Mermaids - helping children & teenagers to deceive their parents

Which is that children are being encouraged and assisted to self harm by Mermaids.

And people are supporting them to do this.

I’ll say it again.

Gillick competence is totally irrelevant to any discussion on Mermaids or Stonewall because Gillick competence refers solely to interventions by medical professionals.

Massive red herring to avoid the real issue.

No-one here says ALL transition is wrong. They just think you (and Mermaids) overstate the case that ALL transition is right.

tri
* Of course Gillick Competence doesn't suit the agenda of those who think all transition is wrong*
Did you not understand this?

My point still stands, as, of course, does the law.

Here is another Google search results page. This one is on the subject Detransitioners Stories and is for those who know only of Keira Bell.
www.google.com/search?q=detransitioners+stories

you have not added anything to the debate - or nothing from the 21st century, anyway
But should there ever be a case brought by anyone to decide if a child should have been treated. (or was not treated, because parents intervened) Gillick Competence will still apply. It is still used and trying to pretend that trans issues are different to other medical procedures is plainly wrong.
Of course Gillick Competence doesn't suit the agenda of those who think all transition is wrong.

Doodledog

Aarrggh! I bit - I am not going to get involved in a diversionary side argument

They’re quite good at starting them, I have to admit, but at least they haven’t dragged in some of the usual stuff. Yet!

"A recent study aimed to shed light on the issue by surveying people who had detransitioned. The results, published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior, showed that the majority of respondents felt that their doctor or mental health professional failed to provide them with an adequate medical evaluation prior to transitioning. What’s more, most respondents did not inform their clinicians after they had detransitioned, suggesting that the total number of detransitioners could be underestimated. " bigthink.com/health/detransitioners-study-evaluations/

"The prevalence of detransitioning after transition is unknown but is likely underestimated because most of the participants did not inform the doctors who facilitated their transitions that they had detransitioned. " link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-021-02163-w#ref-CR3

Google search results for Number of Detransitioners, www.google.com/search?q=number+of+detransitioners Select "Past year" from the "Tools" "Time" options.

Aarrggh! I bit - I am not going to get involved in a diversionary side argument

I am aware of that, but the rationale for the law was because a child wanted contraceptive advice without her parents' knowledge in 1985 or before, and Victoria Gillick opposed this, because of her Catholic faith.

My point still stands, as, of course, does the law. Regardless of pedantry, we are not living back then, and the world has changed beyond recognition.

Doodledog

*I see absolutely what Gagajo means about the same issues being debated. I've always been told that when someone tries to restrict and dictate the parameters of a discussion it can generally be assumed that they realise they are losing. And now I'm bored Goodbye!*

Nobody is 'restricting and/or dictating the parameters of a discussion'! (Note the language used there - more attempts to discredit anyone who dares to disagree).

What I am saying is simply that on a thread about Mermaids, Section 28 and Victoria Gillick is irrelevant. Section 28 was brought in in 1988, and was officially repealed 20 years ago, and Gillick competence is based on a case from 1985. We are not living in the 80s when these were current debates. Back then there was no talk of 'gender assigned at birth' and whilst it is probably the case that there were rare cases of breast binding by confused young girls, there was not any sort of market for an organisation like Mermaids.

It feels as though we are expected simply to sit back and allow these 'restrict and dictate' slurs to pass without comment, or know that there will be a flounce and an accusation that we (ie those who dare to disagree) will be blamed for not letting you say your piece, when in fact, you have not added anything to the debate - or nothing from the 21st century, anyway.

Sorry inaccuracies always tempt me back "Gillick Competence" is still the accepted legal term and has been used in cases in the 21st century so cannot be dismissed as the legal standards of the 1980s.Strangely enough laws sometimes outlast the times they are first enacted. In fact most of our legal system is based on that. Gillick competence was used and carefully defined in immunization cases in 2015. Interesting that the only way to win this argument is to make false allegations.

I see absolutely what Gagajo means about the same issues being debated. I've always been told that when someone tries to restrict and dictate the parameters of a discussion it can generally be assumed that they realise they are losing. And now I'm bored Goodbye!

Nobody is 'restricting and/or dictating the parameters of a discussion'! (Note the language used there - more attempts to discredit anyone who dares to disagree).

