Bell v Tavistock was whether a child or young person under the age of 16 could achieve
Gillick competence in respect of the decision to take puberty blockers [133]. The court specifically declined to address whether parents could consent to the use of puberty blockers on their child's behalf, as this was not the Gender Identity Development Service's ("GIDS") policy; GIDS relied on consent of the child or young adult being treated [47]
1.
Bell v Tavistock for the court to limit its inquiry to
Gillick competence, it undoubtedly left a lacuna as to whether the administration of puberty blockers to children under 16 based on parental (together with clinical) consent required court oversight. This has led to a number of difficulties for transitioning children and their families, from the inability of trans children to access puberty blockers to referrals to social services.