Susie Green

As the parent of a child with asd I do know it’s very hard when you feel no one is listening to you about your child’s situation.
Nevertheless I cannot begin to comprehend why this woman acted as she did and I can find no reason to excuse her. Still less do I excuse her for her strident attempts to influence schools, parents and other children.

I think we need to now push for Mermaids to be banned from going into schools.

Reading this thread is very upsetting.

There's no way SG should be able to influence vulnerable children in this way.

I have watched the video. It is callled “transgender:a mother’s story”

I found it sad and thought provoking

I don’t think Mermaids should have such influence. No mother who has made these kind of decisions (rightly or wrongly) could ever hope to be objective about other people’s children. It’s not appropriate for Susie Green to have such a voice.

I also suspect that Susie Green did not see the “fashion” for young -people- identifying -as -trans coming. To be fair to her, it was probably the last thing she expected sad

Oh, and if you tell a boy that all the toys and clothes they love are ‘girls’ clothes, and if society only provides female-bodied examples of the sort of person you wish to be, then I’m pretty sure that such a boy would logically conclude they must be a girl.

I worry that the narrative of Mermaids has shifted from challenging the idea that children have to display the very narrow gender characteristics that society has assigned to their sex, i.e. gender variance, to girl brain/boy brain theory, where if your personality doesn’t fit the role society expects you to play, the best solution is to physically change your body.

I’m sure there are some people whose body dysmorphia is so strong that physical transition is the best option. I find it horrifying that sterilising gay children so they can better fit our society’s gender stereotypes is becoming the ‘normal’ route though.

Interestingly, Mermaid’s own website links to articles like this one that are of the ‘gender variant’ rather than ‘boy brain/girl brain’ flavour.

I wonder whether Mermaids are aware of these tensions within their organisation, and what the original founders think of the direction it has taken.

@rowdywoman1 I was thinking the other day about the Satanic Panic and how it was allowed to come about in a large part through good intentions backed with theories that were not backed up by robust scientific evidence.

There’s an excellent book called Satan’s Silence on how Satanic Ritual Abuse cases swept America, and the parallels with the phenomenon of trans kids are quite chilling. I urge anyone with even a cursory interest in the subject of child protection to read it. It frightens me that we really have learnt nothing.

Watching with interest

Peaceloving - I think something has to be a crime in the UK in order for it to be tried here and the law to make provision for actions overseas to be tried here. IIRC there was a law change a while back to criminalise performing FGM on a girl taken from the UK; similarly to criminalise underage sex in places like Thailand. War crimes and terrorist activities can also be tried in the UK even if they took place overseas. Evidence is obviously the big difficulty in a successful prosecution

I wonder whether taking a 16 yo abroad for genital surgery would count as FGM under current laws? Would the parent of a MIT find themselves proferring the defence that the surgery had been conducted on their male child, so does not count as Female Genital Mutilation, even though the TRA narrative is that the child would have "always been a girl"

It seems appropriate to post a link to Heather Brunskelll-Evans' podcast here: www.feministcurrent.com/2018/03/18/podcast-heather-brunskell-evans-wants-talk-idea-trans-kids/
as well as as a link to the book review in The Journal of child Psychotherapy www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0075417X.2018.1435707?scroll=top&needAccess=true

Is there any lawyers or people knowledgable that can tell me whether someone who goes Abroad to performance and ilegal act (say buy sex with minors or forbidden surgery as in SG case) and comes back to UK and it is find out, would they be prosecuted? How does one go about alerting the authorities? Hiding in plain sight?

OleannasWimple
It reminds me of the satanic abuse allegations back in the late 80s / 1990s which resulted in children being removed from homes in dawn raids following allegations which subsequently proved to be false. Lots of professionals were drawn into this with training courses and conferences and subsequently after a major investigation which proved that the allegations were unfounded, significant damages were paid to a number of families. The NSPCC (who I have great admiration for) were caught up in it. This was in the days before the internet so it is easy to see how nowadays, specific ideas / beliefs can more easily gain greater traction and support.

rowdy - my personal view of how this situation has arisen in schools is (funnily enough, given the earlier discussion on this thread about conservative religion) that it is similar to what happened a few years back when schools were looking for guidance on how to accommodate Muslim children. Some of the groups that came forward and produced guidance and delivered training and made nice hand-outs available were later identified as promoting extremism, it's just that it wasn't recognised as such at the time because of a lack of general education. I suspect in five years time there will be a general incredulity that Mermaids was ever allowed in a school, but I can see how it has happened now, sadly.

