BLYTHE COWRIE AGAINST STUFF
Case Number: 3561
Council Meeting: 21 October 2024
Decision: No Grounds to Proceed
Publication: Stuff
Principle:
Accuracy, Fairness and Balance
Comment and Fact
Ruling Categories: Gender
- Stuff published an article on 5 September 2024, headlined Mental Health Minister stalls release of ‘puberty blockers’ health advice.
- The story reported a lengthy delay in the release of expert advice on the efficacy, safety, physical and mental outcomes of prescribing “puberty blockers” to young transgender patients and those experiencing gender dysphoria.
- It referred to a UK report, the Cass Review, which was reported to have been accepted by most UK medical groups and as a result, England’s National Health Service (NHS) has effectively stopped the use of puberty blockers in almost all cases - awaiting further evidence.
- Blythe Cowie said the characterisation of the Cass Report was completely false. It did not have THE support by medical bodies outside of the UK and it came as part of a greater media campaign against the public existence and healthcare rights of transgender people, all woman, and the broader LGBT+ community.
- The article implied that the UK-specific bodies that supported the report speak for the global medical community. The article also had an anti-trans ideological stance.
- Stuff said in its response that it was comfortable with its reporting of the subject.
- “It is evident in the story that the paragraph in question [which mentioned the Cass Review] refers to UK medical groups as the thrust of the story is that there is still uncertainty in NZ and it notes the Professional Association for Transgender Health Aotearoa's position at the end of the piece.”
- The Media Council notes that the Stuff story was amended to make it clear it was referring to the UK reaction to the Cass Review. That amendment, which was explained in a footnote, addressed the complainant’s key concern that the report had implied the Cass report was supported by medical bodies outside the UK.
- The other issues raised in the complaint about “an international campaign to prevent transition, enforce detransition and eradicate trans people from public life” and that the Cass Report was ideologically driven, were opinion and not linked to any breach of the principles. There is no evidence of any error of fact and the Cass report has been widely publicised and debated.
- There were no grounds to proceed.