Oxford row over trans study praise for puberty blockers

Taxpayer-funded research provokes backlash from accademics, medical professionals and parents

A ROW has broken out between Oxford academics over a taxpayer-funded transgender study whose participants laud the benefits of puberty blockers for children as young as 13. The university’s Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences was given a £700,000 public grant to identify the healthcare needs of young trans people.

The three-year research has now been published, interviewing 50 trans and gender-diverse people across Britain about their experiences along with 20 parents and carers. But it has been met with a backlash over what critics call its “hardline trans activism”.

It was led by Dr Melissa Stepney and Dr Sam Martin, two Oxford researchers who posted call-out adverts for trans interviewees aged 12 to 35 on Twitter by tagging the controversial charities Mermaids and Gendered Intelligence.

The advisory panel features three staff from Mermaids, the charity being investigated by the regulator over safeguarding concerns, and the chief executive of Gendered Intelligence, which campaigned against a High Court ruling on puberty blockers for under-16s.

A large section on healthcare includes interviews. Evelyn, 14, said that “hormone blockers are good for trans youth” and that it was “dumb and unnecessary” to have to wait for them.

Tom, 13, described the “really good” reversal of changes in breast development and another interviewee described how it is “cruel, just cruel” to be referred for puberty blockers at 12 and not receive them until 16.

While the drawbacks of cross-sex hormones and gender reassignment surgery are discussed in other sections, the puberty blockers chapter fails to mention concerns about the irreversibility of some side-effects.

The study initially named Gender GP, a private clinic whose founder was prosecuted for running it illegally, in two interviews with 17-year-olds and on its front page, but this was removed when Prof Michael Biggs, an Oxford academic, complained.

Prof Biggs last week wrote a second complaint to Oxford’s registrar alleging a conflict of interest between some activists using the study to advertise their own consultancy businesses, and raising concerns with the ethical board.

“My concern about this research project is shared by others,” Prof Biggs told The Sunday Telegraph, adding that other medical professionals have also raised concerns. “This project poses a risk to the university’s reputation.”

One interviewed parent told The Telegraph: “Trans rights activists hijacked this study, used it as a figleaf for hardline trans activism and recruited from a very narrow selection of channels.

“I only got involved by accident, after seeing an advert on the Mermaids Twitter feed, and they were shocked at how off-script I was. I am under the name Elijah and the only parent without an introduction, without a biography, heavily redacted.” The Telegraph understands other parents have also complained to Oxford about the study.

A University of Oxford spokesman said the research was ethically approved, adding: “The research team were not commissioned to evaluate any particular service or agency.

“The published testimonies are reallife experiences and are not intended as advice or to advocate any of the views expressed. The views are those expressed by patients and do not necessarily represent the views of the university, who would never endorse or support any regulated activity that has sanctioned by the regulator.”