Re: Complaint by (NC/11/2019:) Mr Nick Connolly

Date of complaint to Panel: 04/09/19

Article complained of:

Online: “Politicised trans groups put children at risk, says expert”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jul/27/trans-lobby-pressure-
pushing-young-people-to-transition

Print: “Politicised trans groups put children at risk: expert”

Date of publication: 27 July 2019

Decision

Introduction
1. The complainant in this matter is Nick Connolly. In this Decision, the Review
Panel will be referred to as “the Panel”, Mr. Connolly as “the Complainant”
and the Readers Editor” as “RE”. The Panel’s remit is to consider appeals
where the complainant is dissatisfied with the outcome at RE level. The Panel
will only consider whether or not the complaint gives rise to a breach of one or
more of the provisions of the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of
Conduct (“the Code”).

The Articles

2. The Complainant complains about the online and print versions of an article
published in The Observer with the headline “Politicised trans groups put
children at risk, says expert”. The stand first is “Counsellors and other mental
health providers fear being labelled transphobic”. The Article reports the views
expressed by Marcus Evans, a psychotherapist and former governor of the
Tavistock clinic, which provides a gender identity development service
(“GIDS”). Dr Evans resigned from the Tavistock in February 2019 following
the publication of a critical report into the services provided by GIDS, raising
concerns from a number of staff members. The Article also appeared on page
one of the Observer on Sunday 28 July 2019 with substantially the same
headline.

3. The Article is focused on the criticisms expressed by Dr Evans, and

specifically his belief that “the trans political agenda has encroached on the

The Scott Trust Ltd

Registered in England No. 6706464
Registered office: Kings Place, 90 York Way, London N1 9AG

clinical environment surrounding and within the Gender Identity Development
Service”. The Article reports on the rise in the number of children referred to
GIDS since 2013 and quotes from one woman who identified as a trans man
in her teens but had subsequently de-transitioned. The Article quotes Evans
as saying the following about the report written by David Bell, one of the
Tavistock’s former governors:

“’[T]hey reported inadequate assessments, patients pushed through for early medical
interventions and an inability to stand up to pressure from trans lobbies’, Evans said”

4. The following paragraph says:

“A review of Bell’s concerns by the trust did not ‘identify any immediate issues in
relation to patient safety or failings in the overall approach … in responding to the
needs of young people”.

5. The Article includes direct quotes from Evans, which are critical of the
approach taken by the Tavistock, as well as reporting similar concerns held by
others including a report in the Times that the Royal College of Paediatricians
and Child Health had “asked its ethics and law advisory committee to look at
the ethics surrounding the rapid increase in the use of blockers to treat under
16s who identify as transgender.”

6. The Article also includes a detailed statement from the trust that

“GIDS is a thoughtful and safe service. It cares for young people at a

vulnerable time in their lives. Our experience with this group of patients, which
is a highly diverse group, indicates that the choice to do nothing is not
neutral and may lead to significant harm.

The service is thorough and systematic in its approach to exploring with the
young people and families the best way of dealing with their distress and the
implications of different choices”

7. The Article was the subject of a number of complaints. This is one of two such
complaints which has progressed to the Panel from the RE.

Correspondence with the RE

8. The Complainant first contacted the RE by email on 29 July 2019. He alleged

that the Article was inaccurate in the way in which it presented the
circumstances of school counselors and mental health service providers. He
complained that the Article should have been presented as an
editorial/opinion piece rather than a “news” item where it reported only a
The Scott Trust Ltd
Registered in England No. 6706464
Registered office: Kings Place, 90 York Way, London N1 9AG

single side of the argument. He further suggested that the Article breached
Clause 2 of the Code (“right of reply” in that it failed to give school counselors
and mental health service provider groups the opportunity to reply to the
statement that “school counselors and mental health service providers are
bowing to pressures from ‘highly politicized’ transgender groups to affirm
children’s beliefs that they were born the wrong sex”. The complainant also
objected to the use of the phrase ‘trans groups’ on the basis that it fell under
Clause 12 of the Code (“discrimination”).

