Jeremy Vine show is discussing Keira Bell's case today

redshoeblueshoe any links? sounds to good to be true!

If I remember rightly, whistleblowers have mentioned concerns that the Tavistock was overly involved with and influenced by advocacy groups with a lot of passion but no medical expertise? Questions are going to have to be asked about how professional boundaries were maintained, and whether any issues here contributed to the mess the Tavistock finds themselves in.

Transwoman who changed as an adult talking about it reducing the need for facial and voicebox surgery, erm, only if you are male, I don't know of any transmen who have had this, plus if most desist without blockers you are saving the ones who'd desist from medication and surgery. The facial feminisation etc is optional as well.
I thought it was funny that a GC male was accusing the TRAs of being obsessed with genitals for saying people needed to change their gender to live life as they wanted, saying "just do it in the body you have and reject the stereotypes".

I listened to this in the car. SG toned it down a bit from the Newsnight appearance so no mention of suicide ideation, thank god.

Jeremy Vine is no Emily Maitlis that's for sure but at least he did pushback a bit when Green was insistent on contradicting the findings of the judgement.

The court judgement is very readable for the average lay person but its 38 pages long and I'm certain that the majority of the TRAs who claim to care so much simply won't be bothered enough to read a 38 page court judgement. There was some twat on the WPUK Facebook page yesterday wanging on about how the judgement meant the end for abortion rights, and it was just so fucking obvious they hadn't read it. So many of the questions/accusations I've seen on this so far would be answered clearly and quickly by just reading the judgement. But it's like the JKR essay all over again - "I haven't read it and I won't read it but I know what it says and it's bad and wrong". Lazy stupid selfish morons (that's the nicest version of what I want to call these people).

Fear of legal liabilities has happened, I think.

Well that wasn't as bad as I thought it was going to be. Interesting that most of the callers that were allowed on agreed with the judgement.

And no soft voice for the TW caller (Leah?) either. What on earth has happened?

And just to cheer you all up, Stonewall are backing away from Mermaids.
They have tweeted organisations that will support families, and Mermaids are not on the list.
Thanks to those who listened to this. I can't stand JV

For what its worth, twitter opinion looks to have swung dramatically, in particular about susie green and mermaids.

I really can't see it continuing the way it is.

It is interesting that the vast majority of people agree with the court judgement, those that don't seem to not have any great understand of the issue.

I can quite believe that SG does not possess the intellectual capacity to read in full and meaningfully absorb the court ruling about the Tavistock.

And it shows.

Precocious puberty: mentioned and rebutted in the judgement.

Susie, read the flipping judgement.

I honestly can't tell if she hasn't done so, hasn't understood it, or is just unable to accept objectively and legally established facts that don't fit with her feelings.

The last few days have made it obvious how much of this is just based on speculation.

Adult transpeople saying ''if I'd had the blockers, I may have been much better.''

SG and other parents: "If my child hadn't taken PB's, they might not be here today.

All focused on feelings and not evidence, and what might or might not have happened. Not good enough when you're dealing with patients, especially children.

In between Newsnight last night and her appearance on JV shes had time to think about her media strategy and she’s chosen to double down on the precocious puberty angle.
Really?
At least she didn’t mention self harming and suicide.

Susie Green needs to read the judgement. She is making statements that the judgement quite clearly refutes as not correct.

Which leaves you wondering: is she speaking about a judgement she hasn't actually read? It can't be that she has evidence that the judgement is wrong because Mermaids put forward the evidence they had and the judge's job was to look at all relevant evidence to do this establishing of facts.

TBH if the COVID vaccine allows lots of organisations to to quietly update their sex / gender / safeguarding / childcare guidance
in time for the start of the new term / year
and blame in on Brexit / COVID / rainbow unicorns
I do not care

the ruling is excellent and locks safeguarding into healthcare
where it should always have been

Pretty sure there have been U16s on cross sex hormones?

(Yes I got sucked in and am listening)

My Generation by The Who on now. That's not an accident.

"No one is saying kids are born in the wrong body."

JV: "Wouldn't you do the same if you were born in the wrong body?" 🤦‍♀️

It's the beginning of transition. So not a pause at all. Children are consenting to the beginning of a transition, to cross sex hormones, to irreversible changes. All adult decisions. I think this needs to be hammered home harder.

Susie Green, to judge who has just objectively fact and evidenced checked the experts to whom Green sends families: 'that's not a good enough argument'.

About what fgs? The judge was asked to objectively evaluate the evidence of the Tavistock's practice. They did. The conclusions are that the Tavistock must immediately change the way they work to be in keeping with the law. And that this is serious enough that they didn't grandfather any of it and say kids on blockers keep going but no new prescriptions: it looks like every child on blockers will now need an objective court eye to what is happening for them to ensure they are properly protected.

What has any of this to do with Green?

Mermaids offer to give information to the review was rejected since the judge was looking for facts and evidence of Tavistock's practice and beliefs, and what Mermaids was offering was a lot of feelings and anecdotes and individual stories - three of which had been provided anyway as examples by the Tavistock, the experts.

Mermaids is a parents' support and advice group who should right now be thinking very seriously about the fact that they've been funnelling families into the Tavistock where those children have - according to the facts established by the judge from the Tavistock's own evidence - have been treated in a way incompatible with the law. They are now going to need to support those families to deal with this awful situation that they have children in the middle of treatment that is questionable to the point it may have to stop.

Green's opinion that they know better than the judge and the law is neither here nor there, and in the light of the objectively established facts, is not making Mermaids look too good.

Oh, it's the inevitable transwoman who didn't undergo the treatments themself but thinks that children definitely should go through them.