Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Question re mermaids

36 replies

IchbineinBerlinner · 03/03/2020 19:43

Is it accurate to say that Mermaids are a charity ran by parents who are not accountable to medical and psychological bodies ? Id really appreciate if someone could let me know if this is right

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
R0wantrees · 04/03/2020 16:59

Mermaids changed its charitable aims a couple of years ago in recognition of the amount of lobbying they did.
This is recorded on Charity Commission documents.

James Kirkup Spectator, May 2018

'Why are some MPs trying to shut down the transgender debate?'
(extract)
Dr Carmichael in her lecture said some things that seem relevant here:

“Gender has become amazingly topical and we have to be really careful not to assume that anyone is exploring or questioning their gender is going to want to change their bodies in line with that. The extremes on either side are not helpful. We need to look at the grey areas in between. To do that we need to be able to talk and discuss these issues. All too often stakeholders become lobby groups.”

She did not name any stakeholder. But her words might be relevant to a charity called Mermaids. Mermaids is a charity that describes itself as “a support group for children and young people with gender dysphoria and their families”. Its CEO, Susie Green describes herself as “parent to a daughter who was born male.” Mermaids is a relatively small charity (it had income of £127,000 in the year to March 2017) with a big reach. It has prominent backers and its advice and recommendations have been absorbed and adopted by many public bodies. (continues)

Despite its influence, it is worth noting what Mermaids is not. It is not a research body. Its activities are support (for families) and advocacy: based on its contacts with those families, it argues for what it sees are better policies and practices by the NHS and others. It does not carry out or commission clinical or academic research. Its most recent annual report lists among its charitable activities “campaigning and advocacy” and says: “Mermaids has also become more active in lobbying”.

There is regular dialogue between Mermaids and the GIDS, but the two sides do not always agree. An example is on the time the GIDS team take to give referred children the hormone-blocking drugs that stop their bodies developing the physical characteristics associated with their birth sex.

In evidence to another Commons inquiry in 2015, Mermaids argued that GIDS should make such drugs available much more quickly. The GIDS team has generally resisted that call, more than once saying that “any decision around hormone treatment needs time and considered thought.”

And in evidence to that earlier committee, Dr Bernadette Wren of the GIDS said this:

“I know that Susie and Mermaids would like a fast track so that young people who are already well into puberty and feel that they know that they want to move forward into physical intervention would bypass our assessment process and move straight into physical intervention. We feel that is not an ethical way to practise.”

Here’s another summary. A transgender charity that says it is engaged in lobbying lobbied politicians and doctors to change the way children are treated by doctors. The doctors declined to make that change because it would be not be ethical to do so." (continues)
beta.spectator.co.uk/article/why-are-some-mps-trying-to-shut-down-the-transgender-debate-

**Mermaids income financial year end March 2019 £715.3K

Tavistock GIDS is to be taken to Judicial Review over claims it has failed in its Duty of Care to children.

TheGreatWave · 04/03/2020 13:24

This may be the best place to start.

www.samaritans.org/about-samaritans/media-guidelines/

LangClegTheBeardedVulture · 04/03/2020 12:25

Jacqui Green did not, as of September 2018, have a GRC, so is still not legally female.

I know this because I heard Susie Green say that JG didn't have one, in person.

stillathing · 04/03/2020 12:10

Does anyone have a good, concise, link for the samaritans guidelines?

ListeningQuietly · 04/03/2020 10:25

Look up who their current trustees are

Judge them by comparing their accounts reports over the years against their stated aims

Daylight is the best therapy

Aesopfable · 03/03/2020 22:02

I am not sure confirmation bias is the correct word for actively seeking supporting evidence. It is much more blatant than that. It is what drug companies get up to. You ‘lose’ unhelpful research (Cf Tavistock). Do trials where the control is nothing instead of the best available alternative. You are very selective in your selection criteria. You have very short follow-ups. Use subjective outcomes and cohort studies. Fail to record adverse outcomes. For qualitative studies you use leading questions and biased researchers.

wellbehavedwomen · 03/03/2020 21:50

^Goldsmiths and Nottingham Universities: Mermaidsis working with the universities to identify potential areas for research to help
develop supporting evidence^

That's... not how research is supposed to work. In fact, that's the opposite. You are supposed to research things to establish what the data really is, and whether it can be replicated. Not to identify areas that look promising in terms of producing the evidence you want to find. Their approach pretty much enshrines confirmation bias as the preferred yardstick in assessing their methodology, no?

