The Family Court of Australia’s Judge Andrew Strum has criticised Dr Michelle Telfer and the Royal Children’s Hospital in Melbourne over their gender guidelines in what has been described as Australia’s “Tavistock moment”.

This refers to the scandal in 2022, when Britain’s National Health Service shuttered the Tavistock Centre, its only dedicated gender identity clinic for children and young people. 

This came after the independent review led by Dr Hilary Cass, which found the clinic’s method of gender treatment left young people “at considerable risk” of poor mental health and distress.

The ‘Cass Review’, and the closing of the Tavistock clinic, were counted by many as the beginning of the end of the institutionalised radical gender treatment offered to children and young people in Britain, which included the use of puberty blockers.

A similar story may now, finally, be about to unfold in Australia. 

In April the Family Court decided the Re Devin case, which involved a 12-year-old boy who sought to be administered puberty blockers. This was supported by his mother but against the wishes of the father.

The judgement, which was described as the “beginning of the end” for the practice of prescribing puberty blockers in Australia, was extraordinary in itself, but the identities of the clinic and the key expert witness supporting the mother were kept confidential at the time. 

Now, after a petition by The Australian, the judge has agreed that transparency in this case is in the “interests of the public” and will enable people to assess the validity and reliability of the expert’s opinion and the clinic’s practice.

Dr Michelle Telfer is head of medicine at Melbourne’s Royal Children’s Hospital, and wrote what the hospital describes as the ‘best practice’ guidelines for the treatment of trans-identifying children.

These guidelines include “the administration of puberty blockers, ‘gender-affirming’ hormones and even double mastectomies for girls once they reach 16. Incredibly, Telfer’s Melbourne RCH accepts three-year-olds for treatment.”

But Justice Strum harshly criticised the guidelines, noting they did not have “have the approval … of the Commonwealth or any state or territory government, including any such government or minister … or department of health”. 

“I do not accept that the child, at this age and pre-pubertal stage in life, can properly understand the implications, and potential risks, of puberty blockers”, he wrote in his landmark decision in the case. 

“The child is still a child, and not even, if it matters, a teenager”, he said.

He also suggested Dr Telfer’s characterisation of the guidelines as “best practice” was “tantamount to her agreeing with herself”, given her role in their development and the lack of governmental approval.

This judgement may indeed lead to an unravelling of the ‘affirmation’ model of treatment currently being adhered to across Australia. 

Melbourne’s Royal Children’s Hospital saw a surge of minors claiming to experience gender dysphoria, reaching as many as 1000 in 2022. Thousands of children have been prescribed puberty blockers – many in instances where Judge Strum noted that there were “no alternative treatment options” offered.

These comments by Justice Strum reflect a major vindication for Queensland child and adolescent psychiatrist Dr Jillian Spencer, who was stood down from her position at the Queensland Children’s Hospital for questioning the use of puberty blockers on children.

Only time will tell if this is Australia’s ‘Tavistock’ moment, but it appears the trend at the moment is finally moving in an encouraging direction.