Kids under 16 are only doing anything at the urging of somebody else, probably an adult - or their peer who in turn has some creeper influencing them.

So "without parental consent" just means groomers have more control of the kids than parents.

“The court was not in a position to generalize about the capability of persons of different ages to understand what is necessary for them to be competent to consent to the administration of puberty blockers,” the Lord Chief Justice Lord Burnett, with Sir. Geoffrey Vos and Lady Justice King, said in the judgment, The Times reported. “It placed patients, parents and clinicians in a very difficult position.”

Oh, it puts them in a 'very difficult position' to use some fucking common sense?

Pedophile fucks.

Parents should get rid of such doctors. It is a moral duty.

Already posted it, but my editorialized title probably hid that. #MoreFeminineWay

Here's the archive I used, if it's any use.

https://archive.vn/ROvjb

I can't say I'm surprised. The original decision to ban it was more surprising. The United Femdom is never on the right side of anything.

Maybe they weighed up whether it would harm boys or girls more for a while before making their decision.

next up: forced circumcisions of babies, for the medical benefits

Thomas have never seen such bullshit

Puberty blockers: "Male puberty is irreversible! Reeee!"

Sports: "Testosterone suppression of post-pubescent males makes you just as weak as a woman! Reeee!"