Languishingfemale · 03/03/2020 21:45

This court judgement about a young child with a parent who emotionally abuses him by trying to forcibly transition him from a boy to a girl makes interesting reading. Mermaids comes out very badly.
The judgement is lengthy but really worth reading for an in depth look at how multiple professionals and people can focus on an ideology and abandon all care and safeguarding for a child:

www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2016/2430.html

Aesopfable · 03/03/2020 21:35

Hmm... it says it operates in Scotland. To operate in Scotland it needs to be on OSCR. I can’t find it.

ListeningQuietly · 03/03/2020 21:18

Charity framework is interesting
apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/Showcharity/RegisterOfCharities/CharityFramework.aspx?RegisteredCharityNumber=1160575
as are the objects
TO RELIEVE THE MENTAL AND EMOTIONAL STRESS OF ALL PERSONS AGED 19 YEARS AND UNDER WHO ARE IN ANY MANNER AFFECTED BY GENDER IDENTITY ISSUES, AND THEIR FAMILIES, AND TO ADVANCE PUBLIC EDUCATION IN THE SAME.
And the trustees are worth looking up
apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/Showcharity/RegisterOfCharities/ContactAndTrustees.aspx?RegisteredCharityNumber=1160575&SubsidiaryNumber=0

OneEpisode · 03/03/2020 21:08

Hi Blue, the child was M2F,, so legally M at that age.

Aesopfable · 03/03/2020 21:06

the JG case also made Thailand change the law making the operation illegal

I understood that that wasn’t the case. I believe they were on course to do this and SG got in there just before it happened.

BlueHarry · 03/03/2020 21:05

Sorry for all the typos in my post.

BlueHarry · 03/03/2020 21:04

And the child was, at that point, legally not female.

Really? I thought the legal age for legally being recognised as the opposite sex was 18, or is it not? I understand that there'd have been no legal case anyway because of the fgm laws not being in place, but I'm just confused on this point.

Also, thinking the Samaritans guidelines on reporting of suicide, I've written before to online websites and stuff where they've quoted Mermaids on suicides and pointed out that they're not following the guidelines. Some of the sites have amended their articles slightly or just posted a Samaritans link in or something as a result. I'm just wondering now if not following the Samaritans guidelines would be something that the charity commission would care about? Or does it not matter, because it's just a best practice guideline rather than a legal requirement?

OneEpisode · 03/03/2020 20:56

And at 1.4 “hormone suppressing treatment should be accessible to all in a timely manner”. It is safe apparently.

OneEpisode · 03/03/2020 20:53

That 2018 submission from Mermaids, which is their official request to our parliament, has at 2.5, reducing the age at which cross sex hormones can be given. Apparently an age 16 limit is arbitrary.

ListeningQuietly · 03/03/2020 20:49

apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/Accounts/Ends75/0001160575_AC_20190331_E_C.pdf
They pay their key staff very, very well
and do not clarify who made the massive donation in the year

Mossyrock · 03/03/2020 20:40

Wishful thinking.
When it comes to trans it's all about affirmation, support, encouragement, no questioning, no debate, even deep within social services.

I find it so difficult to accept that our country would tolerate the elective removal of a healthy teenager's genitals. Sterility and loss of sexual function for the rest of their life. Surely, surely the school would raise concerns, the GP a social worker?!

OneEpisode · 03/03/2020 20:36

Mermaids don’t seem to like mental health professionals. This is a 2018 request from them. Scroll down to recommendation 1 which is removing psychologists. Psychiatrists and psychotherapists from the process.
data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/women-and-equalities-committee/health-and-social-care-and-lgbt-communities/written/91159.html

Qcng · 03/03/2020 20:34

Surely social services would be all over a parent who took their teenager to another country to have their genitals removed?

Wishful thinking.
When it comes to trans it's all about affirmation, support, encouragement, no questioning, no debate, even deep within social services.

Qcng · 03/03/2020 20:31

Ah ok, and, the JG case also made Thailand change the law making the operation illegal.

Mossyrock · 03/03/2020 20:30

Does anyone know why no legal case has been brought against the head of mermaids

DrLadyBits the only possible reason I can think of is that, at the time, it was not in fact illegal to do so. The child was 15 and had surgery in Thailand on or soon after their 16th birthday. I understand that such surgery has subsequently been banned in Thailand for children.

Would it be legal for a parent to undertake such a trip today? Surely social services would be all over a parent who took their teenager to another country to have their genitals removed?

OneEpisode · 03/03/2020 20:28

The JG case was before the “taking girls abroad for FGM” legislation. And the child was, at that point, legally not female.

Qcng · 03/03/2020 20:22

Basically in our country JG could claim damages that she was taken by her mother to another country for an unethical operation, but JG doesn't want to do that, they are fine with it. No one else can claim on their behalf.

Qcng · 03/03/2020 20:19

^ Ok I'm thinking "legal" is a typo for illegal.