Don't pathologise trans people
Sir, – In her recent letter about gender identity, Sara Morrison claimed that 'dissent is pathologised' (Letters,
May 9th
)
and she is right, but not in the way she suggests.
We as trans people dissent from a rigid gender binary that tells us who we are and how we should live. And we are pathologised for this: labelled as mentally unstable, subjected to invasive psychiatric assessments, denied essential healthcare, segregated from public life, and excluded from decisions that impact our bodies and lives. We are treated as modern folk devils to be 'fixed' for our dissent from the norm.
Does this sound familiar? Women have historically faced – and continue to face – many of the very same barriers. That's why, if you care about women, you should care about trans people too. Our struggles – and our freedom – are shared. – Yours, etc,
KY WALKER,
READ MORE
National LGBTQ+ Federation,
Dún Laoghaire,
Co Dublin.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
9 hours ago
- Irish Times
Frustration in Government over continual revelations from CHI
For weeks the Government had been bracing for more trouble at Children's Health Ireland (CHI), the embattled group that runs paediatric hospital services in Dublin . There has been frustration over waiting times for children who need orthopaedic surgery and a scandal over the implantation of unauthorised springs into three children. By mid-May another significant controversy was brewing; a review indicated that up to 60 per cent of a type of hip operations carried out at Temple Street Hospital were not necessary. However, just days after the hip report, real trouble came out of left field, with questions raised over the use of special waiting list clinics. The Sunday Times highlighted an internal CHI report that alleged potential irregularities in the State's initiative to tackle waiting lists. The Department of Health has said it had never seen or heard of the unpublished report, which dates back to 2021/22. Health Service Executive (HSE) chief Bernard Gloster also said he was unaware. But in recent days CHI told Minister for Health Jennifer Carroll MacNeill that its content had been 'discussed' at performance management meetings with a senior HSE executive. READ MORE The report said a doctor, identified only as Consultant D, had been paid €35,800 for seeing patients at special clinics paid for by the National Treatment Purchase Fund (NTPF). The report questioned whether the special NTPF clinics were needed and suggested the children could have been treated using other capacity in the public system. [ Audit of CHI waiting lists ordered to ensure productivity in public hospitals, Minister for Health says Opens in new window ] The report was devastating on several levels. Taoiseach Micheál Martin is a champion of the NTPF, which forms part of Government initiatives that have seen €1.6 billion spent in recent years trying to curb hospital waiting times. Any suggestion of irregularity could undermine the wider system. Senior management across the Department of Health, the HSE and the NTPF maintain they were completely blindsided. Senior figures have acknowledged it is possible there were 'miscommunications' but insist that CHI never flagged any serious issues. Oireachtas committees will, undoubtedly, seek to pursue what the HSE was told about the CHI report in 2021 or 2022. Gloster, in a pre-arranged interview with RTÉ's 'This Week' programme on May 25th, described the CHI report as 'absolutely shocking'. 'I assure you if anything connected with, or near connected with alleged people ingratiating themselves financially in the public health system, the first step I'll be taking is to refer that matter to the gardaí,' he said. Gloster demanded to see the report from CHI the next day, and the HSE passed it to Carroll MacNeill. The report caused consternation, with worrying findings made about the NTPF clinics. More importantly, the report raised issues about patient safety. In the Department of Health there was concern that architecture put in place in the health service to deal with issues regarding the safety of patients had apparently not been utilised. [ Hip surgery audit: Almost 70% of operations in two children's hospitals 'unnecessary' Opens in new window ] The HSE is understood to have pressed CHI to refer the report to the Medical Council, the regulatory body for doctors. It warned that it would make the referral itself if the CHI did not. Last Thursday the HSE said it would bring the issues to the Medical Council, as well as to gardaí. The NTPF suspended funding to CHI pending an investigation. The report also deals with rows between staff in a particular unit. The findings are stark: 'CHI has a broken culture, created by dysfunctional relationships and challenging behaviour, negatively impacting service delivery, department dynamics and staff experiences and has the potential to put patients at risk.' The new controversy arriving after issues of hip surgery and spinal implants adds to the governance problems