Make money doing the work you believe in
"You may have seen this article on the front page of The Australian today...
"The Australian (page 1) reports that the Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne defended its chief of medicine, Michelle Telfer, despite a judge labelling her evidence misleading in a Family Court case regarding treatment of gender dysphoria in children."
This was a June 2025 email exchange within the media unit of the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care (ACSQHC), just released under Freedom of Information (FOI) law.
The case referred to involved "Devin", a 12-year-old gender non-conforming boy protected from puberty blockers by court order. Justice Andrew Strum rebuked Dr Telfer for being a trans health advocate in court, not an objective expert witness.
Strum was also critical or sceptical about various dogmas of the "gender-affirming" treatment model spearheaded in Australia by the Royal Children's Hospital (RCH) Melbourne.
Here is The Australian's P1 news report
Here are links to Strum's rulings in the case
Last year, I was wondering whether the ACSQHC had been involved in the national debate over paediatric gender medicine, a debate that has been running for the last seven years.
From the FOI documents, I see that someone else (with name redacted) wanted to know whether the ACSQHC had reviewed or endorsed the "Australian standards of care" on gender dysphoria first issued in 2018 by the RCH gender clinic under its then director, paediatrician Dr Michelle Telfer.
In reply, an ACSQHC official said: "The Australian standards of care and treatment guidelines for trans and gender diverse children and adolescents V1.3, were developed and are managed by the Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne. It looks as if these 'Standards' are based upon recommendations. [T]hey drew on expertise from across Australia. They are not mandatory".
I read that as "No, we didn't review or endorse the RCH guidelines."
Isn't it the purpose of the ACSQHC "to lead national improvements in the safety and quality of health care, so you receive better care, everywhere"?
But the ACSQHC media spokeswoman said the Commission "has not undertaken work, or been asked to conduct any work, on the issue of youth gender dysphoria".
So, I asked: "Does the ACSQHC have a duty or power to inquire into the safety or quality of the gender dysphoria/incongruence interventions offered by providers such as state children’s hospital gender clinics, other public health services or providers in receipt of public funds such as Orygen/headspace or ACON?"
ACSQHC replied: "The Commission is a national coordinating body for improvements in the delivery of safe and high-quality health care. It is not a regulatory agency or complaints body, and does not directly regulate healthcare facilities. The Commission’s planned activities are shaped by our strategic priorities..."
Presumably youth gender dysphoria is not a priority.
Still, it's encouraging that the ACSQHC media people picked up the news that Dr Telfer and the RCH gender clinic were the subject of serious criticism by a Family Court judge.
That puts ACSQHC media people ahead of the large audiences of the ABC, Guardian Australia, SBS, The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.
None of those media outlets reported the re Devin case, as far as I can tell from searches. I hope I'm wrong.
But there is another link between the ACSQHC and RCH Melbourne.
The RCH board is chaired by Professor Christine Kilpatrick. She also chairs the ACSQHC.
And ACSQHC is about to offer feedback on the development of Australia's first truly national treatment guidelines for youth gender dysphoria.
Those guidelines are to replace the de facto national guidelines issued by Dr Telfer's gender clinic.
ACSQHC media said: "Our agency does not have a role in reviewing the new guidelines but will contribute feedback during the public consultation [scheduled for September-November 2027]."
I have written about the NHMRC guideline project here
