Where does the right to a private life end?

Oh so 'not' a biopic then - just a drama with SG as a consultant who says “they [the producers] very carefully made sure that it involved people with lived experience of this.”
Arse; I enjoyed ''Marcella.

Christ. Such worryingly thoughtless virtue signalling from all involved.

I don't really get why genitals are a no no.

I watch programmes like the secret life of four year olds and I'd hate my kids to be broadcast and scrutinised like that. It's the same with progammes on birth- baby's first moments being televised - a profound moment - out there for the world to see. Same with kids hospitals, A&E, etc.

Parents sign their kid's right to privacy away all the time - supernanny, etc. It is all so violating of a child's privacy - I don't think that sharing everything up to that point is cool- but genitals nuh uh.

Fyi.

Said child is living and working on a sailing yacht here in Italy according to the mother. Going out getting drunk.

Quite adult things for a child who needs this sort of protection from the law.

I wonder what it is going to be like for these adult 'transkids' in their 30s when all their mates are shacking up and starting families.

Lawsuits. When these young people who have been channelled down the affirmative treatment/hormones/hormone blockers/surgery route hit their mid twenties and thirties and realise they were channelled down a route where they cannot have any kind of sex life and are sterile, without truly understanding what was happening, they will sue. It will be the major scandal of the 2020s.

I think MNHQ are correct to ban discussion of a current minor - child protection is actually what we are pressing for. I think there’s probably a grey area with late teens/people who are extremely vulnerable but not minors. I think anyone who has NOT shared medical information themselves publically should not have that information shared.

If a child had a procedure carried out and had not themselves as an adult put the information in the public domain then I think theyvalsobhave a right to privacy (for example if a parent had sought publicity against the wishes of the child.)

A situation where both parent and now adult offspring are actively using their story as a means of lobby = no right to privacy.

I think it means that the drama is all about her... and her 'inspiring journey' - I bet the kid is just a bit part.

SG says the drama isn't sensationalising anything medical or the social transition. If the kid is 11 what medical aspects are there in this? Or does she just mean no discussion about anatomy & physiology.

I wonder what it is going to be like for these adult 'transkids' in their 30s when all their mates are shacking up and starting families.

I bet that's when the penny will drop.

That sort of programming is dangerous - imagine other parents who are scared of 'God' and think it is possible that 'God' made a mistake with their (probably gay) child. Setting up this woman who ironically played God as a hero - it might give them ideas - much to the detriment of their child's health, fertility and bodily integrity.

It is so dangerous.

Oh so 'not' a biopic then - just a drama with SG as a consultant who says “they [the producers] very carefully made sure that it involved people with lived experience of this.”
Arse; I enjoyed ''Marcella.

Getting The World Over A Barrel
One Mothers Inspiring Journey

Did I read that there' s a biopic on Susie Green being made, starring Anna Friel, or was that a bad dream?

A. Thats 'Marcella' series 2 fucked for me and B. with the level of self publicity inherent in a biopic, how can there be any sense of boundaries to what is discussed elsewhere?

Also - wrt to things like Roman Polanski drugging, raping and sodomising a 13 year old back in the day @KateMumsnet @MNHQ - can we discuss this violating crime? It was horrible and discussing it is discussing the intimate body of a minor (although she is probably in her 50s now I would have thought).

Can we not discuss this case because she was 13 at the time it happened?

To be fair to MNHQ, this isn’t the first time they’ve asked posters not to talk about individual children’s genitalia. I’m sure they warned about it months ago.

I agree.

Was SGs child on the Child Protection register? Because they should have been. Social services failed.

The reason why these people have been getting away with passing all these unjust laws is because no one noticed - it was all very stealthy.

And you know what.

It is being noticed now.

I get the legal risk to MN and I think it's a very real risk given the way SG has gone after Posie.

But MN could at least be upfront about it, instead of implying that we are deviants for talking about it

I fully expect MNHQ have taken legal advice about this issue.

From Stephen Whittle