at CHI, which is preparing to take on operation of the new €2 billion national children's hospital. On May 27th the Minister confirmed three members of the CHI board had resigned. Another had stepped down the previous week. The Taoiseach told the Dáil it was clear the environment was 'not optimal for safety'. He said it was absolutely critical that there should be fundamental reform at CHI. Separately, the Minister for Health said 'toxic behaviours' developed over time within CHI as individuals had not got along with its board and executive. The report found there were 'significant concerns' about the prudent and beneficial management of NTPF funding and a lack of oversight of access initiatives, which are ultimately not in keeping with the memorandum of understanding between CHI and the NTPF. Carroll MacNeill sought answers from CHI about the report. Sources said CHI appeared to view the report as identifying internal human resource management issues that were addressed internally. 'They don't seem to understand there is an issue,' one senior figure told The Irish Times. The Opposition demanded publication of the report but the Attorney General advised the Minister that such a move was up to CHI. However, over last weekend this argument became rather moot. On Monday The Irish Times reported details directly from the report . It found a 'negative and toxic' work culture at a CHI hospital, with multiple staff complaining of 'unprofessional and disruptive behaviour from consultants'. It said this contributed to the undermining of care and treatment for sick children. Challenging behaviours regarding one particular part of the organisation 'appear to be the norm', the report stated. It revealed one that consultant had taken a defamation action against another and stated that it was reasonable to assume this could only arise as a result of fraught relationships within this particular unit. In a statement issued at about 9.30pm on Bank Holiday Monday, CHI said the issues raised in the report had been addressed 'and the team in question are working well'. Effectively congratulating itself, the group said: 'This is an example of taking action when issues are identified in line with good HR practice.' [ Doctors say they warned CHI of toxic behaviour by several senior medics Opens in new window ] On Wednesday The Irish Times revealed that the consultant at the centre of the review for allegedly referring patients to the NTPF-funded clinic did not fulfil his on-call hours for more than three years due to 'health issues'. He had run five weekend clinics for which he was paid an additional €35,800. The consultant was seeing twice the number of patients in the weekend clinic than during his regular weekday equivalent. CHI had brought in a locum to cover the consultant's on-call hours, at a cost of around €450,000. 'It needs to be explored how one consultant can undertake a series of NTPF-funded clinics over numerous Saturdays and during these clinics see a much greater number of patients than they are able to see in their routine public clinics, working at a very fast pace with significant throughput – a substantial undertaking of additional work – yet is unfit for any on-call duties for the past three years,' the report stated. [ CHI consultant at centre of review did not fulfil on-call hours for three years due to 'health issues' Opens in new window ] In the meantime the Minister and the Department of Health were going through answers provided by CHI, particularly on whether the report's recommendations had been implemented. CHI told the department that monthly meetings had taken place, with actions tracked and the majority 'closed out'. Separately the HSE chief executive commissioned an audit of governance and equity in patient access and waiting-list management at CHI. This aimed to look at the balance between public and private patients' access to care. A pre-scheduled meeting of the Cabinet subcommittee on health discussed the CHI issue on Wednesday . Ministers were told the HSE had referred the CHI report to gardaí who will determine what steps to take. In the meantime the service level agreement between the HSE and CHI, which underpins funding, is to be strengthened. Under new HSE structures, regional executive officers have greater responsibilities for running services in their areas. The regional chief executive for Dublin and the Midlands will have a greater involvement in working with management in CHI. But the key issue for the Government is whether it believes CHI is the body that should be given responsibility for the new children's hospital. The Minister expressed confidence in current CHI management, and some in Government believe it may be too late to implement radical change before commissioning of the hospital begins. [ CHI unable to move in to national children's hospital due to continued delays Opens in new window ] Still, frustrations remain in Government at the succession of crises involving the children's hospital group. And a further report on spinal surgery is awaited.
