Devendra Kumar
Dr. Hilary Cass, the lead researcher on the recent Cass Review, has expressed her frustration and disappointment at the criticisms she has faced since the report’s publication. The study, which examined the evidence base for gender care in young people, found that the evidence was lacking and made over 30 recommendations to the National Health Service (NHS) to improve the medical system and ensure that trans youth receive the care they need. Despite the report’s findings being widely accepted, Dr. Cass has faced criticism from some quarters, with Labour MP Dawn Butler questioning the report’s methodology during a House of Commons debate.
One of the criticisms leveled at Dr. Cass is that over 100 studies were not included in the report. However, Dr. Cass denied this, stating that researchers had appraised every research paper involved in the review, but only those that met the minimum level of medium-quality research were included. She explained that the total number of high or medium-quality datasets was 60 out of 103. Despite this explanation, misinformation about the report’s findings and recommendations has continued to spread, with an influencer sharing a list of papers that were supposedly rejected due to not being randomized controlled trials.
Dr. Cass has also been a target of online abuse, which she has said is unconnected to her work as a researcher. She has expressed concerns about her personal safety and has decided not to be involved in the upcoming review of adult gender clinics due to the abuse she has suffered. Dr. Cass has emphasized that the criticism she has faced is inaccurate and unforgivable, and has expressed dismay at the lack of understanding and misinformation that has been spread about her report.
NHS England has announced a second review of adult gender clinics, and Dr. Cass remains committed to her work and determined to see her report’s recommendations implemented. Her decision not to be involved in the adult report highlights the challenges that researchers face in this area, and the need for greater understanding and respect for the work of experts in the field.