Parents of ”trans kids”: Puberty Blockers. Part 5

This is part six of a series looking at parents who all, bar one, believe they have a “transgender” child. Details of the funding are in part one. Oxford University is one sponsor. Mermaids are an advisor. Link to the series is here:

Parents of “Trans” kids: Series 2

This research is published on a website called You can find the link to this section here: 👇

Parents views on Puberty Blockers

What you will not find on the page about puberty blockers are the detailed, critical comments of one of the parents “Elijah”. This matters because anyone accessing this page will not see a parent detailing why he opposes puberty blockers or cross sex hormones, for under 18’s. I will insert his comments, in full, at the end.

Note that the web-site uses opposite sex pronouns throughout. I will not be doing so.

First up is repetition of the lie that puberty blockers merely ”pause” puberty and are reversible. The NHS, eventually, had to revise their guidance to explain that we are not clear of all the impacts of using puberty blockers. Sex hormones play a crucial role in brain maturation which continues to around the age of 25. Some known impacts, of puberty blockers, are lowering of IQ scores and negative impact on bone density.

It is also worth noting that some leading figures at WPATH have broken ranks, to sound a note of caution, over their use. You can read about this here:

Sloppy Care

Here is a clip from that piece. Taken from an interview with Abigail Shrier, author of Irreversible Damage.

Yes, you read that correctly “permanent sexual dysfunction”

Richard shares his thought processes about blocking puberty for his son.

Here he talks about the importance of timing of the intervention in relation to penis size. This is because the standard method of creating what is called a ”neo-vagina” which requires sufficient ”material” to invert for the surgery. {Anyone familiar with the poster child for puberty blockers, Jazz Jennings, will be familiar with the surgicalcomplications that followed because of his micro penis}. We start puberty blockers as young as age 10 in the U.K. It is estimated a penis reaches adult size between the ages of 18 and 21. The main pre-occupation in starting puberty blockers seems to be aesthetic, for males. For females early interventions seem less desirable, even adopting a ”trans-narrative” stance since they will stunt growth. Given that testosterone packs one hell of a punch on female bodies, even if taken later, it seems counter-intuitive to push early intervention in females, for reasons of ”passing”.

The parents all seem to believe they are simply giving their children time to think without the pressure of pubertal development. Unfortunately many clinicians believe it is the process of puberty that may resolve ”gender identity issues”. Blocking puberty may also be denying these children/teens any chance of a life without medical dependence. Also worth pointing out, to these parents, that at least 98% proceed to take cross sex hormones which suggests they don’t provide space for exploration but commence them on an irreversible trajectory.

One argument put forward for blocking puberty is to stop breast growth and thus avoid an unnecessary double mastectomy. Breast growth typically starts between the ages of 9-11 but it is not unusual for growth to start earlier. Here Georgina makes that argument. It is worth noting that many, maybe most, teenage girls struggle with their developing breasts and feeling “down” is not rare.

Oonagh is the one who introduces the idea to her son, who is pre-pubertal. Leigh is very certain that her son won’t change his mind but again peddles the myth that they merely provide “breathing space”. As I said earlier, at least 98% will progress to cross-sex hormones and will be sterile. Not infertile. Sterile. Children as young as 10 are taking this step, in the U.K, it is even earlier in the United States. Oonagh’s son seems unable to even utter the words ”penis” or ”testicles” using language which suggests a lack of maturity.

Here there is a short section on the consent process. Both parent and child signal their agreement to this process. This child has accessed blockers less than a year since “coming out”. 👇

The parents are, in this way, made complicit with the process. In an earlier piece I covered a Tavistock employee who explained why family involvement was important, from the perspective of the clinic. This is Dr. Aiden Kelly speaking publicly about why they involve parents in decisions about puberty blockers. Its because they don’t ”know” which ones will benefit, with any certainty.

Here Dr Kelly also admits they just do not have the evidence base and points out we don’t have any long term follow up.

You can read my full piece on Dr Kelly here:

Dr Adrian Kelly

Here is Leigh talking about her foster daughter, Now on hormone blockers. She describes the process for accessing them ”surprisingly smooth”. Later we will learn that the Social Worker colluded with this decision.

Ali is not happy at the amount of time it took to get her son on blockers.

Richard had some concerns about puberty blockers and the lack of long term data, his son, however, has now been approved to take them. He hopes the increase in “transgender” children will lead to more research. {Call me old-fashioned but should we not have the research before we massively increase the young people we medicate?}.

Elijah thinks the administration of puberty blockers is based on “bad science”. {Where’s Ben Goldacre when you need him?}?

Conversely, Mel felt the NHS were not ”trans-positive” enough. She feels the psychologists take a too questioning approach. Mel, however, is finding it necessary to develop strategies to cooe with the side-effects of the hormones.

I will leave you with Elijah’s critique of hormone blockers.

If you want to read more on puberty blockers, I did a series. You can access this here:

Puberty Blockers

You can support my work here. All donations gratefully received.

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and it’s impact on women’s rights, gay rights and the harms of the Gender medico-industrial complex.


Leave a Reply