Overview

GenderGP is an online gender service founded in 2015 by two Welsh-based doctors, Dr Helen Webberley, a GP (general practitioner, or family doctor), and Dr Michael Webberley, a retired hospital consultant whose specialty was gastroenterology. It offered remote assessment and prescriptions for cross-sex hormones and puberty blockers, including to children, at a time when NHS gender clinics had waiting lists of several years. The founders said they were filling a gap left by the NHS. Regulators and courts in the UK and Singapore have repeatedly found problems with how the service was run.

The two founders' cases ended differently, and they are often confused:

• Helen Webberley was convicted in 2018 of running an unregistered medical agency in Wales and fined £12,000. In 2022 a medical tribunal found misconduct and suspended her for two months. The High Court quashed that misconduct finding in March 2023. We found no record that her 2018 criminal conviction was overturned: she admitted it before the 2022 tribunal. Her licence to practise was withdrawn in July 2024 because she did not revalidate. GenderGP says she remains on the medical register.
• Michael Webberley was erased from the medical register (struck off) on 25 May 2022. The tribunal found failings in his care of 25 patients, including a nine-year-old given puberty blockers. It also found that moving GenderGP offshore had been "motivated by efforts to avoid the regulatory framework of the United Kingdom".

This page is part of a series on medical transition scandals. For the legal background, see sex and gender law in the United Kingdom.

Background

The service model

GenderGP began, in Helen Webberley's words, as "a one-page website, an email system, a Word document and a Google Spreadsheet" (Webberley statement 2023). Patients filled in online questionnaires, had remote sessions with counsellors, and received prescriptions from a doctor. They could then fill these at pharmacies or ask their own NHS GP to prescribe or give injections under shared care, an arrangement in which a specialist recommends treatment and the GP prescribes and monitors it.

The model was built around informed consent, the view that an adult (and, the founders argued, a competent young person) should be able to start hormones after being told the risks, without a long psychological assessment. Helen Webberley described the NHS approach as a "gate-keeping model of care", in which people had to "prove their identity over years of extensive, intrusive and over-bearing questioning" (Webberley statement 2023). For a critique of how this model handles risk, see informed consent critique.

Children and cross-border prescribing

GenderGP stood out because it treated children. Court records describe testosterone prescribed to a 12-year-old in 2016 and puberty blockers to a child aged nine years and eight months in 2018. At the time the NHS youth service, the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS), did not start blockers before about age ten and did not start cross-sex hormones before about 16.

After the UK regulatory action, GenderGP said in May 2019 that it had moved "its working hub and medical provision outside of the UK". A medical tribunal (the MPTS, described below) later found that the company had been re-registered in Belize, through a chain of companies linked to the Webberleys' home address (MPTS 2022, paras 942–947). Its prescriptions were then signed by doctors registered elsewhere in Europe. In one 2022 case, a doctor registered with the Barcelona medical college, with a postal address in Bucharest, signed the prescription (Re J 2024). Until the 2024 ban, UK pharmacies could generally dispense prescriptions written by doctors in the European Economic Area (EEA). GenderGP later registered in Singapore, where the business was listed under Helen Webberley's name (Straits Times 2024).

What was alleged and found

Unregistered service (2017–2018)

Healthcare Inspectorate Wales (HIW), which regulates independent healthcare in Wales, told Helen Webberley that her online service needed to be registered. She kept treating patients. HIW then prosecuted her and her company, Online GP Services Ltd. HIW said the prosecution followed "a period in which Dr Webberley had refused to stop providing services to patients" (HIW 2018). At sentencing in December 2018, District Judge Neil Thomas said: "In this case there seems to be a clear refusal to follow the law and that is a significant aggravating factor" (BBC 2018).

In a separate case in 2018, her local health board removed her from the Welsh Medical Performers List, which a GP must be on to work in the NHS. A First-tier Tribunal dismissed her appeal in October 2018. It found that she "does not accept, respect or understand external governance". It also found that she had used the title MRCGP in a way that wrongly implied she was a current member of the Royal College of General Practitioners (First-tier Tribunal 2018, paras 99–104).