9. The RE responded on 3 August 2019. The response referred to a previous

version of the headline which had been published on Twitter and which had
been the subject of a significant volume of other complaints. In relation to the
substance of the Article, the RE noted the public interest in reporting on
transgender issues and that the views expressed in the Article were clearly
presented as the views of one individual. The Article was a reasonable
expression of an alternative view and did not necessarily reflect the stance
taken by The Observer. However, the RE drew the Complainant’s attention to
the possibility of submitting a letter in response.

10. The Complainant responded by email on 4 August 2019 expressing

dissatisfaction with the RE’s response. In particular, he noted that this was not
an opinion piece published by the Observer1 but a story presented as a news
story. He suggested that Dr Evans’ claim had been taken at face value, was
not the first time such claims have been made and that the Observer had
failed to properly scrutinize the views expressed by him and as reported in the
Article. The Complainant said there was no basis upon which to make the
claim that children were being ‘put at risk’ by ‘politicized trans groups’ and that
it was both inaccurate and discriminatory to report the views of Dr Evans in
this manner.

11. The Complainant on 15 August 2019 requested that the matter be referred to
the Panel.

Complaint to the Panel

12. The Panel received a completed complaint form from the Complainant on 4
September 2019.2 He complains under Clauses 1, 2, and 12 of the Code.

1
Note, the Complainant refers throughout to The Guardian. The Panel notes that the Article was in fact
2
Through no fault of the Complainant, the initial form sent to the Panel was blank. When the Panel pointed
this out to the Complainant he quickly rectified the matter.

The Scott Trust Ltd

Registered in England No. 6706464
Registered office: Kings Place, 90 York Way, London N1 9AG


Relevant aspects of the Code

13. Clause of the Code is headed “Accuracy” and provides as follows:

“Accuracy

a. The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or

distorted information, including pictures;

b. A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion once

recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and
- where appropriate - an apology published. In cases involving the
Commission, prominence should be agreed with the PCC in advance.”

c. The Press, whilst free to be partisan, must distinguish clearly between

comment, conjecture and fact;3

[…]

14. Clause 2 “Opportunity to Reply” provides as follows:

“A fair opportunity to reply to inaccuracies must be given when

reasonably called for”

15. Clause 12 of the Code “Discrimination” provides in relevant part as follows:

“The press must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an

individual’s race, colour, gender, sexual orientation or to any physical
or mental illness or disability”.

Discussion
16. The Panel is tasked with consideration of whether there has been a breach of
one or more of the relevant provisions of the Code. It cannot consider any
matter beyond this. A disagreement in viewpoint between a publication and its
readers will not necessarily mean that the Code has been breached. In this
regard, the Panel notes that the Article is a news item, reporting on the
concerns expressed by a former Governor of Tavistock GIDS. As the

3
Emphasis supplied.

The Scott Trust Ltd

Registered in England No. 6706464
Registered office: Kings Place, 90 York Way, London N1 9AG

Complainant pointed out in his response to the RE, this is not the first time
such concerns have been expressed and reported on. There is a distinction
between accurately reporting views, with which others may disagree or say
there is no evidence of, and reporting without any question or balance views
which are obviously inaccurate or misleading. The Complainant is of course
correct to point out that reporting should be fair and accurate and take care
not to express pejorative views of a person’s gender, race, sexual orientation
or mental or physical illness.

17. In this case, the Panel takes into account the controversial and sensitive
nature of the subject matter, the status of Dr Evans who in its view may
reasonably be described as an “expert”, and the fact that the Article contains
a detailed and extensive rebuttal of his concerns by the Trust. In the Panel’s
view, it is important to note that the Article is not discussing whether or not
transgender children should be assisted and supported in transitioning or in
their preferred gender identity. What the Article is reporting, are concerns
raised first in a report which led to Dr Evans’ resignation as well as concerns
raised by him (and others) about the adequacy of the assessment process
and what was – in his view – a tendency to bow to pressure from pro trans
rights lobbyists which led to an increase in the number of young people
wishing to transition and being medically assisted in so doing by the Tavistock
GIDS. The Panel notes that this is based on his own experience as a former
governor at the Tavistock.

