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.