The British Medical Association’s (BMA) recent proposal for the UK government to repeal the ban on the use of puberty blockers in minors has been met with stern opposition. The BMA’s plan also involves halting the implementation of the widely acclaimed Cass Review’s recommendations. The Cass Review, described as the largest, most comprehensive review of its kind, encompassing 237 papers from 18 countries, was reportedly dismissed as “unsubstantiated” by the BMA.
However, the UK’s Department of Health and Social Care defended the review, emphasizing its solid evidence-based foundation. The Department clearly stated that improvements advised by Dr. Cass to gender services were essential, and they offered no support for the BMA’s proposed delay. This sentiment was shared by The Guardian, criticizing the BMA for potentially causing harm with its stance on puberty blockers.
The BMA’s move has drawn sharp criticism from a wide array of healthcare practitioners. An open letter to Professor Philip Banfield, chairman of the BMA, signed by 1,000 senior doctors across the UK, robustly criticized the BMA’s secretive critique of the Cass Review. They viewed this critique as unrepresentative of the wider membership’s views and labeled it as an accountability failure.
Citing the Cass Review as the most thorough investigation into healthcare for children with gender-related distress, they called for the BMA to cease its fruitless critique of the recommended guidelines. The letter, signed by current and former clinical leaders at royal colleges, stated that the BMA’s lobbying against evidenced recommendations was contrary to ethical practice and evidence-based medicine.
Contrary to the BMA, all other leading medical bodies have endorsed the Cass Review and the reforms it advocates for children and adolescents’ healthcare. The growing consensus among international medical communities opposes the BMA’s viewpoint, recognizing the mental health crisis cannot be addressed solely by altering bodies.