Michael Webberley's tribunal (2022)

The Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) holds hearings on doctors' fitness to practise for the General Medical Council (GMC). Michael Webberley faced 89 heads of charge. They covered 18 men he had prescribed testosterone through a separate online business, Balance My Hormones; seven transgender patients treated through GenderGP; and his running of GenderGP (MPTS 2022, para 4). The hearing went ahead in his absence after the tribunal refused his application to adjourn on health grounds.

For Patient V, aged nine when the parents first contacted GenderGP, the tribunal found proved that he:

• diagnosed gender dysphoria "based upon a questionnaire which was inadequate for assessment of a minor", without an adequate mental state or physical examination;
• started puberty blockers without blood tests to confirm puberty had begun, without considering alternative treatments, and without adequately advising the parents of the risks;
• did not adequately assess whether the child was Gillick competent, meaning mature enough to consent, and did not discuss the risks and benefits with the child directly;
• did not set up an adequate multidisciplinary team (MDT); and
• acted "outside the limits of your expertise as a consultant gastroenterologist" and without training in paediatrics or the clinical management of a minor.

The tribunal said that the younger the patient, "the more obvious the need for input from a paediatric endocrinologist / gender specialist and a paediatric mental health professional". In Patient V's case there was no such input (paras 759–760). Several other charges were not proved. These included the allegations that the information pack given to the parents wrongly called blockers "fully reversible", and that sending it was financially motivated.

On GenderGP itself, the tribunal found that the change in operating method "was motivated by those who had operational control of the company, and which included Dr Webberley, to avoid the regulatory framework of the United Kingdom" (para 947). It found that he had acted dishonestly over informed consent for testosterone patients at Balance My Hormones. It did not find dishonesty in his keeping the GenderGP name after Helen Webberley was suspended (paras 949–951). On 25 May 2022 it erased him from the register. News reports said the tribunal called his treatment of patients a "catalogue of failings" and "fundamentally incompatible with being a doctor" (Telegraph 2022). The BMJ reported that one of the seven GenderGP patients, a teenager given cross-sex hormones, died by suicide a few months later (BMJ 2022).

Helen Webberley's tribunal (2021–2022)

Helen Webberley's hearing concerned three patients she had treated in 2016, aged 11, 12 and 17. The GMC brought more than 100 allegations. On the facts, about 32 were found proved, including her 2018 conviction, which she admitted, and 83 were not proved (MPTS 2022). Allegations that GenderGP's offshore model was meant to avoid UK regulation were withdrawn in her case, after the tribunal accepted a submission that there was no case to answer. In Michael Webberley's case the same allegation was found proved.

The tribunal also described her as "an impressive witness". It was "in no doubt" that she "had immersed herself in the field of transgender healthcare" enough to be called a GP with a special interest in gender dysphoria (para 203). It found serious misconduct in her failure to follow up two teenagers on testosterone. It also found that she had failed Patient C, aged ten when assessed, by not discussing the risks to fertility before starting puberty blockers. On 30 June 2022 it suspended her for two months (BBC 2022).

The "Re J" case (2024)

In May 2024 Sir Andrew McFarlane, President of the High Court's Family Division, ruled in a dispute between parents over a 16-year-old's testosterone treatment. The court set out how GenderGP had prescribed it: a paid online questionnaire, then one online session with a counsellor who was not registered with the Health and Care Professions Council, and "No medical examination, blood testing or other clinical evaluation". The young person had "not had any direct communication with a doctor at any stage" (Re J 2024, para 33). The young person had previously been diagnosed with autism and had been treated in hospital for an eating disorder.

