Complaint
The programme included an interview with Dr Hilary Cass about the Government鈥檚 proposal to publish new gender guidance for schools. A viewer complained that it treated the topic of puberty blockers in a way which gave the impression that the only approaches with medical sanction were to conduct a clinical trial, as proposed by Dr Cass, or simply to prohibit their use, whereas there was support within the medical community for making puberty blockers available for specialist prescription.
He also complained that a reference by Dr Cass to 鈥渃harlatans just handing out inappropriate drugs鈥 gave the misleading impression that no reasonable clinician would prescribe puberty blockers in paediatric gender care cases. The ECU considered the complaint in the light of the 91福利社鈥檚 editorial standards of impartiality and accuracy.
Outcome
Although Laura Kuenssberg did put it to Dr Cass that there were clinicians who thought a clinical trial was 鈥渢he wrong thing to do鈥, she made clear throughout the interview that there was a range of views on puberty blockers and referred explicitly to those who believed a ban on prescribing them deprived young people of treatment they needed. In the ECU鈥檚 judgement this was enough to meet the requirements of impartiality. As to accuracy, Dr Cass鈥檚 reference to 鈥渃丑补谤濒补迟补苍蝉鈥 was in the context of her concern about unregulated and unmonitored sources of puberty blockers, and did not apply to responsible clinicians.
Not upheld