I am disappointed in the BMA’s lack of transparency and failure to follow evidence based medicine. As a clinician working in this field, you fail to represent me and are not centering safe and quality care for children and young people. 

BMA’s behaviour has shocked me and does not represent me or most doctors. I have treated trans patients for years.

On the basis of the BMA’s outrageous stance on the superbly researched and written Cass Report, which has my full support and endorsement, I have decided to leave the BMA having been a member for 50 years since I qualified as a doctor. Increasingly, they not only fail to represent my views, they display no respect for the very premise and ethos inherent in being a medical professional.

The Cass Review is comprehensive and balanced. It is totally inappropriate for the BMA to reject it, presumably under pressure from activists. 

I’m shocked that my trade union would consider challenging an evidenced based document which took 4 years of painstaking research to produce.

I will resign from the BMA if they pursue this. 

I contacted the BMA yesterday, resigning my membership of nearly 50 years.

I am disappointed in the BMA’s lack of transparency and failure to follow evidence based medicine. As a clinician working in this field, you fail to represent me and are not centering safe and quality care for children and young people. 

I need to remain anonymous due to the fragility of the reputation of the new service. However this action that the BMA has chosen to take. I believe will be destructive to our ability to deliver the best care possible for children and young people with issues with their gender.

I support, wholeheartedly the letter and would like this to count as an expression of my disappointment in the BMA, it’s conduct and its total disregard of evidence based research 

I feel unrepresented and unsupported by the BMA, after writing several times to them and not even receiving acknowledgement of my concerns. This is the first time we are asked to follow ideologies rather than evidence based medicine.

I am appalled the BMA has taken this stance and my membership will not continue unless it is reversed.

I lead high quality Cochrane systematic reviews and have expertise in relevant research methodology. The BMA’s approach is reprehensible. I have resigned my membership of BMA twice on ethical grounds due to your undemocratic behaviour on previous occasions on ethical matters, and failure to fairly represent the views of the medical profession.

This reflects very badly on the BMA and will lower any remaining public confidence in the profession – perhaps that’s the idea behind this?

The BMA exist to express the views of the profession. Please fulfil this obligation 

This is not a responsible thing to do.

Knowing our limitations is of crucial importance to all practicing clinicians. This also applies to the BMA who are not an organisation qualified to comment. Politicising this issue further will only serve to cause harm both to patients and the BMAs standing and ability to represent UK doctors.

This is an abysmal failure of leadership. Extremely disappointed to see that high up members of the BMA are willing to promote their own agendas, instead of listening to and representing the views of colleagues in the Medical profession. I think it is appalling that evidence based medicine has been trampled in support of practices currently backed up by pseudoscience alone. As a profession we must seek to protect the needs and interests of those who are vulnerable, in this case, children. This motion passed by the BMA shows that those responsible are interested not in furthering the interests of doctors by representing them, nor of children who are victims of experimental medicine, but only the interests of themselves, and thus has eroded my confidence in those responsible. This disdain for patient safety concerns and evidence based medicine has no place in our profession.

Thank you for writing this. I am thinking of resigning from the BMA. Are other signatories considering this. 

Fast losing faith in the BMA

We need evidence to be prioritised over the politisation of vulnerable children 

I am utterly appalled by the BMA’s opposition to the Cass Review. For goodness sake “Get a Grip”.

BMA has shot itself in the foot. The Cass report is the best scientific report we have.

The bma response is not scientific, rational or credible. Disappointing. 

I am extremely disappointed and concerned about BMA’s decision regarding the Cass Review. 

I left the BMA partly because of this sort of behaviour on the part of the leadership, having been a member for some 30 years.

Your credibility as a trustworthy organisation has taken a huge knock. 

Why is the BMA getting involved?

I am SO horrified and angered that the BMA is taking a view that does NOT represent the view of many BMA members without consultation – and certainly I think it’s an irresponsible and unjustified stance. I am SO close to resignation of my membership of this. 

The BMA would do well to consider the ethics and law implications of their decision, and their promotion of this damaging ideology over the last 10 years 

I completely agree with the Cass report

As a union, primarily, it is the role of the BMA to represent its members, and not to drive clinical opinion, especially in specialist areas. I am considering resigning after membership of 42 years.

About to resign from an increasingly bonkers and radical BMA

What have puberty blockers got to do with a trade union? This another reason why I’m leaving BMA. After 40 years has been infiltrated by political nutcases.