The court-appointed expert, an Australian paediatric endocrinologist, called the starting dose, a full adult dose with a double "loading" dose, "a highly abnormal and frankly negligent approach". She later reported blood testosterone levels as "dangerously high". A UK haematologist who reviewed the blood results disagreed and found them effectively normal compared with adult male reference ranges (paras 38–39). The judge urged "any other court faced with a case involving Gender GP to proceed with extreme caution" (para 58). Helen Webberley called the accusation about the dose "untrue" (Straits Times 2024).

Undercover reporting (2021)

In February 2021 The Telegraph published two undercover investigations. It reported that a reporter posing as a 15-year-old was prescribed testosterone after Skype appointments, without parental involvement. It also reported that reporters posing as the parents of a 12-year-old were told the child might be able to start blockers without speaking to a doctor first (Telegraph 2021). These are journalistic findings, not findings of a regulator or court.

Responses from GenderGP and the founders

The founders and GenderGP have always defended the service and challenged the findings against them.

• On the 2018 conviction, Helen Webberley said she had "never set out to break the law" and had kept treating patients because "I went with my doctor instinct and my heart, which said 'don't pull the rug on these people'". Her lawyer said she had not given HIW patient details out of a misplaced concern for confidentiality (BBC 2018).
• On Michael Webberley's erasure, GenderGP said he "was not able to take steps to defend himself or present his case". It praised "his efforts and courage" and said "the contradictory findings of the Drs. Webberley's cases" showed "the lack of key expertise, and a united approach, in the provision of trans care within the UK" (GenderGP 2022). In 2019 GenderGP had described the regulatory action as "institutional transphobia" (quoted in MPTS 2022, para 942).
• After the 2023 appeal, Helen Webberley said she had been "fully cleared". She said she had been "attacked by the media, feminists, gender critics, TERFs, healthcare professionals, public bodies and regulators alike". She called herself "a well-meaning, well-educated GP" who stood against "the outdated NHS model of care" (Webberley statement 2023).
• On the licence withdrawal, GenderGP says she chose not to revalidate because no GMC exam covers transgender medicine and she had not worked as a GP since 2017. It says she "remains on the register in the UK and has not been struck off" (GenderGP FAQ).
• On the puberty blocker ban, GenderGP called it "politically-motivated" and "discriminatory" (GenderGP 2024).

Investigations, legal and regulatory outcomes

The 2023 High Court appeal

Mr Justice Jay found that the tribunal's analysis of misconduct "was wrong", and that its "thinking was confused, clearly wrong in places, and it omitted reference to important evidence" (High Court 2023, para 157). Emails showed that she had explained fertility risks to Patient C's mother. He said she "may just about have done enough" in those emails (para 159). He did not fully clear her practice, however:

Although I have concerns about certain aspects of the Appellant's practice in relation to Patient C including a failure to have a face-to-face consultation on the issue of fertility, it is far from clear to me that what did take place should be strongly criticised. — (High Court 2023, para 157)

He declined to send the case back for a new hearing, partly because a rehearing would be "disproportionate, if not oppressive" after years of proceedings (para 175). He added that, had the earlier errors not been made, the tribunal's conclusions on insight, impairment and sanction would have been "reasonable and fair" (para 176). He also said the appeal did not raise "any wider issues about the wisdom or otherwise of administering puberty blockers to the younger age group" (para 178).

Licence lapse and Singapore

The GMC says every licensed doctor must revalidate every five years. Helen Webberley's licence was withdrawn on 19 July 2024. This was an administrative consequence of not revalidating, not a disciplinary sanction. In Singapore, the Ministry of Health found that GenderGP's doctors, who were not registered there, had consulted with and prescribed for one person in Singapore. It said that using GenderGP "without any prior medical examination, clinical evaluation or blood tests" was "clinically unsafe and inappropriate" (Straits Times 2024).

