woman loses residency of son she was raising as daughter

Posted before I finished..

Hanora50

Tubas has not given any personal details out, has spoken in very broad terms and about noone in particular, but the company and issues she noticed while working there. All information on Suzie Green that has been mentioned in here is already available on the internet, I know this as I read it all a week or so ago..

As for the influx of mermaids posts..I am slightly skeptical. Great timing. Quite why a charity such as mermaids would either 1) send a bunch of parents onto a forum to argue or 2) set up a bunch of sock puppet accounts is beyond me. What happened to professionalism?

I have no doubts that Mermaids is a big help to many parents of gender questioning children. However the lack of any kind of statements about Mermaids saying, for example..'actually in our opinion this child is not transgender' speaks volumes. This is why it appears that the transition route is always used. The fact that Mermaids continues to argue that the child in the news story is trans is a disgrace. The whole world (and the tavistock..apparently) is transphobic. Accepting that you got this case wrong would have been a much stronger position than trying to discredit the court and professionals and burying heads in the sand while continuing to support an abusive mother.

tubasinthemoonlight

Just read the full thread, sorry this happened to you.

I don't think Mermaids is a totally bad organisation, just one that is acting beyond its remit. I can see from posts on this thread that it has helped people by connecting them to others in the same situation. However, when you find yourself disagreeing with people in the same situation as you, you either keep quiet so as not to lose the support of the group or you risk being ostracised. When my dd started having reservations about transitioning she lost all her friends in the same social group as they turned against her for not being True Trans.

From the link supposedly debunking the 80% myth, gender critical people are called transphobic and homophobic concern trolls. There is no debate, just insults at people who disagree.

It's hard to put a balanced gender critical view to a teenager with gender dysphoria without being called transphobic TERF cis-scum, etc. I forgive a teenager who's still learning the art of debate and listening, but adults - no.

The thing is Hanora50 that of the number of gender non-conforming children, the large majority of them won't have gender dysphoria. Those with GP are very likely trans. Those without, aren't. It's not whether transgender children grow out of it, it's confusing trans with gender non-conformity. No-one is suggesting transgender people don't exist for heaven's sake !

This child didn't have gender dysphoria, so why are Mermaids claiming the case as a seminal point in their narrative? By any medical definition he's not trans.

This article, with all the associated referenced articles, is a far better resource than the ones that link to horrific advice from idiots on Reddit:

everydayfeminism.com/2015/03/i-think-i-might-be-trans/

The primary advice is 'you have time, explore, take small steps and keep reevaluating'. Not 'you must get hormones now - go lie to people'.

There are something like 50 linked articles throughout that are also relevant. I personally found it very useful but feel free to tear individual sentences apart because that is what I expect.

In response to the incorrect 80% quoted on News Night yesterday

http://www.brynntannehill.com/the-end-of-the-desistance-myth/

The absolute hypocrisy of this thread astounds me on a number of levels. Firstly many of you talk about confidentiality and about someone mentioning Tuba's real name, that comment had been removed before I joined in the conversation, and yet you support Tubu in her discussions around things that happened when she says she was on the board of trustees at Mermaids but surely if she was a trustee then she signed a confidentiality and data protection policy and she would still be bound by this even though she left. I myself have worked for a number of high profile charity organisations in the past and even now I am still bound by the policy I signed at the time. Then Tubu goes on to discuss Susie Green and her daughter in detail and yes I know a lot of the information is public knowledge but is all of it?

Many of you talk about Mermaids pushing their own agenda but my goodness from what I have seen here you really push yours and appear to be quiet virulent in your hatred of an organisation that says they are there to support families of gender variant children. 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. My goodness don't you think that, just as each of you do, individuals are capable of voicing their own opinions based on their experiences. I myself have an academic background, am not brainwashed, do have my own opinions and like nothing better than a good healthy debate but you cannot debate when the feelings of hatred are so profound. Many of you make assumptions about individuals you know nothing about based on the fact that they are loving parents trying to do the best for their child.