I resigned from the BMA.

Thank you for writing this. I was hoping to find time to write before leaving the BMA for lack of scientific rigour.

I’m truly shocked by the BMA’s behaviour – so wrong and dishonest.

The BMA should stick to being a Trade Union. How can it possibly believe that a few non evidenced comments from some members should over ride a detailed evidenced based report from a former President of the RCPCH?

Not in my name.

I concur with the AOMRC that the Cass review should be upheld. I disagree with the BMA’s attempt to supersede a rigorously researched piece of work without any basis or expressed support of its members. I do not support the BMA’s planned critique of a systematically objectively reviewed matter conducted independently of the BMA. The evidence has already spoken for itself.

It’s important to consider the ethics.

The Cass review represents the most thorough review of evidence we have internationally and took several years to complete. I do not support the BMA response and question its motivation and decision in undertaking this review of the Cass report. 

Totally disappointed in the BMA decision – ensuring safety is our prime role , Cass recommends assessing the whole child / person’s needs – it has been widely agreed that it is balanced and well written – why would the BMA suggest otherwise ? The RCPCH endorsed – this BMA decision process is concerning indeed.

I agree with the letter to Prof Banfield. This is an ill-judged and divisive proposal by the BMA.

I am outraged by the BMAs proposed action. I have chaired two NICE guidance committees and would have felt betrayed if the BMA considered themselves able to override the efforts of all those involved in the work. Which sensible doctor would consider the BMA representative of our profession?

I support science and ethical medical practice, not ideological groupthink. Was Wakefield not enough?

Knowing our limitations is a crucial quality for Doctors. The BMA has stepped outside of its limitations in attempting to critique a large body of carefully conducted specialist research. 

This will compromise its ability to represent us doctors.

Really disappointing that the BMA did not consult members about this. It makes me wonder if I can trust the BMA at all now, whether with negotiating pay and conditions for doctors or advocating for patients.

FRCGP. I have resigned BMA membership.

I’m appalled and disappointed that the BMA is not fully supporting the Cass recommendations.

It would be helpful to promote evidence based approach in the practice of medicine and protect the vulnerable people.

I will consider terminating my BMA membership 

I believe more evidence looking at the long term impact of puberty blockers is needed.

Fully support the content of this letter.

Wholly in support of Dr Cass’ evidence based report which acts in the best interests of children and is not ideologically or politically driven.

I am horrified that the BMA is taking this position, the Cass review was an important piece of work to safeguard vulnerable children and this seeks to undermine it.

The BMA leadership is not speaking my opinion on this issue.

I have been a BMA member and this stance would have caused my resignation.

Utterly shocked at BMA’S stance on this issue.

I 100% agree and support the findings of the Cass Report.

I am shocked by the BMA’s unprofessional, partisan and polarising response to the Cass Report.

I am alarmed that this motion was passed and advertised in mainstream media without discussion with members. I do not support it.

I am horrified that the BMA has taken this decision on behalf of their members with little/no consultation and that activists appear to have been allowed to take over.

Ignoring the Cass Review is going to cause immense harm to children.

I am appalled by this move from within the BMA. I do not believe it is representative of the views of the wider profession and it calls the integrity of the BMA and the profession into question.

Shocking behaviour on the part of the BMA council! 

The BMA’s response to the Cass report is unprofessional and brings the profession into disrepute. Those responsible should resign.

The BMA is wrong on this issue and has no role on this issue. If the BMA continues to lobby in an area of healthcare like this in an overtly political way without consideration of the evidence I will withdraw my membership. 

The evidence base should be the overwhelming consideration.

I fully support the Cass review.

Evidence based medicine and systematic review are the foundation on which our practice is built. 

This is not for the BMA to be involved with: you are a trade union, focus on pay and working conditions. 

It is the BMAs serial failure to seek the views of or adequately represent those views of the needs of the profession that have led me to resign my membership this year. Doctors have a responsibility to “first do no harm” and the BMA seem to have forgotten this.

This is likely to be the straw that leads to me leaving the BMA 

“The BMA should not be criticising or seeking to undermine medical colleagues for conducting independent evidence reviews. No evidence of wrongdoing or substantial critique has appeared to justify the BMA’s intervention. 

I am very disappointed by the council’s actions which do not represent the profession.

Thanks for arranging this .

The Cass Report is based on the best evidence available. I do not see why this is a BMA issue and the motion does not represent my views. 

I’ve resigned my BMA membership due to this after 25 years.

