direct link (has a paywall): https://amp.theaustralian.com.au/nation/judges-to-oversee-transgender-teen-treatment/news-story/a817de7769ee196faee4f908598a66ef

Article text:

A children’s hospital gender ­clinic is under review, with ­responsibility for treatment decisions shifted to judges amid great ­secrecy and an international trend towards caution.

New patients at the gender clinic, which cannot be named for legal reasons, have to get court approval before they can go ahead with life-altering hormonal treatments that are in high demand by teenagers who identify as transgender.

The Australian understands the dramatic change followed concerns raised by a state solicitor’s office about the risk of government exposure to litigation akin to the successful case brought against Britain’s Tavistock clinic by Keira Bell, a young woman who came to regret her treatment with puberty blockers, testosterone and mastectomy.

In January, one month after the Tavistock ruling that minors would struggle to give informed consent to experimental treatment, the parents of patients at the Australian gender clinic were sent a letter warning them the need for court approval would delay a start to blockers or hormones.

University of Queensland legal academic Patrick Parkinson said it was a “very significant” turn in the gender clinic debate, likening it to the decision by the Tavistock clinic to halt new referrals for puberty blockers, and the recent policy of Sweden’s Karolinska clinic to limit all future hormonal treatment to strictly supervised clinical trials.

He said the state government was “essentially saying they are going to use the court as a safeguard”, keeping in mind the grave consequences of a mistaken decision to approve treatment with irreversible effects.

There has been a global surge in teens declaring a trans identity and telling parents they fear self-harm if unable to get blockers or hormones quickly, and clinics following the “gender affirmative” approach claim these treatments can be “life-saving”.

But the suicide narrative of ­affirmative clinicians as well as the evidence base and risks of medical interventions are under intense international scrutiny.

The move by the gender clinic was revealed in a recent decision by a state Family Court. The judge noted the Tavistock ruling was “integral” to the change.

The judge, who suppressed details of the case before her of a 16-year-old biological female wanting to begin testosterone injections to make her body masculine, noted the new policy of court approval for treatment would apply while the children’s hospital gender clinic underwent a review. Even in cases where the child was 16 or older, able to give informed consent, and parents and clinicians agreed on treatment, the hospital said it was likely to remain neutral, neither consenting nor opposing the ­application to the court.

The unidentified gender clinic appears to be the first in Australia to take the precaution of shifting responsibility from doctors back to judges when it comes to deciding if a minor is mature enough to give informed consent to treatment under the common law Gillick competency rule.

This shift to caution undercuts a long and successful campaign spearheaded by the Royal Children’s Hospital Melbourne to persuade Family Court judges it was safe to trust clinicians with testing the capacity of minors to understand and authorise their own medicalised gender change.

If somebody has access to the comments on the article, please feel free to share, would love to see them.

Was debating between "Transing Children" and "LGB Victory" for flairs, let me know if you think I should change it.