The real Tavistock Clinic scandal: 1,000 court cases that never materialised

In 2022, the UK media went into a feeding frenzy about what it claimed were the disturbing and scandalous events at the Tavistock clinic, which was at that time in the process of being shut down.

There were numerous allegations of negligence, particularly with regards to access to gender affirming care. The Daily Mail referred to Tavistock as a “transing factory” while The Sun called it a “discredited NHS clinic that happily handed out hormone drugs to children”. 

In what may have been the most strongly worded of all of these articles, on 11 August 2022, The Times ran with the headline: “Tavistock gender clinic ‘to be sued by 1,000 families” and the text “The Tavistock gender clinic is facing mass legal action from youngsters who claim they were rushed into taking life-altering puberty blockers.”[subscription required].

This story was picked up on and parroted by dozens of other media outlets, and is still on the internet and presented as fact at the time of writing. So many other sources picked up on this that an AI Google search summarises it as:

“In 2022, international law firm Pogust Goodhead announced it was pursuing a group medical negligence claim against the Tavistock and Portman NHS foundation trust, anticipating that at least 1,000 families will join the action.”

But did the clinic really have an issue with complaints? 

And what happened to the group medical negligence claim?

One way to uncover the truth

In a Freedom of Information (FoI) request to Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust, we asked them:

“With regards to the former Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS).

For the period between 2012 and 2022 please provide the following information.

1) Total number of complaints made about this clinic by parents of trans / non binary minors

2) Number of complaints by families that felt gender affirming care had been provided wrongly or inappropriately

3) Any synopsis of the nature of these complaints would be appreciated but can be omitted if unavailable or if it would make the request arduous

4) Number of complaints persued [sic] via law firm Pogust Goodhead”

Analysing the Tavistock response

Between 2012 and 2022 there were a total of 142 complaints made to the clinic, although the party making the complaint was not recorded.

The number of these where it was felt that gender affirming care was provided wrongly or inappropriately? All of eight. Over a 10-year period, for a clinic that could have up to 12,000 service users (p.9) at any given time.

It is not mentioned if these eight complaints were upheld or not.

An example of one of these complaints is “Concerns about being given information on fertility, not being included in discussions about treatment, unhappy that blockers are not to be prescribed to child until later date.”

Another states “Concerns about support Group not being recommended by GIDS, impact of High Court ruling on starting and remaining on hormone blockers.”

Contrary to press reports about patients being treated inappropriately, from the responses provided under the FoI request, concerns were more likely to be about being able to access and maintain the treatment they wanted.

And the number of complaints being pursued by Pogust Goodhead? 

There are none reported in the FoI response. 

A media storm not supported by the facts

For all the claims by the mainstream media, the hundreds of complaints over inappropriate treatment never existed.

Not one single one of them.

We shared the FoI results with trans ally and MP for Leeds Central and Headingley Alex Sobel. He commented “Thank you very much for taking the time to share this FoI response with me and bringing it to my attention. I agree that it is important to challenge claims that are repeated in the media without evidence, particularly where they risk causing harm or stigma, particularly towards the trans community.”

Although Pogust Goodhead’s website states “We are currently representing families affected by clinical negligence, including those impacted by the widely published failings of paediatric audiology services throughout the United Kingdom and Tavistock Gender Identity Service”, no active case information is currently displayed.

Both The Times and Pogust Goodhead were contacted and asked if they would like to comment on the FoI response. As at time of publication, neither has replied.

The real scandal here was that thousands of children, some of whom would have been diagnosed as trans, lost their healthcare not for any clinical reason, but because of institutional and organised transphobia by the UK government, media and a handful of anti-trans ‘activists’.