woman loses residency of son she was raising as daughter

Did I miss it becoming Groundhog Day?

Hi Paula it sounds as if your situation is different from the woman in this court case that the thread is about - obviously in that case the mother was found to be forcibly transing her son, with "support" from Mermaids. Are you happy that Mermaids are still maintaining that they were right, and the court was wrong?

It says they accept self-referrals here: tavistockandportman.nhs.uk/care-and-treatment/coming-see-us/young-people/do-you-need-help/

So in that case, which "professional" referred the mother? As it says she refused everyone ..... Unless I suppose, Social Services?

The Tavistock take self-referrals - well they always used to. I assume that extends to parents who are seeking help for their children

Hello to all the mums out there, just wanted to respond positively to all the posts about this. I am the proud mum of a transgender child, and no I do not have a mental condition or the unfulfilled desire for a child of this sex, as I already had 1 before my teen told me that they felt they had been born in the wrong body. This is a recognised medical condition, called dysphoria, for which my child has been receiving treatment from qualified Doctors, and in no shape or form is a whim. Mermaids have been supporting us as a family for the last 4 years, and without them I am not certain that my child would still be alive, as they saw no future stuck in the body they were born with. You are all lucky if this sort of medical dilemma has never happened to you, but dont judge those of us that are trying to help and support our much loved individuals through what can be a very hard time.

According to Tavistock website, any "professional" can refer, they just don't accept self referrals (although they do state a preference for CAHMS referrals)

tavistockandportman.nhs.uk/care-and-treatment/our-clinical-services/gender-identity-development-service-gids/

The one thing I can't understand, was how the mother managed to see Tavistock without being referred. I was of the understanding that CAHMS have to assess first and then refer (as confirmed yesterday by our Councellors)

Does anyone know the answer to this?

Yes, there was a discussion about my child actually being gay. We also discussed that this may be a phase as my child has hit her teens. We also discussed my worries that my child was bein manipulated into being trans, rather than actually having gender identity issues. When I said I was surprised by this sudden change, and that my child gets upset when we say she looks female featurly, they responded that it's what my child sees when she looks in the mirror (which mirrored something my friend who is a health professional said to me previously)

When I mentioned my worries of my child pushing for hormone blockers and surgery at such a young age, I was comforted by the fact that it's not a quick easy process and so wouldn't be something we could rush into. They also said it does sound like my child is very confused rather than being sure of gender dysmorphia.

I was also advised to seek help via CAHMS (although I had already reached out to them) and told consistently that they were not trained health professionals but parents/guardians/carers etc who just advise, support and discuss transgender issues from their own experiences.

The other issue I was worried about was my child wanting a binder, and I was worried about the health impact on a developing child. They gave me their opinion that they did not believe it caused any issues, but advised me to research first.

Gidds / Hanora what advice did Mermaids give you about the likelihood that your child will grow up to be lesbian or gay and not trans? Did they point you to resources where you could make connections with other parents of GNC kids who are not trans or any materials to show kids that they could grow up to be a butch lesbian or an effeminate gay man and affirming that as a good outcome? Did they talk about the dangers of life-long hormone treatments or surgeries?

WankingMonkey (this seriously makes me giggle every time I read your name lol). I do agree with this sentiment, but as I said before I may get splinters on my butt from fence sitting. On the face of it, it does seem quite incredulous based on the judgement that they are supporting blindly the mother. However, without knowing what conversations went on confidentially between the mother and mermaids, I am not in a position to understand and have considered that maybe there is more to it than what the judgement states. I do however think that they should state something on the lines of this particular case being a very rare situation, as I can understand them wanting to be seen to support their members through thick and thin.

mermaids? ( sorry for ignorance)

I can't answer the first 2 questions, as I'll be honest I've not looked into it. My child also has not joined the youngsters side, but do know that as a parent/guardian/foster carer, you have to join first before your child joins. I also know that all posts are moderated first, and that is for both child and parent.

With my experience, I found mermaids from googling as was at a bit of a loss with my child's situation - it's most bizarre and has every agency scratching their head at the min.

Anyway I called them, explained my situation and we just talked about it. When i requested to join, I had to provide some personal details and more importantly a landline to which they called me on a couple of days later. I provided my email address and when I wrote about my predicament, it was moderated before it went live. It doesn't work like this forum, where what I write is published before it is moderated

I think you have misunderstood my postings, I was saying that the mother perhaps was misguided in her sense of trying to protect her child and based upon the information provided to Mermaids, they have supported her.

I can understand them taking the mother at her word at the time. What I cannot understand is the continual insistence (even after reading the judgement, as they have claimed to do) that they were right and the judge, and the professionals involved, and even the Tavistock were wrong. That this 'poor child' is now being 'forced' to live as a boy. And so on.

And as this child isn't trans, why are they involved ?

OK, so can anyone who is a Mermaids service user tell me where I can find Mermaids child protection policy?

Are all Mermaids trustees DBS checked?

How does Mermaid check the identities of those requesting to use either the parent or teen boards?

Actually I am a parent who does belong to Mermaids and I have not denied that. What I do deny though is that I have been asked to comment here by anyone from Mermaids as I have my own mind and will use that when I feel the need to do so. I have been on mumsnet, under a different name, for many years now and have followed many conversations like this and even commented on them so have not joined with just this purpose. Yes I have changed my name so that none of this leads back to my family, and in-particular my child, but I don't need to hide behind an organisation or be the voice for them. My words are my own and I stick by them.

