The court ruled that children aged sixteen and over were able to consent to puberty blockers, children aged fourteen to fifteen were unlikely to be able to give informed consent to puberty blockers, and that children aged thirteen or younger were less likely still.
The judgement did not prohibit prescribing puberty blockers or other forms of gender-affirming care to young people under the age of sixteen, nor did it alter the legal provision of Gillick competence (i.e. that children are able to consent to treatment if they can demonstrate that they fully understand the consequences).
In March 2021, the Good Law Project raised its own legal case (ABCD v Tavistock) which determined that parents are able to consent to treatment on behalf of their child. An appeal against the original Bell v Tavistock ruling is ongoing.
You can get the full information on Bell v Tavistock on our website.