Taxpayer-funded study promotes gender ideology to 5-year-olds

The James Lind Alliance (JLA) has been accused of peddling gender ideology in a survey of gender-confused children as young as five.

Canvassing the views of 5 to 17-year-olds in Britain, JLA asked participants for “questions you would like answered by research to help improve support and care” for “young gender diverse people”.

The pro-trans project is funded by the Department of Health and Social Care through the National Institute for Health and Care Research.

‘Non binary’

JLA describes itself as “a group of young gender diverse adults, parents, health and care professionals”.

The survey asked children who have “experienced gender diversity” to submit “a question, idea or experience” under the heading “Things that matter to me are…”

At the end of the survey, children were asked to indicate their gender; options included Male, Female, Non binary, I am not sure, and Other.

Children under the age of 14 only had to tick a box to indicate they had parental permission to complete the survey.

Echo chamber

A JLA spokesman claimed the survey was designed “to gather a broad spectrum of views” and “no perspectives are excluded from contributing to the consultation exercise.”

But Fiona McAnena, Director of Campaigns at Sex Matters, questioned the “neutrality” of the research. She said: “Rather than building on the findings of the Cass Review of health services for gender-distressed children, it uses made-up concepts like ‘gender diverse’ – which is not a medical term”.

She added: “Then there is the biggest fail of all: the study does not record the sex of respondents. The team behind this research needs to revisit the Cass Review urgently and redesign their work to take its considerations – as well as basic safeguarding – into account.”

Stephanie Davies-Arai of campaign group Transgender Trend said: “NHS England must purge the activists and ideologues from the research for the new clinics if they are to be safe for children. The research as it stands seems to be designed to reinforce activist views.”