Seòmar agus comataidhean

Dr Neal, I see that you are nodding, and I acknowledge what you said earlier. Is there a way to stop the courts from moving the definition on without a parliamentary change to primary legislation? Is there a way to keep the definition tight?

I refer people to my entry in the register of members’ interests as a practising national health service general practitioner, and I note that I chaired the steering group for the bill.

May I pick up a bit more about training, please? Professor White, you said that there is a baseline of knowledge. Is there a requirement for an annual review or oversight of the training?

What is the minimum age for eligibility?

Why was 18 chosen as the number? That might have been because of what you have just said.

With my final question, I want to focus on workload. Obviously, your system is very different from ours. Here in the United Kingdom, we do not charge. How many people per capita would you say go through the assisted dying process? I do not mean how many complete the process; how many at least start the process? If we had that information, that would help us to work out what that would mean for the workload over here.

Is a different amount of training required for the different parts of what happens? For example, is there a bespoke version of the training for your care co-ordinator or the doctor who would administer the medications?

I have a question about workload. In Australia, is assisted dying something that is provided by independent practitioners who perform that role in particular, or is it added on to the role that, for example, a general practitioner would perform here?

Good morning. I remind the committee of my entry in the register of members’ interests, which states that I am a practising NHS general practitioner.

Professor Smith, you have said today that we need more evidence in this area. You have also said:

“The Cass Review highlighted that the evidence for prescribing gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) analogue to suppress puberty is inadequate and the risk of short- or long-term harm remains uncertain.”

My question to you, therefore, is this. Why were we allowed to get in a position in which such medication was given to children, even though, according to your own words, the knowledge about it is uncertain and inadequate?

I want to ask two questions, if I may.

Building on Emma Harper’s questions, I note that Professor Ellis said that the MDT would include a psychiatrist. We know from comparative studies that transgender young people are about four times more likely to think about attempting suicide, and the latest stats show that, in 2023, more than 7,000 children and young people had their referrals rejected by CAMHS, which is an average of 26 children a day. How are you going to get psychiatry involved in this particular MDT if we cannot provide basic services to children around our country at the moment?

In the devolved health service, we are watching, but we did not do anything to start it off.

My final question is for Professor Strath. Will you please give us an update on where we are with current research and current indications on what is happening? I appreciate that it is always difficult to tell with trials, but roughly when will we get an update?