Red - the "broad and balanced curriculum" phrase is a general term used by the DfE. Some religious schools fall foul of it (or come very close to it) when the timetable is dominated by RE, bible studies, catechism classes and prayers (for example)

Well done to whoever reported that.

The NHS Choices website page for Gender Dysphoria has removed the link to Mermaids as a suggestion for getting support (hooray! - someone out there is listening)

Now that is extremely good news

The NHS Choices website page for Gender Dysphoria has removed the link to Mermaids as a suggestion for getting support (hooray! - someone out there is listening).

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions".

Thank you R0wantrees and RedToothBrush (again)

This from Mermaid's Trustee's annual report:
"Mermaids has also become more active in lobbying on behalf of its members for better treatment, in contributing towards policy decisions within the NHS, in providing training on trans issues specifically regarding children and young people.... All of this is crucially important to help influence changes that are so desperately needed." So quite clearly a lobby group - and there's nothing wrong with that.

Working in education with training, safeguarding and sensitive issues, you come into contact with countless organisations wanting to access schools and children and schools must gate keep. The DfE has guidance on the role of 'political ' and lobbying ' organisations in schools, They are forbidden to allow the promotion of 'partisan political views' and have to ensure a balance of views.

I fail to understand how the DfE have exercised due diligence in enabling these lobby groups direct access to schools. I can see how it has happened - groups that frame everything within an equal opportunity / anti discrimination framework are seemingly appropriate - until you examine the materials and see that groups are using not just persuasive techniques but as highlighted, countering the Samaritan's guidelines on suicide in an attempt to persuade the audience of a particular cause and effect. Framing presentations within a definition of 'transphobia' that silences an audience and inhibits legitimate questions. At times, undermining basic safeguarding principles by insisting that children have no right to expect commonly accepted principles of safety and privacy. Undermining a child's understanding of the basis of consent by promoting the eradication of sex segregated spaces.

I am minded of Red's caution that we must approach all of this with care. These are organisations representing vulnerable people and children and I do believe that their intentions are 'positive'. However in their zeal to promote their version of reality and to change schools and society to enable their particular model of validation, they fail to appreciate the harm that is happening to children who are having their boundaries and their ability to consent removed - all in plain sight.

When you work with children you know that school can be a place of acute agony for many children if their right to privacy and safety, in particular in relation to puberty and their developing bodies, is not respected and enabled. Knowing this, it seems unbelievable that any organisation working with children would promote practices that remove these rights from any child.

I'm not at all surprised that Susie Green continues to be adamant they they did the only thing possible for their child. Reading other trans account on here and elsewhere, perhaps it truly is the best option for a very few people, who cannot live with their natural bodies and expected roles, and don't have the luxury of waiting for a less gender-ridden society.

None of us will never know whether her child really fell into that category, or whether, given parents and a society who had never heard of SRS, this child would have grown out of it like so many others, I personally think it is a tragic outcome, but then so are many other decisions taken for a child in good faith.

It's the pushy, blinkered campaigning that sticks in my craw.

I am fully expecting this thread to disappear in a puff of smoke with a deletion message from MNHQ, such is my current scepticism towards Mermaids inability to deal with any level criticism or divergent thought. If it should disappear, I think it would rather prove my point.

If they are to have credibility and for people who might come into contact with the charity to trust them, they need to address these areas.

the personal experience is both a motivator (which can be a positive or a negative thing) and an emotional thing (which can be good if it helps you connect with people but unless it can be controlled and you can step back from your own experience can also mean you are really blinded by your own experience).
I completely agree and this is something that I am acutely aware of when sharing my experience in the hope it might support others eg that whilst we might share one key similarity, our wider circumstances and needs are very different. I've seen how some people who are emotionally driven are often blind to the actual needs of others. The charities that I have worked with (for a specific health issue) are also really heavily informed by medical guidance, good practice etc. and these are primarily supporting adult women.
There seems to be a gaping hole in the resources that I've seen regarding children and young people and I'm gobsmacked!!

Susie Green is capable of going to the Samaritans website all by herself and reading their guidelines on talking about suicide and how it is a social contagion.

Susie is not ignorant of this.

