The Tavistock didn't believe in objective truth. Alexi Rosenfeld/Getty Images
![](https://unherd.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Kathleen-100x100.jpeg)
For years, the seeds of the Tavistock’s downfall have been hiding in plain sight, as a picture has slowly emerged of its clinicians doling out harmful drugs to gender-confused youth as if they were sweets. At the same time, though, a more subtle clue to the clinic’s endemic dysfunction has been contained in the generic communications that followed each new crisis.
“Thoughtful” is a self-description that crops up repeatedly. In response to critical reporting from Newsnight in 2019, the clinic’s Gender Identity Development Service insisted that it was “a thoughtful and safe service”. When Keira Bell and others took their case to the High Court a year later, arguing that under-16s could not give informed consent to puberty blockers, a GIDS spokesperson replied obstinately that theirs was “a safe and thoughtful service”. And when the Care Quality Commission rated the service as “inadequate”, the Tavistock’s ensuing statement defensively began: “The first thing to say is that GIDS has a long track record of thoughtful and high-quality care.”
Alongside this manic insistence on thoughtfulness, there has also been a marked tendency to engage in special pleading about the especially difficult and highly contested cultural position the service occupies. For instance, in response to the damning CQC report, CEO Paul Jenkins replied that GIDS “has found itself in the middle of a cultural and political battleground”. And to the news of the closure last week, a spokesperson commented, with the air of someone sighing heavily: “Over the last couple of years, our staff… have worked tirelessly and under intense scrutiny in a difficult climate.”
Presumably what they really mean by this is that, as is now known, for several years GIDS has been caught between the emotionally blackmailing demands of transactivist organisations such as Mermaids and GIRES, talking constantly about suicide risk and lobbying hard for yet more relaxed attitudes to medicalising children, and the criticisms of those who profoundly object to the notion of a “trans child” in the first place. Former employees such as Susan Evans have reported the historical influence of Mermaids and GIRES on managers at the service, despite their lack of formal medical expertise and the possession of clearly vested interests.
Now, you might think that it is the job of a healthcare provider — and especially one who dispenses medication to children — to try to remove itself from current furores, social trends, and pressure from political activists, and to just get on with providing evidence-based medicine according to whatever gold-standard methodology is available at the time. And you might also think that while being thoughtful is all very well in a medical provider, you don’t exactly want them to emulate Hamlet. But to apply these earthbound medical standards to GIDS is to fail to recognise some of the distinctive and converging influences on the service that have led to the unholy mess we now see.
A crucial yet underappreciated part of the story is the clinic’s strong emphasis on psychoanalysis and psychodynamic approaches to mental health. The founder of the Tavistock, Hugh Crichton-Miller, was explicitly influenced by Freud and Jung. And when Domenico Di Ceglie founded the Gender Identity Service for children in 1989, later commissioned nationally as the only English NHS provider, he too was heavily influenced by psychoanalytic methods.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThanks for the good read. One thing that is not at all clear to me is how so many intelligent individuals found it completely ok to perform irreversible sexual reassignment surgery on children. Could it be related to Hannah Arendt’s description of Eichmann at the time of the Nuremberg trials:
Maybe the real enemy is institutionalized thinking.
The real enemy is large American pharmaceutical companies pushing these off licence drugs and that have been found to be responsible for funding the toxic mess of lobbyists, activists and ‘research’ dominating the area. What’s chemically castrating a few thousand kids when there are new markets to build and frontiers to extend?
Sure the pharma co’s are along for the ride – they’ll sell anything to anyone and perfectly demonstrate the banality of evil. If there is an enemy here it is the gender-baiters who are just the same soldiers of the left who have so far failed to whip up a race war in USA or a “greens” versus humanity war in both European and ANZAC nations. I think of them more as criminals, some insane, who unlike Eichmann or pharma sales execs do indeed present as monsters. Anyone trying to re-hash Charles Manson’s lifes work couldn’t be anything else.
Sure the pharma co’s are along for the ride – they’ll sell anything to anyone and perfectly demonstrate the banality of evil. If there is an enemy here it is the gender-baiters who are just the same soldiers of the left who have so far failed to whip up a race war in USA or a “greens” versus humanity war in both European and ANZAC nations. I think of them more as criminals, some insane, who unlike Eichmann or pharma sales execs do indeed present as monsters. Anyone trying to re-hash Charles Manson’s lifes work couldn’t be anything else.