Hundreds of parents have belonged to Mermaids since 1995 and out of those you have heard the two voices of dissent and in the case of one she appears to have left with bad feelings. If this person was so unhappy why did she not take it through the proper channels at the time instead waiting another two years to jump on the band wagon because I know that if I had those concerns about any organisation I would have done just that. Surely even the most ardent of you can see this point?

And so I press the post message button and wait for the attacks back.

Thank you for the copy of the press release.

I'm afraid I'm going to end up with splinters on my backside from fence sitting.

I think the press release is a little blinded, In respect of the overlooking of worries raised by professionals and the current outcome, of the child being free to express themselves fully now they are with what has been deemed as a very passive father.

However, I do see where their worries lie. It has been deemed as a transgender issue that the child has been removed, I mean the DM headlines were pretty narrow minded with "Transgender Child removed From Mother", and that in itself will cause huge worry and upset to parents of children with gender dysmorphia currently going through the worry and struggles that are associated with this, that may be now seen as child abusers.

Without the knowledge of what has been said between the mother and Mermaids, I cannot be in a position to comment on why they feel strongly to overlook the other issues that have been raised in the report but I suspect it is because of the confidential information that was between themselves and the huge support that have given that drives them to continue to support the mother. It may well be she was acting in what she believed was right for her child, but based upon clearly lots of other issues, has become very narrow minded in her views. I think it needs to be said that this is perhaps a very rare case and perhaps Mermaids should clarify this.

She didn't say he was a gender non confirming boy she said he was a girl.

The child in question was NOT diagnosed with gender dysphoria, despite the mother saying he had been.

The mother insisted he was a girl based on...?

Mermaids statement:

PRESS RELEASE
23 OCTOBER 2016

Parents fearful in supporting transgender children following High Court ruling

Parents of gender questioning and transgender children have expressed serious concerns, following publication of a High Court ruling in which a gender questioning child was removed from their mother on the basis that, in allowing the child to express gender non-conforming behaviours, the mother was in some way making her child transgender.

Social services found no evidence to support the threshold of any significant or other harm to the child and indeed judged her to be a loving and caring mother who had taken active steps to protect her child from bullying and was home educating them to a high standard.

Following publication of the ruling by Mr Justice Hayden, the transgender and LGBTQ community together with their allies have questioned the Judgement

One of the first to comment was Susie Green, CEO of Mermaids, the national UK charity that supports children, teens and families of transgender and gender questioning young people. Susie is available for interview, email [email protected] Susie commented:
“This case highlights the challenges of how professionals across a number of agencies including the Courts, understand and respond to issues relating to gender identity. This is a complex case, many aspects of which are not reflected in the judgement. Unfortunately, the Court did not request any expertise to be provided either from this organisation, or from the national centre for supporting children with gender issues, the Tavistock GIDS. There is also a body of international experts, commentary and research in this field, none of which has been formally accessed.

“We know from experience, having worked with hundreds of young people, and from international research that very young children can express gender non-conforming behaviours. The stress and isolation that families can feel when their child experiences gender identity challenges at any age can be immense. It must be appreciated that this matter involved parents who had separated in very acrimonious circumstances. “There have been a number of unsubstantiated allegations made against the mother which have been presented as fact in the judgement. What is clear is that the child’s voice appears to have been lost in the face of a bitter parental dispute. Mermaids would urge the Courts to respect the child’s human rights and that the child remains central to the entire proceedings.

Mermaids is aware that the announcement of the ruling was quickly followed by the creation of an online petition demanding justice for the mother and her child, which received over 3,000 signatures within hours, as parents of transgender children and their supporters feared for the human rights repercussions. Many voiced their concerns within protected social media groups, worried that by supporting their own children, they too may now be accused of child abuse.

Commenting within a closed forum, one parent of a young transgender child equated the current struggle as the ‘defining civil rights battle for the 21st century’, posting:
“Our children and families face hostility, criticism, abuse, isolation every day. No loving parent would choose this for their child. I love my daughter to the moon and back. And I will not allow hard won rights and protections to be taken away by ignorance and hate.”