18. The “risk” identified in the headline and further described in the Article relates
to the concern identified by Dr Evans and others that the overly politicized and
polarized nature of the subject matter has the potential to put children at risk
because of a fear on the part of professionals that speaking out will label them
“transphobic”. It includes a response from the Trust but not from any other
group. In this regard, the Panel notes that the right to reply does not mean
that the press must include a response from every individual or group who
may be affected by the content of an article. The focus of the Article is on the
service provided by the Tavistock NHS Trust. It was therefore both
appropriate and reasonable to include a detailed reply from the Trust, which
strongly disputes the concerns raised by Evans. The Article also points out
that some have in fact criticized the Tavistock GIDS for taking too long to
provide support and treatment to young people. The Panel also notes the
opportunity afforded via the mechanism of letters to the editor to reply to
issues reported by the Observer. This was highlighted by the RE in his
response to the Complainant. Overall, the Panel considers that the Article is
sufficiently balanced, although its focus is reporting on the concerns
expressed by Evans.

The Scott Trust Ltd

Registered in England No. 6706464
Registered office: Kings Place, 90 York Way, London N1 9AG

19. The Panel does not consider that the Observer should have been aware that
the views expressed by Dr Evans were so ill-founded as to be inaccurate but
in any event, the Article provides a counter to those views through the
statement provided by the Trust. It also includes the Trust’s own internal
findings which did not identify any concerns of the sort raised by Dr Evans.
The Panel also notes that Dr Evans is not the only professional to have
expressed concerns of this nature. The complainant suggests that the
Observer simply took Dr Evans’ views at face value whereas in fact other
professionals such as Dr Kirsty Entwistle's raised similar concerns about
GIDS in Leeds, and David Bell raised concerns from ten members of staff at
the Tavistock. The Article makes reference to these individuals, as well as the
general increase in the number of children referred to GIDS, the report from
BBC’s Newsnight that there was an apparent increase in thoughts of suicide
and self-harm on the part of the young people taking hormone blockers and
the request by the Royal College of Paediatricians and Child Health that its
ethics and law advisory committee look into the ethics surrounding the
increase in the use of hormone blockers in the under-16s.

20. The press must be free to report on matters of public interest provided it does
so in a fair and balanced manner. It must “take care not to publish inaccurate,
misleading or distorted information”. In this case, the Panel is satisfied that the
Article does not simply adopt the views of Dr Evans as its own and is
balanced and fair in how it has reported those views. These concerns were
first raised in an internal report and have been reported upon elsewhere,
including in the Guardian.

21. As to whether the tone of the Article and in particular the phrase “trans
groups” gives rise to a breach of Clause 12, the Panel does not consider that
the Article has written in a pejorative manner about any individual’s gender,
race, sexual orientation or physical or mental illness. The use of the phrases
“trans groups” or “trans lobbies” in the Article does not appear to the Panel to
fall short of what is required in Clause 12, particularly when taken in the
context of the Article as a whole.

22. The Panel also reminds itself of Guardian News and Media’s Code of Practice
which refers to “fairness” and in particular the following: “The voice of
opponents no less than of friends has a right to be heard . . . It is well be to be
frank; it is even better to be fair” (CP Scott, 1921). The Panel considers it
essential that the Observer is able to report on views which may be contrary
to its own or of many of its readers. The Panel is satisfied that it has done so
responsibly in this case and does not find there to have been any breach of
the Code.

The Scott Trust Ltd

Registered in England No. 6706464
Registered office: Kings Place, 90 York Way, London N1 9AG


Dated: 18/12/19

Signed:

John Willis, Chair review panel.

Signed:

Elinor Goodman, panel member.

Signed:

Geraldine Proudler, panel member

The Scott Trust Ltd

Registered in England No. 6706464
Registered office: Kings Place, 90 York Way, London N1 9AG