Irish Times
12 hours ago
- Irish Times
The Irish economy grew by 22% over the past year. Yes, you read that right
Ireland's economic data was always going to be a bit special at the start of this year. But Thursday's figures were mind-bending. It is impossible to overstate the extent to which we now stand out in international comparisons. And this is not just a curiosity – it matters. The economy, as measured by gross domestic product (GDP) , was 22 per cent larger in the first quarter of 2025 than one year earlier, according to the latest estimates from the Central Statistics Office . Think about it. The figures suggest that for every €1 of activity last year, there was €1.22 in 2025. Even comparing GDP in the first quarter of this year with the last quarter of 2024, there is a rise of close to 10 per cent – this is roughly the extent of growth across the euro zone over the past decade. Of course this bonkers data is not real, in the sense that it does not reflect what is happening in the underlying economy in which we all live. How could it? As has been long discussed the headline economic data is entirely distorted by the activities and tax planning of a small number of very big US tech and pharma companies. From time to time, this has created huge distortions in the figures. A decade ago, top US economist Paul Krugman famously described a 26 per cent GDP growth rate reported for the Irish economy (later revised up to over 30 per cent) as 'leprechaun' economics . At the time the figures were distorted by massive tax-driven investments by the companies concerned, including Apple, essentially a manoeuvre by the companies involved to try to keep their tax bills down as international rules changed. READ MORE Now, as one observer put it, we are seeing another 'Krugman' moment. This time the reasons are different. Big pharma companies have been rushing product over to the US to try to get drugs and key ingredients into the market before Donald Trump announces tariffs on the sector. This has led to a surge in exports, feeding into the GDP data. Many of these are manufactured here – and some are made elsewhere but organised by Irish subsidiaries and so also show up in our figures. And so we see a massive surge in Irish GDP in the first quarter of this year. A big – temporary – decline in pharma exports in GDP will follow at some stage, as the firms involved must now have massive stocks jammed into every free warehouse in the US. Much will depend on how the tariffs story plays out. [ Welcome (back) to the era of Leprechaun economics Opens in new window ] Whether Krugman renews his leprechaun offensive or not, let's not pretend this won't be noticed. Ireland's GDP data is not some irrelevance in a quirky economic corner. The amounts of money being moved through Ireland are now enormous. Daniel Kral, chief economist at Oxford Economics , calculates that Ireland – which accounts for 4 per cent of the euro zone economy – accounted for half its total growth over the past year. Analysts have taken to looking at the figures 'excluding Ireland'. How do we pull back from all of this to judge the underlying health of the economy? Total demand in the domestic economy – adjusted by the CSO to remove the multinational factors - rose just 1 per cent over the year. But we need to look under the surface here, too. Consumer spending, a good measure of how we feel, was up by a decent 2.5 per cent. But the overall figure was dragged down by a fall in business investment, presumably reflecting the international uncertainty. So households continued to spend in the first part of the year, but businesses are taking a wait-and-see approach to big capital spending. This is likely to be reflected in the jobs market as the year goes on – and here AI is also changing the game in many sectors. Consumers may get more cautious too. Uncertainty is starting to slow the economy and this is a trend we need to watch as the year goes on. The piece of data that seemed a bit out of line this week was a 30 per cent fall in corporation tax in May compared with the same month last year. This was affected by the comparison with a strong May last year – which the Department of Finance suggests was boosted by once-off factors. Two of our biggest taxpayers, Pfizer and Microsoft – pay significant amounts of tax that month. But the key early indicator for most of the big companies is June – and what happens here will give a good pointer for the year as a whole. The figures do underline one point. It is our huge reliance on the opaque affairs of four or five massive companies – and our exposure to the sectors they operate in, their own performance and complex decisions on how their tax structures are set up. Our latest bout of data exceptionalism again puts Ireland in the spotlight, when it would have been better to keep the head down. It underlines the outsize take Ireland is getting from pharma and tech activity in the EU – both contentious points in the White House. Notably, the US added Ireland to an economic watch list this week, based on the size of our trade surplus. We are very much on the radar in Washington. Our corporate tax take and manufacturing base are looked on enviously not only from the US , but from elsewhere in Europe. [ 'No long-term commitments to anything' – Ireland's economy is experiencing a silent slowdown Opens in new window ] The advance shipping of products again focuses attention on the scale of activity and tax planning in Ireland by big pharma companies. And this causes a rollercoaster of cyclical activity. But what really counts is longer-term, structural issues. Will these pharma giants decide over time – and it would take years – to relocate some of their production to the US? Will their profits and thus tax payments here be hit by Trump's policies? Or will they – or some of the tech giants – alter their corporate structures so that they pay significantly less tax here? It comes down to whether Trump's policies change the way the economic and corporate world operates fundamentally, a fair bit or not much at all. As Ireland benefits from the current system so much, the more it changes, the more risks there are for us. The coming months will tell a lot.