An eminent child psychotherapist and gender specialist, (UKCP, BACP, WPATH), performed an independent assessment for the courts, which concluded that the mother had not instigated the child’s gender identity, that she was merely supportive of her child, and was open to the possibility of the child’s gender identity and expression changing in the future. Separately, the court was also presented with an independent psychiatric report which stated that the mother had no psychiatric issues. However, in contrast to the professionally endorsed reports, there was no substantive evidence provided to show that the child was being emotionally or physically abused, or was ‘at risk’ from her mother. This is not mentioned in the Judgement.

This judgement, as it stands, has significant implications for gender-questioning children and their parents. Indeed, the Social Services division at the heart of this case has already begun to review its policies. Mermaids is committed to supporting all professionals who work with these children and their families so that well informed, measured judgements can be made in accordance with the child’s human rights and the equality laws.

~ ENDS ~
About Mermaids:
Mermaids is a the only national charity offering support, to gender questioning and transgender children, young people and their families in the UK. Mermaids were awarded a National Diversity Award in 2016 and have been nominated for four other awards for the work they do in supporting children and their families to gender questioning and transgender children as well as education and expert support to organisations nationally. Mermaids work at a local, regional and national level to improve outcomes for these children as well with government bodies
A number of the trustees at Mermaids are also professional members of the WPATH ( World Professional Association for Transgender Health) and regularly engage with international leaders. Mermaids presented a national conference on 14th October 2016 attended by a 100 professionals, families and leaders who came together to discuss the needs of such children and ways to support.
Mermaids also offers resources and training to educational establishments and organizations on diversity and support for young transgender people.
The Mermaids charity, represented by CEO Susie Green, is one of the few organisations that is called to give evidence at government level on the topic of transgender issues and children. It is also the only charitable organisation outside of the NHS treatment pathway referenced by the NHS as a supporting body for gender questioning and transgender children.
Mermaids have successfully helped thousands of young people and their families since the charity was formed in 1995
For further information, please contact: [email protected] or visit www.mermaids.org.uk

References:
Mermaids Facebook Post: www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1122167297880045&id=192046384225479
Online petition: www.change.org/p/a-court-justice-for-a-young-trans-girl-that-has-been-taken-from-her-mum-forced-to-live-as-a-boy
England and Wales High Court (Family Division) Decisions www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2016/2430.html PLEASE NOTE: This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for this version of the judgment to be published on condition that (irrespective of what is contained in the judgment) in any published version of the judgment the anonymity of the children and members of their family must be strictly preserved. All persons, including representatives of the media, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so will be a contempt of court

Sorry, my response was to itsallgoingtobefine

Quite possibly. Unfortunately I haven't read Mermaids response to the outcome of this case so cannot really comment on this. I will however endeavour to have a look.

On my part, after seeing comments like Mermaids is a cult or brain washing people, I just felt it right to comment on my own experience and just speak out that I haven't found the organisation to be anything of the sort that has been stated.

It was quite striking on newsnight that when susie green was asked about desistance rates amongst children who had been involved with mermaids

As far as I remember the question was about desistance rates in general not just Mermaids, which made it even more striking that Green had to fumble for anecdata from a small self selecting group, whereas Davies Arai knew the results of the actual scientific studies.

It was quite striking on newsnight that when susie green was asked about desistance rates amongst children who had been involved with mermaids, the only answer she could give was 'about 6'
Which is probably fair enough (just about) if they were only a parent support forum, but nowhere near good enough for an organisation that is getting lottery funding and being presented as experts.

I obviously do not know personally what was said by this particular mother on the forum, but if she went on and stated that Tavistock advised to let her child transgress or that the authorities were being discriminative, or even that she had been to CAHMS, who are the people on Mermaids to know any different?

That is a reasonable point, but if that were the case I wouldn't be expecting Mermaids to be disagreeing with the verdict and saying that the judge and the rest of the world were transphobic, and that the mother had been gagged.

If Mermaids were a reputable organisation Id be expecting their post on Facebook press release to be apologetic and concerned, stating that they has very obviously got it wrong in this case, and that they would be tightening up on their safeguarding policy (do they even have a safeguarding policy?)

