj.com/content/377/bmj.o1357
UK girls as young as 13 are known to have had amputation of healthy breasts abroad (I have professional knowledge of such a case) , and the son of the Mermaid charity CEO Susie Green was castrated abroad at the age of 16.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3973036/Jackie-Green-heart-controversy-children-young-nine-given-drugs-change-sex.html
22.They may be prescribed puberty blockers. These drugs are nothing more than a pause button
Inaccuracy, harm:
This is a statement of purported fact.
Adair did not in 2016/2017 have the evidence to say these drugs are “nothing more than a pause button” with the phrase “nothing more” strongly implying negligible side effects and full reversibility.
The research available at the time did not support this assertion. There was strong evidence (if the BBC had cared to look for it in 2016) that puberty blockers were being used in the context of “profound scientific ignorance”.
“An Archive of Diseases in Childhood letter referred to GnRHa treatment as a momentous step in the dark. It set out three main concerns: 1) young people are left in a state of ‘developmental limbo’ without secondary sexual characteristics that might consolidate gender identity; 2) use is likely to threaten the maturation of the adolescent mind, and 3) puberty blockers are being used in the context of profound scientific ignorance.
The development of these interventions should, therefore, occur in the context of research, and treatments for under 18 gender dysphoric children and adolescents remain largely experimental. There are many unanswered questions that include the age at start, reversibility; adverse events, long term effects on mental health, quality of life, bone mineral density, osteoporosis in later life and cognition. We wonder whether off label use is appropriate and justified for drugs such as spironolactone which can cause substantial harms and even death. We are also ignorant of the long-term safety profiles of the different GAH regimens. The current evidence base does not support informed decision making and safe practice in children.”
Prof Carl Heneghan
Editor in Chief BMJ EBM, Professor of EBM, University of Oxford, 2019
“The lack of available high-level evidence was reflected in the recent NICE review into the use of puberty blockers and feminising/masculinising hormones commissioned by NHS England, with the evidence being too inconclusive to form the basis of a policy position. Assessing treatments for gender dysphoria has many of the same problems as assessing treatment for children with autism – it can take many years to get a full appreciation of outcomes and there may be other complicating factors in the child or young person’s life during this period. However, this of itself is not an adequate reason for the major gaps in the international literature.”
Cass Interim Report 2022
“Puberty blockers stop a young person's body developing breasts, periods, facial hair, or a deeper voice. Recently updated NHS guidance on puberty blockers acknowledges that little is known about their long-term effects, or what impact they might have on children's brains and bones
NHS England says young people should only be referred for this treatment after a minimum of three sessions.”
BBC Newsnight investigation, 2020
There is no signposting to accurate sources of information about puberty blockers.
There is evidence that puberty blocking drugs may have lifelong, harmful, effects including premature death.
There is also overwhelming evidence that most children prescribed puberty blockers go on to opposite sex hormones which also carry significant medical risks.
The almost inevitable puberty blocker-to-hormone pathway also leads to infertility. All these relevant facts, which were known and being debated in 2016, are omitted.
In 2022, I and others made a complaint (reference about a BBC News article which claimed puberty blockers were “reversible” – an assertion for which there is no good evidence. The complaint went unanswered for six months. The article was eventually corrected after I raised the matter with BBC Safeguarding. (Complaint reference CAS-7128088-K6B0S3)
23.to buy more time for the child, cuz there is nothing more distressing for a trans kid than going through the wrong puberty.
Bias. Harm, Inaccuracy:
This is a statement of purported fact.
In science, there is no such thing as “the wrong puberty”.
There is only the right puberty which a child may feel uncomfortable with.
“The wrong puberty” draws on the pseudoscientific “born in the wrong body” language of adherents to gender identity theory.
There is also no good evidence to say there is “nothing more distressing “for a child than to experience a puberty they are uncomfortable with.
This is Adair’s opinion presented as fact, but not clearly identified as such.
24.And anything we can do to help kids feel less distress in life is a good thing, right? For many kids, this extra time bought is a life saver.
Inaccuracy, harm
This second sentence is a statement of purported fact.
It is an unevidenced assertion that the administering of puberty blocking drugs saves lives.
90% of people who attempt suicide have a mental health condition.
The Samaritans advise never attaching just one reason to suicide as it can lead to beliefs which increase the risk.
In September 2022, the BBC was forced to publish a correction and clarification after an episode of Hard Talk repeated similar false and unevidenced claims about suicide rates in “trans young people”. (Complaint reference CAS-7258507-M0Y0K4)
The outcomes for children placed on these medical pathways are not known due to lack of research.
“We need to know more about the population being referred and outcomes. There has not been routine and consistent data collection, which means it is not possible to accurately track the outcomes and pathways that children and young people take through the service.”
Cass Interim Review, 2022
In terms of children who go on to have surgical interventions, the most thorough follow up study extending over 30 years found their suicide rate rose to 20 times that of comparable peers
25.And for a small number, they may choose not to continue, in which case they stop taking the puberty blockers and puberty continues as is. But for many, this is just the stop gap until they're legally old enough to start hormone replacement therapy.
Inaccuracy, harm:
This is a statement of purported fact.
Adair does not have the evidence to state these drugs are “nothing more than a pause button” with the strong implication of full reversibility.
There is compelling evidence that puberty blocking drugs may have lifelong, harmful, effects.
There is also overwhelming evidence that most children prescribed puberty blockers go on to opposite sex hormones which carry known and significant medical risks.
The puberty blocker-to-hormone pathway also leads to infertility. All these relevant facts are omitted.