What I am saying is simply that on a thread about Mermaids, Section 28 and Victoria Gillick is irrelevant. Section 28 was brought in in 1988, and was officially repealed 20 years ago, and Gillick competence is based on a case from 1985. We are not living in the 80s when these were current debates. Back then there was no talk of 'gender assigned at birth' and whilst it is probably the case that there were rare cases of breast binding by confused young girls, there was not any sort of market for an organisation like Mermaids.

It feels as though we are expected simply to sit back and allow these 'restrict and dictate' slurs to pass without comment, or know that there will be a flounce and an accusation that we (ie those who dare to disagree) will be blamed for not letting you say your piece, when in fact, you have not added anything to the debate - or nothing from the 21st century, anyway.

The last official figure I can see was one of 5, 000 detransitioners, which was info given to the board of the tavistock. The detrans reddit group has 37 000 members but I am guessing or rather hoping that most of those arent detransitioners.

It is the same old, same old, isn't it? Try a diversion that discredits the opposition, and when that doesn't work, flounce and gaslight them by saying it is their fault. Maybe create another persona and sneak back in as though you are adding weight to previous posts by agreeing with everything your previous self has said.

Sorry Rosie - I meant to address your point that the objectives of Mermaids have clearly changed from giving information and advice to confused children, most of whom would turn out to be gay, rather than trans, to an assumption that everyone who contacts them should be given information about transitioning, and acceptance that it is possible to be 'born in the wrong body'.

It is clear that there must be a reason for this shift in emphasis. The previous incarnation was, presumably, also 'plugging a gap' that should be filled by the NHS and CAHMS, so how is it that this 'gap' has widened so massively? I am inclined to think it is because the idea that 'gender is assigned at birth', or that there is such a thing as a 'wrong body' has gained credibility because of Stonewall, and vulnerable young people have latched onto it as an explanation for other types of mental health fragility.

Galaxy

That took we ages I am puppy wrangling here , I shouldnt have bothered.

I took ages for different reasons, but likewise it would appear to be a waste of time.

Glorianny The case of Keira Bell is the only case I have ever seen mentioned and I am sure if there were evidence of ever increasing numbers of detransitioners you would have posted it.

Oh for goodness' sake do you want me to list all the names of the detransitioners? You don't think there are increasing numbers? For someone so involved and interested in trans issues you are incredibly ignorant in that aspect, I wonder if that's a deliberate stance. Kiera Bell is NOT the only detransitioner, just the first to awaken the general public to the whole area. Are you totally unaware that gender identity clinics did no follow up on patients discharged from their care? That was admitted during the Keira Bell hearing. They had no idea how many went on to detransition. They didn't care. People who have detransitioned have reported that they go from being "stunning and brave and loved" to being persona non grata amongst transpeople and their allies. But you choose not to know that.

Perhaps instead of advocating for irresponsible actions from Mermaids, you could lobby them to refrain from advancing transition on every family that approaches them with a confused child? Maybe point out that 'first do no harm" is a really good starting point?

That took we ages I am puppy wrangling here , I shouldnt have bothered.

The warnings over Kids Company went back years, particularly the reliance on government funding and the lack of reserves. A number of trustees resigned because of their concerns that the warnings werent heeded. I dont actually think that kids company were solely to blame but I don't think concerns over the actions of a charity indicates lack of care for the target group. I also have grave concerns about the behaviour of staff in some large childrens charities, (Save the Children for example) I think those issues should be addressed, the fact that they are one of the main providers of support for vulnerable groups makes that even more imperative. If Mermaids are going against the advice of the cass report ( which has implications in my view for most services for young people with gender dysphoria) then of course that should be challenged. If there had been adequate data and follow up by people involved in the care of those with gender dysphoria then perhaps we would be able to provide evidence based care.

Doodledog

I am bored with diversions into irrelevant (to this discussion, not in themselves) discussions of gay rights, contraceptive provision, race and so on that are always dragged kicking and screaming into 'discussions' of trans issues. It is done to paint those who have concerns about the erosion of women's rights and about children being used to further the trans cause as being illiberal, reactionary and rather unpleasant, just as the language of 'anti-trans', 'shutting [things] down' and so on is intended to do. It also kicks any debate on the actual issues of the threads in question into the long grass, and if they ever get round to being addressed it is after most readers have either got bored or sick of the diversions and left.

I see absolutely what Gagajo means about the same issues being debated. I've always been told that when someone tries to restrict and dictate the parameters of a discussion it can generally be assumed that they realise they are losing. And now I'm bored Goodbye!

