In British news that escaped much public attention amid the country’s momentous July 4 elections and the subsequent change in government, Dr. Hilary Cass is set to receive a life peerage as part of former prime minister Rishi Sunak’s “Dissolution Honours” list. Dr. Cass, who will become a baroness, is unaffiliated with a political party and will sit in the U.K.’s House of Lords as a cross-bench peer.
Cass has been the target of threats, intimidation, and conspiracy theories since the April publication of her 388-page report, commissioned by the National Health Service, calling into question many prevailing medical interventions and treatments for minors with gender dysphoria. The report, which among its notable findings criticized the use of puberty-blocking hormones and concluded that there was “remarkably weak evidence” to support medical gender-transition procedures for minors, received support across the political and ideological spectrum. Labour parliamentarian Wes Streeting, now the U.K.’s health secretary, described the report as a “watershed moment” and pledged his support for “implement[ing] the expert recommendations of the Cass review.”
Cass’s report was, however, met with fury from transgender activists. In the aftermath of the report’s publication, Cass revealed she had become the subject of “vile” online abuse and that she had been advised to avoid traveling on public transport for her own safety. Observing that evidence-based discussions about transgender treatments for children had been corrupted by a “toxic” public discourse on the issue, she later announced that she would not participate in a similar NHS-commissioned review of adult transgender-treatment clinics.
Amid all of the vitriol and bullying, Cass has bravely stood by her report and pushed back against the many false allegations — some of which amount to outright character assassination — being leveled against her. But the mere fact that she is on the defensive is absurd: Cass is a well-respected doctor, not a politically motivated activist, and both her dispassionate meticulousness and her compassion for children with gender dysphoria are plainly reflected in her report. Indeed, her report was simply a good-faith effort to fulfill her government-provided mandate to objectively assess the wisdom of transgender medical procedures for children.
Cass’s many achievements and the tremendous personal sacrifices she has made for just trying to do her job well merit the honor of a life peerage. She will undoubtedly bring her scientific expertise and a welcome fresh perspective to the House of Lords — a body whose membership is dominated by patronage appointees and where few members come from an entirely nonpolitical background. Cass’s platform will, hopefully, allow her to continue to have a prominent voice in debates over the medical handling of gender dysphoria in minors — both in Britain and abroad.