Irish Times
13 hours ago
- Irish Times
Ireland's plan to weaken legal protections for waterways will push many of them beyond recovery
If I went to my doctor with a cancerous tumour that was treatable and curable, and he shrugged it off and told me to accept it – knowing that without treatment, it would eventually kill me – I'd think he had lost his mind. Yet this is how the Irish State plans to treat some of our most treasured rivers, lakes and estuaries. According to a proposal from the Department of Housing , certain iconic stretches of waters on the likes of the Shannon, Boyne and Blackwater rivers will no longer be viewed as needing restoration. Instead, they will face a future as engineered channels. In the 1980s and '90s, Europeans began to recognise that their rivers were in severe decline due to decades of neglect. Naturally meandering waterways were straightened, drained and dammed; chemicals, pesticides and untreated sewage poured into them unchecked. The problem was cross-border: the Danube, which flows through 10 countries, became saturated with pollution. In 1986, a fire at a chemical warehouse near Basle, Switzerland, caused the Rhine river to turn red with mercury and dyes, as vast amounts of toxic waste flowed hundreds of kilometres downstream into Germany and the Netherlands. Drinking water supplies were shut off, and aquatic life, such as European eels, was decimated. What was clear was that Europe needed a unified, legally binding approach to water protection that set out common rules, clear responsibilities and shared goals. By 2000, a plan was in place that aimed to safeguard waterways not only for aquatic life but also as a source of drinking water, transport and leisure for humans. This law, known as the Water Framework Directive, has a clear objective: to ensure all waterbodies reach at least 'good status', meaning they are clean, healthy and safe for swimming and drinking. Built into the plan is a legal recognition that some waterbodies, especially in highly industrialised countries such as Germany, have been altered so extensively that returning them to their natural state would be impossible or potentially harmful to human interests and security. These are placed in a special category, called 'heavily modified water bodies', and are legally exempt from the requirement to achieve 'good' status. They include reservoirs supplying drinking water, canals designed for navigation or drainage, urban rivers confined within concrete channels or culverts, ports, harbours and rivers drained for agricultural use. READ MORE While they cannot be used as dumping grounds for pollutants, the law accepts that these waters will never be restored or naturalised. For that reason, the principle guiding 'heavily modified' designation should be balanced and factor in whether it serves the widest possible interest: their number should be kept to a minimum, and where ongoing engineering and management is necessary – for example, in a reservoir or port – they must deliver significant benefit to the public. Ireland has 33 heavily modified water bodies, including Poulaphouca reservoir, which provides drinking water to Dublin; Cork Harbour for industrial activity; and New Ross Port in Wexford, run by the council as a transport route. But under the department's proposal, released in March, this number will increase by 1,312 per cent. It includes 122 waterbodies that run through some of Ireland's unique natural areas. It includes stretches of the Nore, Brosna, Maigue, Liffey, Fergus, Mulkear and Carrowbeg rivers; lakes such as Lough Corrib and Lough Derg; and estuaries like Lower Suir. [ Pollution on the Liffey: Algal blooms at Blessington a threat to Dublin's drinking water Opens in new window ] Why does the State want to all but give up on these waters? The problem stems from a law dating back to 1945, the Arterial Drainage Act, which gives the State sweeping powers to carry out large-scale drainage works, such as deepening, widening, dredging and straightening. Eighty years ago – when we knew nothing about climate warming – the law was viewed as progressive; today it clashes with the Water Framework Directive because this extent of drainage causes severe damage, irreversibly stripping rivers of their natural life and course. Ireland cannot abide by one law with the other. As long as these waters are drained, they will never meet the standards set by EU water law. Reservoirs, ports, canals and harbours must be operational, and as such, designating them as 'heavily modified' is in the public interest, as their functional demands cannot be fulfilled while simultaneously attempting restoration. But in the future, who'll benefit from the continual dredging of the Clare river in Galway, once one of our most natural rivers and now, in many parts, a canalised channel? Or the river Brosna, whose waters followed a meandering course through Offaly before its curves were straightened and its channel deepened? And how is it justified in the public interest, given that drainage makes our towns and cities more – not less – vulnerable to flash flooding? Instead of reshaping drainage policy so that it's fit for the critical challenges we face – not least, the chaotic mix of water shortages and drought, extreme weather events and rapidly warming waters – what's proposed is simply remove these waters from any hope of being restored to full health. Never before have our waterways needed climate and nature-proofed policies more. Our waters are warming at levels never seen before – for example, in Lough Feeagh in Mayo, the heat in the water has been above the long-term average (recorded since 1960) since January. Sea temperatures have soared. This is the future for which we need to rapidly prepare. Under the Nature Restoration Law, we're required to restore at least 20 per cent of our land and sea areas by 2030, increasing to 90 per cent by 2050. That includes rewetting organic soils, like those at the headwaters of the river Boyne, which are currently drained. Instead of giving up on our waters and relegating them to a lower standard – all for the sake of an outdated, 80-year-old law – now is the time to put energy into nature-based solutions, which are proven to be effective and cheap as a way to reduce flood risk, improve soil health and meet climate, nature and water goals without abandoning the land. We can't ignore the facts: our waterways are facing immense pressure, and some are already critically ill. Even if our only concern was water security, the urgent need for restoration is clear. This proposal to weaken their legal protections will only speed up their deterioration. Across Ireland, communities are volunteering to revive the life in their local waters. If this legal loophole is allowed, their efforts will be in vain. In effect, the State would be like a doctor unfit to practice – turning its back on the patient instead of providing care. As a result, many of our most treasured rivers and lakes will, without question, slip beyond recovery.
