Mermaids justification for supplying breast binders to kids

The goatskin is quite dashing:

www.cilice.co.uk/product/goatskin-hairshirt/

www.cilice.co.uk/product/a-traditional-sack-cloth-hairshirt-with-belt-and-metal-buckle/

Maybe this garment would avoid both the evidenced harms of breast binders and the difficult connotations of bras?

They are holy vestments of mortification.

Also, now I've thought about it, 'we send out bras to pubertal girls' just doesn't sound good, does it?

Actually to clarify, having read the paper more thoroughly rather than skimming, it wasn't just the proportion of participants who reported negative outcomes. There was an analysis of which method was associated with significantly greater risk of each outcome occurring. Binders were associated with significantly greater risk of 20 out of 28 negative outcomes. Other methods were associated with significantly greater risk of lower numbers of negative outcomes.

The majority of the participants were from the US and aged under 24. Most used some method of binding 7 days a week and had been binding for at least a year. Commercial binders were by ar the most popular method - 87% of participants had used a commercial binder, compared to 33% for the next most popular method, sports bras. Frequency of use (days/week) was significantly associated with risk in 22/28 of negative outcomes - i.e. for 22/28 outcomes, the more often the method was used, the higher the risk of experiencing that negative outcome. So the results may in part reflect the fact that a high proportion of the study participants were using commercial binders on a regular basis, compared to other methods.

The full text is here:
cabinradio.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Health-impact-of-chest-binding-among-transgender-adults-a-community-engaged-cross-sectional-study.pdf

This paragraph gives a bit more information:

Commercial binders were the binding method most consistently associated with negative health outcomes, possibly because such binders have the potential to provide more compression than other binding methods. This finding is inconsistent with community perceptions that commercial binders represent the safest option (Cole and Han 2011; QMunity 2013; Stanford University 2014; Hudson 2004; Transguys 2014). This study lacked sufficient detail about participants’ binding practices to determine if binders are uniformly risky, or if practices such as wearing multiple binders or overly tight binders drove the heightened risk associated with binders in this study. Elastic and other bandages, duct tape, and plastic wrap were all commonly associated with negative health outcomes, a finding consistent with existing community recommendations against their use. Sports bras, layering sports bras, and neoprene or athletic compression wear were the binding methods least commonly associated with negative outcomes, and therefore may be the safest options for binding.

They found that commercial binders as well as elastic bandages, duct tape and plastic wrap are all associated with negative outcomes while other methods like sports bras are safer. There was also a lot more data from users of binders - 1570 participants in the study used them compared with 298 using elastic bandages and 78 using duct tape or plastic wrap, so more potential for negative outcomes to be experienced. They also don't know how many participants were wearing multiple binders or overly tight binders.

There's more detail on the figures for each binding method in the appendices of the .doc version of the paper which you can download from here:

scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?cluster=12662798008292072347&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&as_ylo=2014&as_yhi=2018

If they are just like sports bras, why not just use sports bras? Seems like that would be a lot easier 🤔

Or, if they're 'just sports bras', then - why not send out sports bras? Because there's nothing creepy at all about adults posting children underwear.

Or send girls a roll of cling film

Not enough laugh emojis. Are mermaids claiming they have a safeguarding network now?

Yes, I think your understanding is correct. From the Methods section of the paper:

"A comprehensive search strategy that assessed peer-reviewed literature and information from health clinics, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender organisations and online community resources was used to develop a list of 28 health outcomes potentially associated with binding."

The authors compiled a list of 28 known negative outcomes of binding, and made a questionnaire asking whether study participants had experienced these negative outcomes. The proportions out of 28 given in the Results for each method of binding refer to how many of these 28 outcomes at least one participant reported experiencing as a consequence of using that method. Therefore the figures show that commercial binders are associated with a broader range of complications compared to DIY methods.

I wonder if commercial binders are easier to use and apply solo so lead to much more frequent usage?

India Willoughby is on Twitter arguing they're only sports bras anyway.

So supply correctly fitting sports bras. (I'd seriously be in favour of schools being able to do this for girls whose families are unable to buy them, a bra suitable for eg a cross country run or aerobics isn't cheap.)

That's how I read it. You need the previous sentence:

Over 97% reported at least one of 28 negative outcomes attributed to binding. Frequency (days/week) was consistently associated with negative outcomes (22/28 outcomes). Compression methods associated with symptoms were commercial binders (20/28), elastic bandages (14/28) and duct tape or plastic wrap (13/28).

So commercial binders led to women reporting more negative outcomes than using other methods to bind their breasts.

India Willoughby is on Twitter arguing they're only sports bras anyway.

I just can't understand why anyone gives them anything like benefit of the doubt when they constantly misrepresent and dodge facts

That's the argument drug dealers use isn't it? Best buy it from me cos I've not cut it with anything harmful. 🙄

From a liability point of view I don't think that achieves much in the real world.

“The risk is considered by Mermaids staff within the context of our safeguarding framework.”

Given the current issues regarding Mermaids staff and safeguarding I’m inclined to ignore the whole statement.

Was she ever investigated by the police for the (moral at the very least) crime she committed?

In general you cannot be prosecuting for doing something that would be illegal in the UK but legal where you do it.

Special laws had to be written carefully for "taking child overseas for FGM". I'm not sure that was in force at the time it happened, and I imagine it was drafted too specifically to cover castration & penile inversion.

(Thailand changed there laws to up their age limit since, apparently. Don't know if the attention of Susie Green's case affected that).

It's the long con to get people to donate to them.