The Cass report represents conventional science.

Excellent initiative.

Gender dysphoria is not a fatal condition. Under the principle of “first do no harm”, any active intervention should be based on strong evidence arising from careful peer reviewed studies rather than on the prejudices of anonymous members of some pressure group that has obtained undue influence on an organisation that, in any case, should be attending to other matters. 

Just cancelled my BMA membership.

I have resigned from the BMA because of their opposition to the Cass review and their secrecy.

Dismayed to see a sensible call for evidence based practice being ignored in favour of ideology

Evidence based medicine must be at the heart of what we do, and my experience is that no gender “care” fits this requirement.

Fully supportive of Cass report, outrageous and unacceptable challenge of its findings by BMA

Gender dysphoria is not a fatal condition. Under the principle of “first do no harm”, any active intervention should be based on strong evidence arising from careful peer reviewed studies rather than on the prejudices of anonymous members of some pressure group that has obtained undue influence on an organisation that, in any case, should be attending to other matters. 

How can the public trust us to provide evidence based care if our leaders do not support it? Perhaps the BMA needs to stick with concerning itself to its role as a trade Union and not with activism. 

I am currently a BMA member but will be cancelling my membership over this issue.

I fully support the letter questioning the stance taken by the BMA on the prescription of medications to children that have absolutely no evidence base 

I have resigned from the BMA because of their opposition to the Cass review and their secrecy.

I think trying to undermine the Cass review is not the way forward on this particularly controversial subject. You can disagree with how the government is implementing only some of the recommendations issued by the review, but to question the validity of the review itself is unhelpful to say the least. I can’t willingly contribute to this type of questionable analysis of the evidence, so you should refocus your efforts in a more constructive way or you stand to lose a lot of members.

Echo the point of lack of evidence. On one hand we, as the BMA, question the PA project due to lack of evidence, and yet call for drug therapy that suffers a lack of evidence. Cass review may not be perfect, as no research is, but it appears to be the best we have at the moment. Only better research should supercede it.

I have resigned from the BMA!

I was involved in the care of a child with puberty  blockers and it ended very badly. More research required before use.

I’ve resigned my BMA membership due to this after 25 years

It is important for the long-term safety and well-being of our patients that we practice evidence based care as highlighted by the Cass review. To abandon this is to go against our Hippocratic oath to first do no harm. 

Just cancelled my BMA membership

I am appalled that the BMA seems to be discarding EBM and trying to trash the very thorough Cass Report. As someone who has encountered “gender distress” professionally and also in a close family member,  as well as spending some early years as “gender fluid” myself, I find the eagerness to provide puberty blockers to young children cruel and abusive.                 

The BMA has no authority whatsoever in its presumption to oversee and comment on the findings of the Cass report. It is a trade union representing political opinion on behalf of its members; and only that.

On the global stage, we need to be exemplary in science and its conduct, in clinical methodology and practice, and safeguarding children. In the spotlight now, what will the BMA do?

It is very revealing that this group of self-selected non-specialist individuals of the “BMA”  is arrogantly defying the best scientific evidence. This is not the way of medicine that I have spent the last 40 years promoting. This is shameful

Specialist in the treatment of Gender Dysphoria for the past 24 years and fully support the findings of The Cass Review which was a thorough and evidence based piece of work. To dismiss such an important review would go against medical ethics of ‘first do no harm’ and deny evidence based clinical practice in favour of non-scientific ideological beliefs 

I have been a consultant paediatrician and a national director of the safeguarding service in Wales until I retired in October 2023. I am continuing a research role on child maltreatment with Public Health Wales.      

I am very interested to hear why the BMA considers it “necessary” to undertake a further review of this subject. I have studied the Cass Report and I am very satisfied with its methodology. Accordingly, I am extremely puzzled to understand on what basis the BMA has made this initial decision. 

New drugs should not be tested on children. Children cannot give valid consent to irreversible treatment.  

I find the BMA’s stance on this un-evidence based and incomprehensible. The BMA appears to have been politicised and compromised as a representative body of doctors.

I am deeply concerned about the total lack of involvement of BMA members in the decision making process 

The Cass review is the only one of its kind in the world – an unbiased review into practices around gender care. BMA undermining it in such secretive way is very disappointing .