It has been talked about repeatedly on social media and on MN. We know that Mermaids are reading these threads and checking for things they can report or find a way to attack MNHQ for allowing.

That the issue continues to be used is alarming.

The suicide reporting guidelines are here:
www.samaritans.org/media-centre/media-guidelines-reporting-suicide

One point is this:
Remember that there is a risk of imitational behaviour due to ‘over-identification’.

Vulnerable individuals may identify with a person who has died, or with the circumstances in which a person took their own life.

For example, combining references to life circumstances, say a debt problem or job loss, and descriptions of an easy-to-imitate suicide method in the same report, could put at greater risk people who are vulnerable as a result of financial stress.

Since we are talking about identity politics this seems a pretty big and easy problem to spot.

The Samaritans report on suicide is here:
www.samaritans.org/sites/default/files/kcfinder/files/Suicide_statistics_report_2017_Final.pdf

It has a lengthy section on the problems with suicide statistic and reporting. It talks about how comparisons of figures are problematic and how they should not be used on small population figures because they can be grossly misleading.

The idea that Susie is unaware of this is mind boogling and I find inconceivable.

If in the remote chance she genuinely doesn't she hasn't done enough research on her own.

If the Mermaids spies are out in force on MN, then the link above are for Susie's personal benefit and I suggest they have a good look at them and pass them on to Susie to help her with her programme.

R0wantrees the personal experience is both a motivator (which can be a positive or a negative thing) and an emotional thing (which can be good if it helps you connect with people but unless it can be controlled and you can step back from your own experience can also mean you are really blinded by your own experience).

I think it is really difficult to do that necessary stepping back. I know my Mum is unable to question anything relating to my sibling in her own head. It has led to the breakdown of my relationship with her, because she can not separate from that. Areas which she would always normally do that in she is completely blinded by my siblings experience.

I have found the process of actually doing that, has been the very thing that has alienated me. The trouble is, the whole experience does make you look at your family and question things and I think I would have to shut down completely and utterly mentally in order to do that. I couldn't. That's not how I have been educated. It put me in direct conflict of what I believe in and think matters and being asked to forget all that for the sake of my sibling. It was never going to work.

I think the lack of room in the trans culture to explore issues in an environment in which any sort of dissent is labelled as transphobic is a big issue for this reason. It reinforces the sense of defensiveness and doesn't help build up a tolerance and understanding of the difference between a lazy, ill thought out comment, one that is well meaning and trying to learn and understand and one which is genuinely abusive. Instead it creates this bubble in which the only people who really are on your side are the support group and its unquestioning allies.

This is why I have difficulty in seeing them as a support group and do see them as being very cultish, as one of the key features of a cult is to try and discourage critical thinking.

My sibling was already wound up so much by the people they were around that they would be rejected by their family, that DH was judged as prejudice before the event of being told. This ultimately set up a whole spiral of being unable to engage and hold a normal conversation. It led to abusive behaviour and a complete breakdown in communication because of the overly defensive manner in which we were treated.

I don't see how affirmation only, ultimately helps in that context. It just makes the cycle of it continue and be worse, because it never helps to build skills to be resistant or understand where comments are coming from. In the short term it might be helpful. In the long term I just think it sets you up to live in a bubble of reality which is somehow parallel to the rest of the world, and it makes it harder to be part of the world.

I don't know that trying to force the rest of the world to pander to that will work. I fact I know it won't. It will just lead to greater isolation and resentment rather than proper understanding. Especially if there are a lot of people who fall through the cracks or are let down by an affirmation only policy.

I don't know. I just feel there are issues with this charity, which need careful consideration and thought about, before getting involved with them. Their own bias is hard to ignore and avoid.

& given the high levels of reported suicide ideation and vulnerability of the young people concerned. I am really shocked that the training program for volunteers seems (according to the report) being devised by Susie Green alone... surely CMHT/Samaritans/Tavistock etc etc would have been involved?

what I am struck by is the difference between what I have heard Polly Carmichael say and what I have seen said by for example Susie Green and Sgt Gina Denham. Both Susie & Gina have very powerful personal experiences and I understand their drives to help others in similar circumstances... ( I've been involved with charities specific to my experiences, motivated to make things a little easier for those who follow etc)
I'm surprised that there doesn't seem to be much in the way of obvious professional endorsement... especially in so far as the two organisations they represent seem to have been involved with schools etc. I'm really surprised that Tavistock (or similar) don't take a more prominent role.