Significance and wider impact

GenderGP showed how a remote service could get round national gatekeeping. A UK patient could be assessed online by staff in one country and prescribed for by a doctor registered in another. The prescription could then be dispensed by a UK pharmacy or turned into NHS prescribing through shared care. Several later policies closed these routes: the 2024 ban covered EEA prescribers by name, and the 2025 NHS England guidance warned GPs against shared care with unregulated providers. These changes came alongside the Cass Review, which called for a more cautious approach to medical treatment for young people. For the clinical evidence on blockers, see puberty blockers; for how the national reviews changed policy, see evidence reviews.

The case also shows how little the regulatory system can do. The UK conviction, the performers-list removal, the erasure and the licence withdrawal all applied only in the UK. As the GMC told The Straits Times, "it is for individual regulators in other countries to determine whether the action taken in the UK has an impact". GenderGP kept operating abroad throughout. Some young people who could not get prescriptions went to black-market sources, as described on the DIY hormones page.

Criticisms of how the case has been framed

• The founders are often treated as one case. Much coverage says both doctors were "struck off". Only Michael Webberley was erased. Helen Webberley's misconduct finding was quashed, and her licence lapsed for administrative reasons. Advocacy material that describes the "permanent loss of their licenses" for both overstates the record.
• Her conviction is sometimes said to have been overturned. We found no evidence of this. The 2023 appeal concerned the MPTS misconduct finding, not the 2018 criminal conviction, which she admitted at the tribunal.
• Mixed findings get flattened. Both tribunals rejected many charges. In Helen Webberley's case, 83 factual allegations were not proved and the tribunal praised her expertise. Supporters, for their part, say she was "fully cleared". The High Court did not decide whether her practice was sound. The judge recorded concerns about it and said he could not fully resolve the matter.
• Patient counts vary. Press reports said Michael Webberley's care of 24 patients was at issue. The tribunal determination lists 25 (18 plus 7).
• Context of NHS waits. Supporters argue that GenderGP existed because NHS waits ran to years, and that cutting patients off risked pushing them to black-market hormones. That context is real. The tribunals and courts nevertheless judged the care against professional standards, whatever the reasons the service was set up.
• The dosing dispute in Re J was not settled. The expert's "dangerously high" assessment was contested by a second specialist.

What detransitioners say

On r/detrans, GenderGP comes up mostly in accounts of how quickly hormones could be obtained in the UK, especially at 17:

Yeah the clinic I use, GenderGP had not much screening or barring, it was very basic and simple for me to get HRT, I had a singular appointment with Dr. Webberly who saw me for like 30 minute and prescribed me hormones (this is at 17) —hello6589woo, commenter in a thread about reconsidering transition after starting at 17

I started through GGP in the UK because they were the only company that would take me at 17 —inspireddelusion, detrans female

One detransitioner described learning to inject at home with little supervision:

I went with GenderGP (online gic) to do diy hrt when I turned 17, it was injections this time and I had to learn how to do it at home myself, lots of blood and errors. According to my GP at the time GenderGP can be dangerous too, but I didn't listen until I was finally seen by the NHS where a nurse used to do my injections when I turned 19 —idkreddituser11, detrans female

Others express anger at private providers generally, or at what they see as a service that kept operating from abroad:

sadly genderGP isn't even NHS, it's a company working illegally from Spain because they were shut down in the UK. my carer is absolutely furious but i'm not sure what i can do, i can't undo the damage from testosterone but losing money too really sucks —khamori, detrans female

I have a lot of rage for Gender GP and any private clinics in the UK. I'm fairly sure that they ARE informed but just want money. —Snoo_85491, desisted female

Not everyone on the forum took this view. In 2020, writing about the Bell v Tavistock ruling (the High Court case brought by detransitioner Keira Bell), one desister (someone who stopped identifying as trans without medically transitioning) defended access through GenderGP:

This, along with transphobic groups forcing GenderGP's suppliers to halt supply has already cut kids and adults off from the medication and forced them onto the NHS system. —unseemly_gentleman, butch female desister

These comments are a small, self-selected sample. They describe individual experiences and cannot show how typical any outcome was. For the risks of starting testosterone in adolescence, see testosterone in females.

