This site costs nothing to run so donate to our friends at https://www.broadcastingscotland.scot/donate/
identity clinic in Scotland – a fivefold rise since 2018. BBC Scotland News has learned that some are now waiting up to six years for a first appointment. GPs say they’ve been left to care for those on waiting lists with guidelines that are now 12 years old.
Reporting Scotland, one again, with a heavy dose of early morning gloom for their ever diminishing audience.
The full report on the website does have this key context:
Campaigners say the high demand for specialist help is down to improved social attitudes towards trans people, which makes it easier for them to come out.
But Reporting Scotland prefer to foreground this thread:
But GPs say the long waits can put them in the impossible position of trying to care for patients without expert support.
Waiting list data are provided but carefully they do not tell us just how many that ‘some’ waiting up to six years is or are.
As for the claim that GPs feel they have been left to care, no survey data are offered, just one trade union convenor’s opinions.
This site costs nothing to run so donate to our friends at: https://www.broadcastingscotland.scot/donate/
Talking-up Scotland 
” Improved Social attitudes to Trans make it easier to come out …”
Does Union Jack , SSS , agree with this ? Is that why he stuck his Jackboot ( see what I did there ? ) into Scottish legislation which would have improved the lot of Scots Trans ?
LikeLiked by 4 people
It is a most contrived and unattributed article https://archive.ph/HnMJz, mainly pushing the notion SG are dragging their heels compared to England, and do bear in mind recent news leaking out over the true picture of waiting lists in England.
If you scroll down to the section headed “What are the current rules on gender reassignment?”, the second last paragraph sets the revised protocol in context – ” But two-and-a-half years later, doctors are still waiting for Dr Smith to approve a new national protocol. An update issued last November said a draft had been submitted by civil servants, but was held back for more work to be carried out before publication. ” – Jeez, ‘dragging their heels’ for a whole 3 months….
The next and final paragraph comments on SG giving up fighting Alister Jack’s harrumph over the GRR bill, despite it having nothing to do with the subject other than tangential, yet omitting to mention AJ petulantly seeking costs to pile further financial pressure on SG.
As for the GP “claims”, the context is ” Dr Morton added that GPs could be left in a “very difficult situation” when patients turned to the private sector, which was often unregulated, and they thought they should be prescribed hormones.
“We can’t assess every private provider. For some GPs, it feels an impossible situation,” Dr Morton said. “
In short it is yet another mischievous propaganda piece when all SG are focussed on budgets for the next year…
LikeLiked by 3 people
Health Improvement Scotland regulate NHS and Private health care in Scotland, so are the bbc not telling the full story for the few people who still tune in to there British Service…..not like them!!!…….https://www.healthcareimprovementscotland.scot/inspections-reviews-and-regulation/
LikeLike
”Dr Morton” would know this as he must have been inspected at some point last year………surely!!! If not I wouldn’t want to be treated by him!!!
LikeLike
Dr Catriona Morton….
LikeLike
sorry, I did know that……..corrective spelling demon!!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
UK Gov will have to introduce changes under International Law. Only affects a relative few. A fuss about nothing. Giving people their rights.
Women who co habit (majority) do not have equal rights. They have to put in a claim within a year and it can cost £thousands. There is little legal aid. Abused women have to stay in unsafe places or lose the roof over their heads.
Legal Aid has been introduced in England so women do not lose their house/home. Selling it for legal expenses. Legal Aid has to be paid back in any case, upon any settlement. This affects many more people needing help.
LikeLike
‘improved social attitudes towards trans people’ – looks as if the Labour Party continues to tie itself in knots over how socially progressive it wishes to be!
Headline from LabourList: ‘Scottish Labour rejects ‘sex-based rights’ motion backed by women’s conference and most CLPs (https://labourlist.org/2024/02/scottish-labour-rejects-womens-conference-and-clp-backed-motion-backing-sex-based-rights/)
Context is a vote at the recent Glasgow conference: ‘Scottish Labour has VOTED DOWN A MOTION SUBMITTED via its women’s conference which had urged it to “acknowledge the principle of women’s sex-based rights”, despite most Constituency Labour Party delegates and the Scottish Labour women’s conference supporting the motion. Critics of the motion have hit out at “transphobia” within the party, but supporters said it was “chilling” to see a women’s conference motion voted down. (my emphasis)
‘A card vote was held on the floor of the Scottish Labour party conference in Glasgow over the motion this weekend. LabourList can reveal 69.3% of CLP delegates’ votes were for the motion, but votes are weighted equally between CLP delegates and party affiliates. The motion fell because 77% of affiliate votes were against it, making it the FIRST AND ONLY MOTION TO HAVE BEEN REJECTED BY THE CONFERENCE. The party’s affiliate groups include trade unions, socialist societies and equality groups. Multiple sources told LabourList several trade unions voted against the motion.’
The article in LabourList also has this: ‘Former Scottish National Party leadership candidate Ash Regan, now leader of the Alba party at Holyrood, sought to capitalise on the issue, claiming Labour had “made it clear that they also cannot be trusted to listen to women on what we need from legislators and policymakers to protect the dignity & safety of women and girls”. And it has this comment from Labour MP Rosie Duffield which was posted on X in support of the motion that was defeated: “We will continue to demand our rights whether these organisations like it or not.”
LabourList balances the above with quotes from younger Labour activists: ‘Lauren Harper, youth representative on Labour’s Scottish Executive Committee, said delegates were “absolutely” right to reject the motion, which would have been a “step in the wrong direction”. The original (the motion prior to compositing) would also have been “far worse”. She praised the trade unions which voted against it, saying Labour’s “progressivism comes from the trade unions” and that there is misogyny and transphobia within Labour that “comes from the same bigotry”.
“Trans people and women are not at odds, and it benefits the capitalist class most when the discussion is about single-sex spaces not the barriers that the two groups share to having their rights in the workplace and wider society recognised and respected. It’s a form of hegemony to keep the the two groups from realising their true enemy of their rights, the capitalist class.”
‘Another youth delegate, who did not want to be named, told LabourList: “As the party of equality, the party who scrapped Section 28 and brought in the equality act, if we don’t stand for the rights of trans-peoples then those previous achievements and accolades become hollow. No-one who claims to be on the left should be willing to have one groups’ rights protected at the expense of the existence of another minority.”
‘Two candidates running against each other to be the Scottish Labour youth representative in Labour’s national policy forum process also issued a joint statement saying: “We reaffirm our support for our trans comrades”. They urged the party to now “reaffirm the Scottish Labour Party’s support for our transgender community” following the vote.
‘Another trans member also questioned the motion’s reference to 2010 equality legislation. The motion says that the Equality Act allows for some single-sex spaces. The member said interpretation of the law was contested, and guidance indicates it is only allowed when it is a “proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim” such as privacy, decency, preventing trauma or health and safety”.
‘Scottish Labour was approached for comment.’
I suspect the THE leader of the Labour Party was not amused at the defeat of this motion. It is notable that according to LabourList the motion voted upon was a ‘merged version of an Edinburgh Southern CLP motion backed by Scottish Labour Women’s conference and a Rutherglen CLP’. Is it just a coincidence that the defeated motion derived in part from CLPs influencing or influenced by Labour’s only two MPs and Starmer loyalists?
LikeLiked by 1 person