I share your puzzlement. The presence in the ruminations of Wren of her interpretations of specific ideas of Rorty and Foucault, and then Wren’s application of her ideas is something I wish Stock would seriously deconstruct as to its ontological falsity.
I think there is a weaponised narrative in the ether regarding ‘transgenderism’, that sees it as something that is a true feature of reality rather than a psychological issue of self perception. As Wren writes; In our time, it is hard to see any knowledge or understanding as ‘mirroring’ nature, or ‘mirroring’ reality.” She concludes: “There is an implication here for our work in gender identity clinics: that we are in the business of helping actively to construct the idea and the understanding of transgender,… .
I think that idea is now the entrenched narrative, such that the law can be effected by it and public discussions critical of it can lead to loss of employment and social cancellations with its effect also in the abuse and corruption of language.
Oh, I think this is absolutely the case. Institutional thinking is very persuasive.
Once a cult-ure embraces “no fault” divorce, the Pill, abortion and sodomy as a natural behavior then there is no argument to be made coherently for our actual human biology. We are seeing our faces in the reflective waters of this pool of transgression.
I disagree.
But what _has_ happened over the last sixty or so years is that with good contraception, easily available abortion and a liberalisation around gay sex is that ‘sex’ as an activity has become totally divorced from sex as a means of reproduction.
Sex is now overwhelmingly about ‘recreation’ rather than ‘procreation’. So ‘changing your sex’ is just an extension of the recreational thing. ‘Trans’ makes no sense in any biological/evolutionary path, but is only individually recreational.
I disagree.
But what _has_ happened over the last sixty or so years is that with good contraception, easily available abortion and a liberalisation around gay sex is that ‘sex’ as an activity has become totally divorced from sex as a means of reproduction.
Sex is now overwhelmingly about ‘recreation’ rather than ‘procreation’. So ‘changing your sex’ is just an extension of the recreational thing. ‘Trans’ makes no sense in any biological/evolutionary path, but is only individually recreational.
The real enemy is large American pharmaceutical companies pushing these off licence drugs and that have been found to be responsible for funding the toxic mess of lobbyists, activists and ‘research’ dominating the area. What’s chemically castrating a few thousand kids when there are new markets to build and frontiers to extend?
I share your puzzlement. The presence in the ruminations of Wren of her interpretations of specific ideas of Rorty and Foucault, and then Wren’s application of her ideas is something I wish Stock would seriously deconstruct as to its ontological falsity.
I think there is a weaponised narrative in the ether regarding ‘transgenderism’, that sees it as something that is a true feature of reality rather than a psychological issue of self perception. As Wren writes; In our time, it is hard to see any knowledge or understanding as ‘mirroring’ nature, or ‘mirroring’ reality.” She concludes: “There is an implication here for our work in gender identity clinics: that we are in the business of helping actively to construct the idea and the understanding of transgender,… .
I think that idea is now the entrenched narrative, such that the law can be effected by it and public discussions critical of it can lead to loss of employment and social cancellations with its effect also in the abuse and corruption of language.
Oh, I think this is absolutely the case. Institutional thinking is very persuasive.
Once a cult-ure embraces “no fault” divorce, the Pill, abortion and sodomy as a natural behavior then there is no argument to be made coherently for our actual human biology. We are seeing our faces in the reflective waters of this pool of transgression.
Thanks for the good read. One thing that is not at all clear to me is how so many intelligent individuals found it completely ok to perform irreversible sexual reassignment surgery on children. Could it be related to Hannah Arendt’s description of Eichmann at the time of the Nuremberg trials:
Maybe the real enemy is institutionalized thinking.
Both Julian Farrows and R Wright have hit on some of the problems with the Tavistock and GIDS in particular.
Group think is so prevalent around this whole Psycholgy/Psychotherapy area. I was a Psychotherapist and worked within the NHS and privately for a good number of years. I was lucky, I found some sound mentors, but witnessed over the years at conferences and various meetings a strange dogma between different groupings. Think Peoples Front of Judea, and I am not exaggerating.
Psychodynamic versus, Cognitive Behavioural, Kleinian versus Jungian etc. To me, too many people forgot the following word in all these THEORY. A strong subset believed and acted as if all these theories were absolute, true and not to be questioned. To be “in” someone had to support vehemently their truth. Those who rose to any position of power were the strongest believers. This, to me, is the group think that infected the Tavistock.
The Tavistock people were always very sniffy about anyone from one of the other disciplines and it is not much of a leap to go full hardcore on gender.