Lol ipost. I agree, it sometimes is hard to separate the wheat from that chaff, but my forever pinging of my email box for mumsnet job updates or newsletters would qualify me as being an oldie. Trouble is, once I find a topic to debate, you can't get rid of me and have to endure my wafflings . Normally I'm a thread killer, so am grateful for the opportunity to continue my waffling!

Fourormore

I think you have misunderstood my postings, I was saying that the mother perhaps was misguided in her sense of trying to protect her child and based upon the information provided to Mermaids, they have supported her. From the judgement, it appears that the mother has manipulated the situation with relevant agencies and indeed has given herself such a narrow view to the child's gender, that she forgot to let him decide who he was, and honestly think this was actually based on her dislike of her ex opposed to what her child wanted. If you look at my previous postings, you'll see I have a youngest who wears makeup, nail varnish, high heels, princess dresses etc etc, but has absolutely no gender identity issues. For him, he has autism and doesn't see male/female conforms and quite rightly so. (I did put load more about my personal life a couple of pages back, I believe )

In this instance from what I've read of the report, I think the judge has made the correct decision. It was heartbreaking reading, if I'm honest.

I wasn't referring to the judgement when I said about the poor parent, I was merely stating that if the mother was posting on the forum that that was what was going on, the mermaids would have had to take that at face value when they are there to support in a non judgemental way

Hope that makes sense - I do have an incredible ability to waffle

I have to say, I am genuinely here off my own back

7 years ago I sat with increasing levels of eyebrow raising as my off piste, private, niche group co-ordinated a comment bombing.

As soon as it was called out as comment bombing the off piste group started advising people to start commenting by saying they were genuine independent posters, were not co-ordinating with a group or other posters, and ... to introduce a greater degree of nuance in their posts. To add some half agreements with some stuff the forum members has been discussing prior to the invasion. Not cos they believed it. But because nauance/half agreement muddied the waters in the face of being called out as Flying Monkeys.

Which must be really annoying for genuine posters who have just started posting here.

They are between a rock and a hard place when it comes to making the case for their authenticity. Because "activists" have been using the most obvious "but I'm genuine !" strategies for so long that they tend to raise, rather than lower, suspicion of joint enterprise.

Like anything, there are going to be situations where things go wrong

I don't think anyone here would dispute that, however, Mermaids have responded in an unusual way to the court case.

Usual responses:
Apologies
Admitting that on this occasion they had got it wrong
Reassuring service users that they were going to carefully examine their involvement in this case, learn from it, and out in procedures to try and minimise the risk of a repeat.
Update and make clear on their website their safeguarding policy.

Mermaids responses:
Stating repeatedly that they were right and that the courts were wrong
Trying to start a social media shitstorm
Supporting a petition for the child to be returned to mother.
Have service users posting to defend them blindly, without any consideration of the issues raised by the court case
Have no safeguarding policy

Gidds, did we read a different judgement? Where are the parts that show "a poor parent trying to protect her transgender child"? How do you explain the boy independently correcting a teacher who asked him if he was a girl? What gives Mermaids the right to insist this child is a girl when the child himself does not?

I have to say, I am genuinely here off my own back, being part of mumsnet for quite some time. I'm more an observer than a speaker unless I feel opinionated on the situation.

In all fairness, whilst I have joined Mermaids, I'm not overly active there either, as I say I'm more of an observer. However, I am a massive news reader and this story struck me as quite an interesting read. To then read the full court papers was horrific and quite frankly far more deeper than what the news portrayed it as, a poor parent trying to protect her transgender child.

I honestly felt that whilst I could sit here quietly reading the thread and say nothing, to read mermaids being called a cult and brainwashing organisation, I felt that I needed to balance it somewhat and explain my personal experience.

Like anything, there are going to be situations where things go wrong, there is a long list of ones where Social Services got it wrong and children have died. I can think of another situation whereby a lovely agony aunt was supporting someone who's children had been take away etc, was blindly supporting of them Only for it to turn out that the abuse the children had suffered was horrendous. Even recently when that child was taken off her parents, who then went on to fool daytime TV shows, for the child to be sent back to them and dying not long after. It doesn't make organisations overall bad, just misjudged and sometimes by people that are good at manipulation, as seems to be the case of this particular mother.

Overall, from what I have experienced with Mermaids so far, and as I say quite limited, I have to say that they have been nothing but supportive and In my case especially, very open minded

Yy iPost!

I'd love to be a starfish on the wall at mermaids, listening in on them dissecting this thread!

Whenever someone has commented who says they are a parent (as myself) then someone hits back with how brainwashed they are or they must be a trustee or put up to it by a trustee.

If you don't want to be perceived as probably inauthentic, or using a group script then don't employ the well known "comment bombing" strategies of niche "communities" when they are reacting to extremely bad press.

It's not new enough to work anymore. Long ago the curtain was pulled back on ....

-The non public discussion of who should focus their efforts where.

-The sharing of links to forum threads and articles with the covert, or overt request for members to create one or more accounts and flood said link with their voices.

-The joint enterprise of post writing.

-The direct and indirect instruction of what the internal elite want the bog standard members to say.

-The currying of favour/sit up and beg for headpats as members report back with links to their contributions.

It's as old as web 2.0. And this exhibition is about a decade too late not to be seen for what it more than likely is.

And if we are wrong. If you all here off your own bat, utterly coincidentally and not because of Mermaids' off piste link sharing + "shock horror somebody should SAY SOMETHING THERE !" ...then you need to take on board that if you choose to lecture here in the same manner that gets rave reviews in the echo chamber, you are not likely to enjoy the same level of engagement that poster like tubas gets.

You want to be accepted as an authentic, original voice ?

Then develop an authentic, original voice.