Trans perspectives

Trans commenters disagree about GenderGP. Some see it as a practical option when NHS waits run to years:

You might be able to convince to help you do GenderGP, which will be a lot quicker. Or another private clinic. —ikheetsoepstengel, trans man (FTM)

Others advise strongly against it on grounds of care quality:

Essentially, you're not an individual person seen by an individual doctor. You're a subscription number who uploads blood results and GGPs set up issues a random prescription request off this - often without taking into account timing of a test and what's precribed. Ie. Upping people's Sustanon dose to dangerous levels. —Neat-Bill-9229, trans man (FTM)

The same commenter told another user to "Avoid GenderGP (search the linked sub for why)" (Neat-Bill-9229, trans man (FTM)). These are personal accounts. Claims in them about GenderGP's current ownership and use of automation have not been checked against official records.

Related pages

• Medical transition scandals
• Tavistock GIDS
• Mermaids
• Puberty blockers
• DIY hormones
• Informed consent critique
• Keira Bell v Tavistock
• United Kingdom: sex and gender in law
• Study archive and support directory

References

• Medical Practitioners Tribunal (2022). Dr Michael Webberley (2620107): Determination on the facts, 18 May 2022 (copy hosted by GenderGP). source.
• Medical Practitioners Tribunal (2022). Dr Helen Webberley (3657058): Determination on the facts, 22 April 2022 (copy hosted by GenderGP). source.
• High Court (2023). Webberley v General Medical Council [2023] EWHC 734 (Admin), Jay J, 31 March 2023. source.
• High Court (2022). Webberley v General Medical Council [2022] EWHC 3520 (Admin), Foster J, 12 December 2022 (Michael Webberley). source.
• High Court, Family Division (2024). Re J (Transgender: Puberty Blocker and Hormone Replacement Therapy) [2024] EWHC 922 (Fam), 1 May 2024. source.
• First-tier Tribunal, Primary Health Lists (2018). Dr Helen Webberley v NHS Wales [2018] 3251.PHL, 22 October 2018. source.
• Healthcare Inspectorate Wales (2018). Healthcare Inspectorate Wales prosecutes online GP. source.
• BBC News (2018). Transgender services GP fined £12,000 over registration failure. source.
• BBC News (2022). Transgender children GP: Helen Webberley suspended for misconduct. source.
• BBC News (2023). Transgender children GP: Helen Webberley wins suspension appeal. source.
• BMJ (2022). Retired consultant is struck off over treatment of young transgender patients. BMJ 2022;377:o1357. source.
• The Telegraph (2022). 'Reckless' doctor struck off after giving puberty blockers to nine-year-old. source.
• The Telegraph (2021). How children can order life-altering transgender drugs from their bedroom. source.
• The Telegraph (2024). GPs receive urgent warning not to work with discredited transgender clinic. source.
• The Straits Times (2024). MOH warns British teleconsultation service to stop providing puberty blockers to S'pore users. source.
• CNA (2024). Singapore blocks access to online gender clinic GenderGP due to 'public health risk'. source.
• Department of Health and Social Care (2024). Ban on puberty blockers to be made indefinite on experts' advice. source.
• Attitude (2024, LGBT outlet). Government places 'emergency ban' on private puberty blockers. source.
• Pulse (2025). NHSE issues warning to GPs about transgender children shared care prescribing. source.
• Cass, H. (2024). Independent review of gender identity services for children and young people: Final report. study page.
• GenderGP (2022, party statement). GenderGP Comment on Dr. Michael Webberley's MPTS Hearing. source.
• Webberley, H. (2023, party statement). A Statement by Doctor Helen Webberley. source.
• GenderGP (2024, party statement). FAQs answered by Dr Helen Webberley on her licence to practise withdrawal. source.
• GenderGP (2024, advocacy page). Trans Youth in the UK. source.
• GenderGP (2025, company press release via PR Newswire). GenderGP.com launches in the United States. source.