And on Pharmaceuticals a lot has been written about anti-depressants and that no one knew they were depressed until there was a “cure”. Similarly would there even have been a GIDS without some pills to give?
Andrew, both my parents were mental health professionals, and what struck me over a lifetime of listening to them is that a good deal of how the profession works is akin to wandering around in a fog and pretending they KNOW the way out. The reason being many of the treatments are like you say about this issue, merely theories.
Now if you move on to the transgender issue at its core (not all the other things which have jumped on the raft), where people suffer dysphoria and about 5,000 people between 2004 and 2018 pursued re-assignment. In the end, it’s a self-diagnosis.
So put self-diagnosis with those who have any number of other agendas and the road to chaos in my mind is easily understood.
Most people have dysphoria triggers at either 4/5 when their identity becomes clear (Jan Morris) or at puberty 11/12 when they look down two pathways at how to express the onset of a sexual impulse and in Caroline Cossey’s case, she knew she was not gay or masculine. However, because the vast majority of people are in a state of flux between 11 and 21 (somewhat arbitrary ages) common sense tells you the chance of drawing a line in the sand when it’s still shifting for the vast majority is entirely wrong. I accept that gender dysphoria is real for a handful of people and an even smaller number will be happier when they transition but that has to wait until as an adult you have rejected every other option.
I might have taken the view some years ago that this current movement came from the notion that the road to hell is paved with good intentions but I think not. It’s part of the great deconstruction and so many de—
Andrew, both my parents were mental health professionals, and what struck me over a lifetime of listening to them is that a good deal of how the profession works is akin to wandering around in a fog and pretending they KNOW the way out. The reason being many of the treatments are like you say about this issue, merely theories.
Now if you move on to the transgender issue at its core (not all the other things which have jumped on the raft), where people suffer dysphoria and about 5,000 people between 2004 and 2018 pursued re-assignment. In the end, it’s a self-diagnosis.
So put self-diagnosis with those who have any number of other agendas and the road to chaos in my mind is easily understood.
Most people have dysphoria triggers at either 4/5 when their identity becomes clear (Jan Morris) or at puberty 11/12 when they look down two pathways at how to express the onset of a sexual impulse and in Caroline Cossey’s case, she knew she was not gay or masculine. However, because the vast majority of people are in a state of flux between 11 and 21 (somewhat arbitrary ages) common sense tells you the chance of drawing a line in the sand when it’s still shifting for the vast majority is entirely wrong. I accept that gender dysphoria is real for a handful of people and an even smaller number will be happier when they transition but that has to wait until as an adult you have rejected every other option.
I might have taken the view some years ago that this current movement came from the notion that the road to hell is paved with good intentions but I think not. It’s part of the great deconstruction and so many de—
Both Julian Farrows and R Wright have hit on some of the problems with the Tavistock and GIDS in particular.
Group think is so prevalent around this whole Psycholgy/Psychotherapy area. I was a Psychotherapist and worked within the NHS and privately for a good number of years. I was lucky, I found some sound mentors, but witnessed over the years at conferences and various meetings a strange dogma between different groupings. Think Peoples Front of Judea, and I am not exaggerating.
Psychodynamic versus, Cognitive Behavioural, Kleinian versus Jungian etc. To me, too many people forgot the following word in all these THEORY. A strong subset believed and acted as if all these theories were absolute, true and not to be questioned. To be “in” someone had to support vehemently their truth. Those who rose to any position of power were the strongest believers. This, to me, is the group think that infected the Tavistock.
The Tavistock people were always very sniffy about anyone from one of the other disciplines and it is not much of a leap to go full hardcore on gender.
And on Pharmaceuticals a lot has been written about anti-depressants and that no one knew they were depressed until there was a “cure”. Similarly would there even have been a GIDS without some pills to give?
Occam’s razor might suggest these doctors are ghoulish maniacs
Occam’s razor might suggest these doctors are ghoulish maniacs
Puberty blockers are analogous to putting a child under general anaesthetic then claiming they can ask to be woken up if they change their minds.
Clever! May I use this analogy, Melissa? and, if I may ask, did you coin it yourself?
Clever! May I use this analogy, Melissa? and, if I may ask, did you coin it yourself?
Puberty blockers are analogous to putting a child under general anaesthetic then claiming they can ask to be woken up if they change their minds.
V much appreciate Kathleen’s writing.
A linked discussion point – is it the neuroscience consensus now that the brain doesn’t stop growing/reach maturity until one’s early 20s? How much therefore we risk dabbling before then?