Rosie51

Glorianny how does affirming every single child that approaches Mermaids as trans and starting them on the path to transition help those that are merely confused? People like Kiera Bell and the other ever increasing numbers of de-transitioners whose surgically altered bodies and destroyed endocrine systems can never be restored. How many of them will be enough to prompt the slow down of this runaway train? Do you care about their ruined lives? Or are they less worthy of concern, just collateral damage? If Stonewall and Mermaids weren't pushing this agenda so hard there'd be much less demand for the services available. If Mermaids still acted in accordance with that old screenshot I posted, there really wouldn't be a problem. They themselves stated ^only a small proportion of cases will result in a transsexual outcome^

That's a bit like blaming the service engineer because your boiler breaks down. Mermaids and Stonewall are not responsible for creating trans children. They provide a service. Possibly it is a flawed service. But at present it is the only service available to most trans children. Saying that they create the demand is unfounded nonsense. Do you really imagine children wouldn't access other methods if Mermaids wasn't there? As for accusing me of not caring about individuals it is precisely because I care that I think Mermaids must remain until a proper gender service for children is established. The case of Keira Bell is the only case I have ever seen mentioned and I am sure if there were evidence of ever increasing numbers of detransitioners you would have posted it. It's a sad case but it doesn't detract from help given to many others and in fact it reinforces the case for a proper gender counselling service when Mermaids will simply not be needed.
Perhaps instead of advocating Mermaids closure you could spend time lobbying MPs to fund a proper gender counselling service which doesn't have a 4 year waiting list?

I am bored with diversions into irrelevant (to this discussion, not in themselves) discussions of gay rights, contraceptive provision, race and so on that are always dragged kicking and screaming into 'discussions' of trans issues. It is done to paint those who have concerns about the erosion of women's rights and about children being used to further the trans cause as being illiberal, reactionary and rather unpleasant, just as the language of 'anti-trans', 'shutting [things] down' and so on is intended to do. It also kicks any debate on the actual issues of the threads in question into the long grass, and if they ever get round to being addressed it is after most readers have either got bored or sick of the diversions and left.

Glorianny how does affirming every single child that approaches Mermaids as trans and starting them on the path to transition help those that are merely confused? People like Kiera Bell and the other ever increasing numbers of de-transitioners whose surgically altered bodies and destroyed endocrine systems can never be restored. How many of them will be enough to prompt the slow down of this runaway train? Do you care about their ruined lives? Or are they less worthy of concern, just collateral damage? If Stonewall and Mermaids weren't pushing this agenda so hard there'd be much less demand for the services available. If Mermaids still acted in accordance with that old screenshot I posted, there really wouldn't be a problem. They themselves stated only a small proportion of cases will result in a transsexual outcome

Galaxy

I was really glad when Kids Company was shut down, this does not mean I dont care about children in poverty.
I would follow the guidance in the cass report about the support that should be offered. If Mermaids meets that guidance great.

The closure of Kids Company was not simply a matter of shutting down an inadequate service as was widely reported. It was heavily influenced by allegations of sexual abuse by clients of clients - no charges were ever brought. The charity failed through inadequate financial support. An investigation into the directors took three years and the judge finally reported In February 2021, after a three-year case, Mrs Justice Falk in the High Court rejected the Official Receiver's assertion that Batmanghelidjh and the other trustees were unfit to be directors of a charity, saying "Most charities would, I think, be delighted to have available to them individuals with the abilities and experience that the trustees in this case possess. It is vital that the actions of public bodies do not have the effect of dissuading able and experienced individuals from becoming or remaining charity trustees".[11] She said: "[A] restructuring plan was agreed and a further government grant was awarded, however the charity was forced to close after sexual assault allegations [the same week]. The charity was exonerated following a police investigation - but by that time it was too late. Had it not been for those unfounded allegations, it is more likely than not that the restructuring would have succeeded and the charity would have survived."[12] The judge found that there had been "no dishonesty, bad faith or personal gain on the part of Batmanghelidjh or the trustees ... Nor had there been any inappropriate expenditure on children assisted by the charity"
So actually the only people failed by the system were once again children.

Ooh, such presumption on your part tri. I know a lot about the lengths girls are prepared to go, but if the source of advice is wrong, it’s better to shut it down and provide something better. Mermaids is tainted by their previous wrong activities, some of which they are prepared to perpetuate evidently with your support.

I was really glad when Kids Company was shut down, this does not mean I dont care about children in poverty.
I would follow the guidance in the cass report about the support that should be offered. If Mermaids meets that guidance great.