“The most difficult question is whether puberty blockers do indeed provide valuable time for children and young people to consider their options, or whether they effectively ‘lock in’ children and young people to a treatment pathway which culminates in progression to feminising/ masculinising hormones by impeding the usual process of sexual orientation and gender identity development. Data from both the Netherlands38 and the study conducted by GIDS39 demonstrated that almost all children and young people who are put on puberty blockers go on to sex hormone treatment (96.5% and 98% respectively). The reasons for this need to be better understood.”
“A closely linked concern is the unknown impacts on development, maturation, and cognition if a child or young person is not exposed to the physical, psychological, physiological, neurochemical, and sexual changes that accompany adolescent hormone surges. It is known that adolescence is a period of significant changes in brain structure, function, and connectivity. During this period, the brain strengthens some connections (myelination) and cuts back on others (synaptic pruning). There is maturation and development of frontal lobe functions which control decision making, emotional regulation, judgement, and planning ability. Animal research suggests that this development is partially driven by the pubertal sex hormones, but it is unclear whether the same is true in humans. If pubertal sex hormones are essential to these brain maturation processes, this raises a secondary question of whether there is a critical time window for the processes to take place, or whether catch up is possible when oestrogen or testosterone is introduced later.”
“An international interdisciplinary panel has highlighted the importance of understanding the neurodevelopmental outcomes of pubertal suppression and defined an appropriate approach for investigating this further. However, this work has not yet been undertaken.”
Cass Interim Review, 2022
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06jqvcr
26.So that's it. There is no secret agenda. No parents enforcing anything on their child.
Bias, Inaccuracy
This is a statement of purported fact.
Adair mockingly dismisses as absurd legitimate and widely held concerns that homophobic parents are pushing “transness” on children they suspect might be gay.
These concerns were uncovered by BBC investigators:
“Homophobia in families attending GIDS is mentioned in all the transcripts Newsnight has seen.
As well as seeing young people struggling with their sexuality, staff say some parents appeared to prefer their children to be transgender and straight, rather than gay.
In one example, a GIDS clinician describes a young person who had come out as a lesbian and faced homophobic bullying, "within the family and quite openly in school".
"Suddenly the young person changed their mind, and they started identifying as trans."
In some of these cases, clinicians thought that it wouldn't be appropriate for the patient to be referred for puberty blockers, with one child apparently saying: "My mum wants the hormone more than I do."
But staff could be overruled by GIDS director Polly Carmichael, the transcripts suggest.”
BBC Newsnight, 2020
27.Actually, if any parents are enforcing anything, it's the ones that enforce the assigned at birth gender on their child no matter what.
Har, Inaccuracy:
It is not clear if this is a statement of purported fact or Adair’s opinion.
Adair, a political activist, is suggesting that the parents of the young audience which he has just directly addressed are enforcing something cruel and wrong if they do not follow his ideological stance.
It is against all safeguarding best practice to promote mistrust between children and their parents in a context such as this.
This is a tactic used by cults.
28.Trans youth need support, not to be told they're wrong.
Inaccuracy, harm
It is not clear if this is a statement of purported fact or Adair’s opinion.
There is no good evidence that afforming a child in the delusion they are the opposite sex, rather than telling them the truth, leads to better outcomes.
Adair does not have any clinical expertise to opine on the best treatment pathways for children expressing distress about their sexed bodies.
“Evidence on the appropriate management of children and young people with gender incongruence and dysphoria is inconclusive both nationally and internationally.”
“There has not been routine and consistent data collection within GIDS, which means it is not possible to accurately track the outcomes and pathways that children and young people take through the service.”
“Internationally as well as nationally, longer-term follow-up data on children and young people who have been seen by gender identity services is limited, including for those who have received physical interventions; who were transferred to adult services and/or accessed private services; or who desisted, experienced regret or detransitioned.”
“There has been research on the short-term mental health outcomes and physical side effects of puberty blockers for this cohort, but very limited research on the sexual, cognitive or broader developmental outcomes.”
“Much of the existing literature about natural history and treatment outcomes for gender dysphoria in childhood is based on a case-mix of predominantly birth-registered males presenting in early childhood. There is much less data on the more recent case-mix of predominantly birth-registered females presenting in early teens, particularly in relation to treatment and outcomes.”
“Aspects of the literature are open to interpretation in multiple ways, and there is a risk that some authors interpret their data from a particular ideological and/or theoretical standpoint.”
Cass Interim Review 2022
29.I know it's a dramatic change, and I'm not telling you it will be easy, but as a parent, you have to ask yourself a question. Do you want an unhappy child likely to have issues in later life due to unchecked gender dysphoria?
Inaccuracy, harm
This is a rhetorical question designed to suggest a purported fact.
See point 24-28 above for rebuttal..
30.Because as we know, there was a high number of attempted suicide rates amongst trans teens and adults.
Inaccuracy, harm
This is a statement of purported fact.
There is no evidence of children attempting suicide because their parents don’t want them to take an irreversible medical pathway.
90% of people who attempt suicide have a mental health condition.
The Samaritans advise never attaching just one reason to suicide as it can lead to beliefs which increase the risk.
In September 2022, the BBC was forced to publish a correction and clarification after an episode of Hard Talk repeated similar false and unevidenced claims about suicide rates in “trans young people”. (Complaint reference CAS-7258507-M0Y0K4)
31.Or would you like to have a child that you're able to support and helping them feel a bit less distressed in their younger lives without having to deal with the heavy, complex situation of gender?
Inaccuracy, harm
This is a rhetorical question designed to indicate a purported fact.
What that fact is impossible to say because “situation of gender” is scientifically meaningless.
If Adair means stopping puberty, there is no good evidence to suggest this makes children feel “a bit less distressed” than allowing puberty to proceed normally.
32.Choice is up to you
Inaccuracy, harm
This final declamation indicates a purported fact which is that only by following Adair’s advice, will a parent be behaving responsibly.
For all the reasons above, this is an unevidenced assertion.