With 90 billion neurones, or something similar, in every brain, and the interconnections running into the trillions we know we remain very much in the foothills of neuroscience. Will a growing biological canon of research squeeze the more psychological interpretations? One can see elements of that already.
There is so much we do not yet understand. One feels therefore that humility has to accompany all consideration in this field.
V much appreciate Kathleen’s writing.
A linked discussion point – is it the neuroscience consensus now that the brain doesn’t stop growing/reach maturity until one’s early 20s? How much therefore we risk dabbling before then?
With 90 billion neurones, or something similar, in every brain, and the interconnections running into the trillions we know we remain very much in the foothills of neuroscience. Will a growing biological canon of research squeeze the more psychological interpretations? One can see elements of that already.
There is so much we do not yet understand. One feels therefore that humility has to accompany all consideration in this field.
“The Tavistock didn’t believe in objective truth.”
Neither does the British Government. Only this week the Civil Service announced additional security clearance for “trans and non-binary staff” in order that they could “bring their whole selves to work.”
The Tavistock is a jaw-dropping horror story and the biggest medical scandal in decades, but will it be reported accordingly? Will the Tavistock be acknowledged as a grotesque warning of what can happen when objective truth is denied? I’m afraid I don’t hold out much hope of that in a country whose Government institutions pander to the most ludicrous rejection of objective truth (and biological reality), and where the bulk of the media is terrified to admit what’s happening.
“The Tavistock didn’t believe in objective truth.”
Neither does the British Government. Only this week the Civil Service announced additional security clearance for “trans and non-binary staff” in order that they could “bring their whole selves to work.”
The Tavistock is a jaw-dropping horror story and the biggest medical scandal in decades, but will it be reported accordingly? Will the Tavistock be acknowledged as a grotesque warning of what can happen when objective truth is denied? I’m afraid I don’t hold out much hope of that in a country whose Government institutions pander to the most ludicrous rejection of objective truth (and biological reality), and where the bulk of the media is terrified to admit what’s happening.
As ever, right on the nail!
As ever, right on the nail!
It’s commonly said that all shrinks are, themselves, nutters.
I suspect much truth is to be found in this.
It’s commonly said that all shrinks are, themselves, nutters.
I suspect much truth is to be found in this.
This is a brilliant, insightful, piece. It really shows the intellectually dubious stress on creation and fluidity of meaning and identity. It will be interesting to see if, at some stage in the future, some of the key people at GIDs may face disqualification or worse for the harm they have done to children.
This is a brilliant, insightful, piece. It really shows the intellectually dubious stress on creation and fluidity of meaning and identity. It will be interesting to see if, at some stage in the future, some of the key people at GIDs may face disqualification or worse for the harm they have done to children.
It is evident that the Tavistock was being run by a bunch of queers and perverts who appear to have no problem in indoctrinating and harming children and this is people who have no children themselves , have never raised their own . Just listening to the way they speak shows them up for what they are .
Evil degenerate perverts who could not believe their luck
The eventual bill when the class action(s) concludes will run into hundreds of millions
I disagree. To me they are sadly just an over-clever bunch of nutters. Not evil, just confused in their own thinking … to the point that the very useful concept of ‘common sense’ has been abandoned.
(On common sense. Way back, I got banned by the moderators at the Guardian for suggesting that if face-to-face with a trans woman who insisted he, or she<polite pronoun>, was a woman I would use the common sense vernacular and say “What? You call yerself a bird? Pull the other one! ….Mate!”.)
I might say something similar and moreover, if any mentally ill trans woman were to accuses me of misgendering them, I would tell them they are misgendering themselves. I am being a realist and I refuse to give into their delusional narcissistic fetishism.
delusional narcissistic fetishism.
Love it! I will use that expression myself…
delusional narcissistic fetishism.
Love it! I will use that expression myself…
I might say something similar and moreover, if any mentally ill trans woman were to accuses me of misgendering them, I would tell them they are misgendering themselves. I am being a realist and I refuse to give into their delusional narcissistic fetishism.
Evil degenerate perverts who could not believe their luck
The eventual bill when the class action(s) concludes will run into hundreds of millions
I disagree. To me they are sadly just an over-clever bunch of nutters. Not evil, just confused in their own thinking … to the point that the very useful concept of ‘common sense’ has been abandoned.
