UK ambulance chasers start targeting detransitioners

submitted by jet199 from attwatersjamesonhill.co.uk

all 12 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]GConly 15 insightful - 4 fun15 insightful - 3 fun16 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Said this would happen two years ago.

Called it.

[–]Daraincork 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Good call. Things are going to get very messy very soon!

[–]LesbiSilly 8 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Anyone got some popcorn?

[–]artetolife 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

It's really difficult to prove medical negligence, and I imagine it's especially so with some of these trans surgeries where the risks are so inherent.

[–]jet199[S] 10 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

However luckily the BBC Newsnight report had whistle-blowers stating that Tavistock managers had said they knew what they were doing was probably malpractice but it was OK because staff wouldn't be sued personally, just the hospital

[–]artetolife 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

In my own case I had multiple doctors give evidence that what happened to me was malpractice and it didn't help - still ended up with a measly out of court settlement despite being disabled for life. And yeah, you don't sue individual doctors within the NHS because the whole NHS trust is deemed culpable for any negligence.

[–]MarkTwainiac 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I suspect in the UK many people - particularly the young ones - who've gotten suckered into the trans cult but have not necessarily had surgeries still might be able to sue many different parties - such as the NHS/Tavi, Mermaids, GIRES, Gendered Intelligence, Stonewall, local councils, schools - on many different grounds. Such as failing to provide mental health care and diagnostic workups for evident mental health problems, failing in the duty to provide safeguarding, and violating various pieces of legislation pertaining to education, the conduct of charities/lobby groups and the 2010 Equality Act.

Beyond the matter of surgical medical negligence, there are a bunch of laws in the UK that clever lawyers could argue have been breached by all sorts of authorities and organizations - causing vulnerable persons to have been injured psychologically and physically as a result.

On the issue of medical negligence, prescribing or administering testosterone to females and putting children/teens of either sex on puberty blockers can be hugely and permanently damaging in and of themselves. When it comes to "trans medical care" for kids and for females of any age, no surgery is required for major medical harm to have occurred.

[–]artetolife 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Clever lawyers aren't pimping themselves out on a no-win-no-fee basis, these types of solicitors basically just threaten people enough until they settle out of court for a few grand to make you shut up and go away (personal experience here, although not for anything trans related). We'll have to wait to see what happens in the mrs A case starting next month to see if there'll be any real change in the system.

[–]MarkTwainiac 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

This particular firm seems to have won many multi-million pound medical negligence cases of all sorts.

https://www.attwatersjamesonhill.co.uk/medical-negligence/recent-medical-negligence-cases/

Also, this firm practices many areas of law - its primary focus traditionally has been wealth management. I know people who are its clients or have consulted them in areas having nothing to to with medical negligence. So don't think it's fair or accurate to assume they are just "ambulance chasers" or to claim they are shysters "pimping themselves out."

"No win, no fee" isn't necessarily a nefarious strategy. Many people in all sorts of cases have no money, and are thus afraid to consult lawyers. "No win, no fee" enables a lot of people to come forward and inquire about whether their cases might have merit.

[–]ekitten 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, I assume they would've had the transitioners or their parents sign forms saying they understood there were risks, so they won't be liable. That's what happened when I had laser eye surgery, and when I went for a check-up afterwards and mentioned vision issues (ghosting), the first thing they asked me was if I'd been warned about the risks.

[–]Cicerosolo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It depends on the type of medical negligence claimed. In circumstances like this involving people below the age of majority with complicated and interrelated mental health issues I am more inclined to say that negligence is easier to demonstrate, particularly with regards to experimental use of hormonal medications

[–]worried19 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Has anyone in the USA sued yet?

I figure a lot of them might have even better cases considering they were minors. At least one of the young women from the Pique Resilience Project went to (I'm assuming from her description) Planned Parenthood. You can walk in there on your 18th birthday and walk out with a prescription for testosterone, no medical evaluation or psychological assessment required.