As an academic consultant psychiatrist who sees children and young people with gender dysphoria and mother of a trans child, I am appalled at the position the BMA has taken, with total disregard for its members and adding fuel to the fire of a toxic debate, which will only harm children and young people. I am considering my resignation after nearly 35 years

It is clear that there is little evidence for treatment to date. I am concerned about a review by BMA that has already shown opposition to the Cass Report. I am concerned that BMA is in opposition to significant royal colleges.            

A disgrace that a political pressure group can try to overturn responsible scientific analysis.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

We need to practice evidence based medicine. Members were not consulted about this vote, the results of which I strongly disagree with.                  

Excellent letter.  Barely believable that this has happened.  Some members of council clearly ideologically captured.  It will make many people question the BMA’s statements on any other topic.

I am dismayed that the BMA (whilst not acting on my behalf as a member) does not wish to implement the evidence based findings of an independent review the basis of which is to provide a sound framework to protect vulnerable children from non-evidence based interventions.

I am surprised, shocked and disappointed about this response from the BMA. As an experienced clinician, working also with all children and young people services across the system (education, LA, health, VCSE) I welcome the Cass Report. With my deep understanding of child and adolescent development I recognise the absolute necessity of the Cass report to protect the health of our population midst complex times. I am considering leaving the BMA due to this.

I totally agree it’s outrageous for the BMA to oppose a study of this nature without any scientific foundation. Shame on the BMA.                

I support the RCPCH position that the Cass report is a very valuable addition to this area and needs to be taken extremely seriously.  These children and young people deserve the absolute best evidence-based care.  Not guesswork.

I’m sorry to see an organisation that has been so supportive to its members to be pursuing a cause that can only be divisive, disruptive and confusing to the population that we serve  

The BMA, if they could not have debated this in an open meeting, should have shelved it. The Council cannot speak for the membership on this.

A representative body is obliged at the very least to be transparent and ideally to have had a consultation process in a contentious area, which this is most certainly

Why depart from evidence based view on a controversial subject without consulting the membership? I feel highjacked by those with an agenda with no evidence of representing doctors and damaging our standing with public in support of dangerous experimentation on children – “do no harm”- even higher standards are demanded for care of children.  

I would like to call for a vote of no confidence in bma leadership. We are funding the bma and they are using our money to act on whim without accountability.

I support this letter as a Consultant Paediatrician of over 30 years and also as a profoundly disappointed BMA member in the BMA leadership and the position they have taken.             

This is an absolute disgrace that BMA council puts news like this out to the media before informing its members. I am very disappointed with council and its membership. There should be a vote of confidence held in council chair and deputy chair for allowing this situation to progress in this fashion. 

The BMAs approach to this seems highly politicised, anti-science and worst of all anti-democratic. The membership deserve full transparency on this issue

Let’s go back to science rather than politics please

Just like in Parliament we know who says what amongst our elected representatives. BMA Council is obliged to publish who proposed this, who seconded this and how Council members voted. Only that will allow BMA members to know whether their views have been properly represented by Council.

I terminated my BMA membership

I recently cancelled my membership of the BMA after 20+ years, making it clear that this was the main reason behind my decision.

The BMA are a disgrace. No consultation. Putting ideology before evidence based assessment. #notinourname

I agree wholeheartedly that the BMA is acting outwith its remit and the wishes of us, its constituent members. This action is neither evidence-based nor in the interests of young people and families.

I recently cancelled my membership of the BMA after 20+ years, making it clear that this was the main reason behind my decision.

I wrote a personal letter to BMA chair and lead for diversity to which I have not received a response

I challenge the BMA stance, actions and need for involvement in this debate. The BMA does not speak for me on this at all. You have not sought my view. There is no mandate to act. Such presumption is reckless, subversive, any and all previous positive actions by the BMA are at risk from this idiotic tactic

This motion represents staggering overreach by the BMA, which has no role in reviewing evidence or clinical standards. It can only be ideologically driven and works against the interests both of clinicians and, most importantly, of patients. I hope that common sense prevails and the decision is reversed as soon as possible.

I was dismayed and concerned by the BMAs decision to conduct a critique of the Cass review. The Cass review has brought a thoughtful clinical approach to the treatment of children and adolescents with gender conflicts and their families. This has counteracted the tendency for the rapid use of puberty blocking drugs preventing the thought and time needed to help young people with gender conflict difficulties.

The first priority of everyone must always be to safeguard children and protect and promote children’ s welfare.

I want compassionate and evidence based care for all. I am fully in support of gender transitioning where it is proven likely to benefit but I do feel that proof needs to be there.