This is why the current Guidelines need to go out with a Health Warning.
There are other youngsters whose parents are too scared to speak out, for fear of losing their children.
And it's why we need to somehow capture these people's experiences of harm, and threats of children being taken into care, into something stronger than mere anecdotes. You cannot run trials on human beings to provide scientific evidence that a treatment seriously harms or kills them, yet NICE are incredibly loathe to rock their cosy little boat without scientific evidence! What the hell do they want? Mere acecdotal evidence is, I agree, too weak in itself.
Maybe they will put their complaint in support of Dr Myhills GMC complaint. I saw on Facebook that there are now 42 people with ME who have joined in.
So maybe this
is where Sarah Myhill's initiative might help break such an absurd catch-22, because something has to, and no-one else seems to be in with much of a chance. If the powers that be are faced with a collection of signed statements, from people prepared to be identified and stand by their statements, maybe they will then suspend GET (at least) pending further investigation. They need to be made to see that if they dogmatically ignore clear evidence of
risk of harm, then they will be morally and maybe legally responsible thereafter. (Yes, I know, they have been for a long time already, but I'm on about what we can get them to see). And we should
absolutely not have to prove definite harm for this, but only clear
risk of harm. The burden of proof is different and very relevant, when dealing with human safety and when to suspend potential harm triggers, and intiate investigations.