Yes, Beyond, it is.

Isn't it quite standard for family courts to be restricted re identification/reporting?

I have to say, that court report was hard reading and actually very sad. I think personally, based upon what I read, that the judge has made the right decision overall based upon what is seen an an unhealthy relationship and overpowered by the mothers views. As we all know, children spend time to-ing and fro-ing on what they like, don't like and anything Inbetween. I have 4 children, my eldest used to love his pink buggy and baby doll, my 2nd eldest is/was a tomboy but liked to occasionally wear princess dresses, my 2nd youngest acts quite infeminate but wants to join the RAF plays war games with toy soldiers but also loves horse riding and the youngest wears nail varnish, likes to wear high heels, plasters his face in make up, occasionally wears my only feminine clothes. Myself, I see myself as a bit of a Tomboy, like helping to fix cars, drink pints, prefer mud to being squeaky clean, wear steel toe capped boots, nails always bitten down, rarely wear makeup etc etc, but am very comfortable at being female. None of my children have expressed any other desire to be any other gender except their own.

However, recently my 2nd eldest based upon us finding worrying stuff and me seeking urgent advice has expressed her desire to change gender. This is where my contact with Mermaids began

I had a series of telephone conversations with them explaining about what was going to. I found them incredibly helpful and was told numerous times that they were not qualified health professionals, and could only advise based upon their own experiences. I was advised to contact CAHMS, but at this point we were under their councellors. It was also advised to me that this was a forum to give non-judgemental support from others who have been or are in the same situation.

The trouble is, as I see in this case, a place that wants to support people and give a safe haven for people that want advice or just to vent, can only advise based upon the information given. I obviously do not know personally what was said by this particular mother on the forum, but if she went on and stated that Tavistock advised to let her child transgress or that the authorities were being discriminative, or even that she had been to CAHMS, who are the people on Mermaids to know any different?

It appears from what I read in the report, that the mother has her own issues mainly I suspect based upon her dislike of her ex partner. It also appears that the people trained to stop abuse actually failed quite miserably , even with so many people including schools highlighting their worries. I personally think that this is where the buck should really stop and I'm glad that intervention was involved thankfully (or hopefully) before any serious impaction and with any luck the child can grow into a well rounded person.

As I say, I can only advise of my personal experience, but have at no time felt that I need to push my child into any gender and have infact been advised to just go with the flow and continue to just be supportive of my child's current choices

The mum's 'side of the story' is in the judgment, surely? I.e. she thinks the child is a girl, but there doesn't seem to be any real reason for that. It's not like the judge didn't speak to her or she wasn't involved in the court case

I don't get all this "mums side of the story" whining. Has the father posted his "side of the story" publically anywhere? Is the father approaching the media? Or is he perhaps bound by the same restrictions as the mother?

Apologies- app told me the first post hasn't posted

Can I ask a question of those criticising the judge for 'gagging' the mother?

What do you think is the alternative? Surely, whatever you think of the substantive judgment concerning J, it cannot be in any child's best interests to have highly personal details of their life splashed all over the Internet. Even if you think the judge has made the wrong decision about J's living arrangements, how could it possibly be appropriate for M to expose J's childhood to permanent (because once it's out there, there's no going back) public scrutiny? Or do you think the parent's right to make decisions for their child outweighs the child's entitlement to privacy?

Can I ask a question of those criticising the judge for 'gagging' the mother?

What do you think is the alternative? Surely, whatever you think of the substantive judgment concerning J, it cannot be in any child's best interests to have highly personal details of their life splashed all over the Internet. Even if you think the judge has made the wrong decision about J's living arrangements, how could it possibly be appropriate for M to expose J's childhood to permanent (because once it's out there, there's no going back) public scrutiny? Or do you think the parent's right to make decisions for their child outweighs the child's entitlement to privacy?

But what I know is no matter how much boys clothes, lego, star wars toys etc you throw at a child, you can not MAKE them feel like a boy

God they just don't get it do they?

Let boys and girls play with whatever they want ffs!