(On common sense. Way back, I got banned by the moderators at the Guardian for suggesting that if face-to-face with a trans woman who insisted he, or she<polite pronoun>, was a woman I would use the common sense vernacular and say “What? You call yerself a bird? Pull the other one! ….Mate!”.)
It is evident that the Tavistock was being run by a bunch of queers and perverts who appear to have no problem in indoctrinating and harming children and this is people who have no children themselves , have never raised their own . Just listening to the way they speak shows them up for what they are .
A most appropriate metaphor. The Italian for mermaids is sirene.
A most appropriate metaphor. The Italian for mermaids is sirene.
I’ll toss this remark of mine as a “Please discuss”…..
Now society has adjusted the word ‘marriage’ to include a union between two people of the same sex – something _some_ people may find as absolutely ridiculous as it seperates marriage away from the social aspects of procreation/the raising of children/the care of the elderly by their now grown children, and the like, has this change of the meaning of ‘marriage’ opened up the space to change the meaning of sex (in the sense that sex is male or female)?
Please discuss!
No, it hasn’t – even if you disagree with same-sex marrage.
No, it hasn’t – even if you disagree with same-sex marrage.
I’ll toss this remark of mine as a “Please discuss”…..
Now society has adjusted the word ‘marriage’ to include a union between two people of the same sex – something _some_ people may find as absolutely ridiculous as it seperates marriage away from the social aspects of procreation/the raising of children/the care of the elderly by their now grown children, and the like, has this change of the meaning of ‘marriage’ opened up the space to change the meaning of sex (in the sense that sex is male or female)?
Please discuss!
This is IMO a bit of a weird piece of writing. First, ‘The Tavistock’ is usually the name given to ‘The Tavistock Centre’ – the main locus of psychoanalytic thinking/treatment in the NHS, where the Tavistock and Portman NHS trust is based. There are lots of different services offered by the trust – but Stock is instead here just writing about the Tavistock GIDS Clinic but misleadingly calling it ‘The Tavistock’. Second, some of the strongest criticisms of the GIDS clinic – and the concerns that were raised over the last few years – came precisely from the psychoanalytic practitioners of the Tavistock! (think David Bell and the whistleblowers Marcus and Sue Evans). The concerns were precisely about the lack of depth psychological thinking, and the prevalence instead of concrete thinking, going on in the GIDS. (A good book-length psychoanalytically based consideration of gender dysphoria is given by the Evans’s in their new book Gender Dysphoria.) I don’t think you could get things more backwards than chalking up the thoughtlessness and ideological capture of the Tavi GIDS to the psychoanalytic heritage of the Tavistock Centre.
I checked out the recommended ‘Gender Dysphoria’ (Sue Evans) on Amazon.
The publication itself may be of use and interest, but then Amazon took me to ‘also may be of interest’ pages and there is dangerous stuff there; picture books for small confused children with comic characters, telling them their delusion (because it is a delusion) is real and they are this delusion, not what they actually are in reality. And this delusion is a truth.
God help us!
BTW. I have bought a copy of Gender Dysphoria by Sue Evans.
BTW. I have bought a copy of Gender Dysphoria by Sue Evans.
I checked out the recommended ‘Gender Dysphoria’ (Sue Evans) on Amazon.
The publication itself may be of use and interest, but then Amazon took me to ‘also may be of interest’ pages and there is dangerous stuff there; picture books for small confused children with comic characters, telling them their delusion (because it is a delusion) is real and they are this delusion, not what they actually are in reality. And this delusion is a truth.
God help us!
This is IMO a bit of a weird piece of writing. First, ‘The Tavistock’ is usually the name given to ‘The Tavistock Centre’ – the main locus of psychoanalytic thinking/treatment in the NHS, where the Tavistock and Portman NHS trust is based. There are lots of different services offered by the trust – but Stock is instead here just writing about the Tavistock GIDS Clinic but misleadingly calling it ‘The Tavistock’. Second, some of the strongest criticisms of the GIDS clinic – and the concerns that were raised over the last few years – came precisely from the psychoanalytic practitioners of the Tavistock! (think David Bell and the whistleblowers Marcus and Sue Evans). The concerns were precisely about the lack of depth psychological thinking, and the prevalence instead of concrete thinking, going on in the GIDS. (A good book-length psychoanalytically based consideration of gender dysphoria is given by the Evans’s in their new book Gender Dysphoria.) I don’t think you could get things more backwards than chalking up the thoughtlessness and ideological capture of the Tavi GIDS to the psychoanalytic heritage of the Tavistock Centre.