Change of CEO at mermaids…

My TRA/cat video twitter feed is still cats. Which makes me think the main TRAs know what’s about to land. They’re all connected, just as the women’s groups talk to each other the TRAs/trans organisations are networked, and the silence is deafening.
Interesting.

The blog post linked by Dr W is written a, afiercemum and dadtrans, two Twitter users very aligned to mimmymum and Foxy. Afiercemum is very involved with trans academia at Goldsmiths I think.

There’s an interesting line in the blog - We cannot afford to have weak or conservative cis leadership at Mermaids.. It seems to imply that Susie Green was seen as conservative and weak. I can’t see Mermaids reversing or reverting. I think they’ll appoint, as others unthread have suggested, a wholly inappropriate trans woman akin to Christine Burns.

To me it points to a fracture in Mermaids. The recent tribunals and cases will have shaken the way Mermaids ideology, methodology and lobbying fits within the law.

IMHO SG was wholly unsuitable for her appointment - a stunt gone badly wrong.
Mermaids is surely going to be the next Kids company?

Oh please, oh please ...

Fucking hell, I've only just learnt about this.

If she was pushed out, I wonder if she'll take them to tribunal 🍿

Situation is we can't even do a private assessment because of what our council / school will / won't recognise.

We need the school's input for this.

We will see what this first stage produces. His teacher is picking up on stuff lots so recognises it's a real issue for him.

If we aren't getting anywhere after that, we'll see. On the plus side his class are such an absolute nightmare I think they are desperate to have one boy at least performing at a good level and for there to be at least some extra funding for the class.

Today's Telegraph

The chief executive of Mermaids, Susie Green, has left the transgender children’s charity after six years in her post.
Announcing the decision, the charity thanked Ms Green for “building Mermaids into the organisation it is today”.
The chair of trustees said an interim chief executive would be appointed shortly. No explanation was given as to what triggered the announcement.
The news comes after a Telegraph investigation earlier this year revealed the scandal-hit charity was offering to give potentially dangerous chest-flattening devices to 14-year-olds against their parents’ wishes.
Staff with no medical training were also found to have given advice to users, who they believe were as young as 13, that controversial hormone-blocking drugs are safe and “totally reversible”.
In the wake of The Telegraph’s investigation, the Charity Commission launched a “regulatory compliance case” over concerns about the charity’s “approach to safeguarding young people”.
In recent months, the charity has also found itself under intense public scrutiny for other controversies.
One of which was the charity's decision to launch an appeal against the Charity Commission’s awarding of charitable status to LGB Alliance, which has been critical of “gender ideology’’.
The case is understood to be the first time one charity has tried to strip the legal status away from another.
Founded in 1995 and headquartered in Leeds, with an office in London, Mermaids has about 44 staff members and 110 volunteers.
Prior to her appointment as CEO in 2016, Ms Green worked as an IT manager for Citizens Advice from 2002 to 2015.
Ms Green has previously spoken about taking her child to the US in 2017 for puberty blockers when they were aged 12, oestrogen aged 13, and to Thailand for surgery on their sixteenth birthday.
In a statement posted on the charity’s website on Friday night, Mermaid's chair of trustees, Belinda Bell, wrote: “The trustees are very grateful to Susie for everything she has done over the last six years to support trans, non-binary and gender-diverse young people and their families, and to build Mermaids into the organisation it is today.
“We wish her all the best for the future.”
Reacting to the news Ms Green had stepped down, a Charity Commission spokeswoman said: “Mermaids’ trustees have informed us today about the departure of the charity’s CEO. The charity remains subject to a compliance case.”
Since the commission launched its investigation, some organisations have paused their relationships with Mermaids.
The national lottery community fund has suspended future payments and the Department for Education has removed it from its mental health and wellbeing resources for schools.

@RedToothBrush We were in a very similar position with DD, who is both academic and has ADHD. Because she's a girl as well, it took us a long time to be heard about this and I really regret some of that delay, so you are absolutely doing the right thing in pressing for it.

In the end, the best solution for us was to get a private assessment. From that point on, everything else can be organised through your GP/local paediatricians if you want, so there is just that one-off cost. I can recommend you an amazing person in the Midlands if that is any help at all - DM me if it's of interest.

I hope all the other Mermaids enablers are held to account here, particularly those, such as ITV with its Green-based drama series tweely named 'Butterfly', that helped instil the threat 'better a live daughter than a dead son' (or vice versa) into the minds of so many distressed and confused families.

Jackie has no room for regrets.

This is important to note. There are many people who are dealt a blow of some sort and they don’t want to dwell on the past because it can’t be changed. Regret is a hazy measurement of whether something should have happened differently. Some people find the inner strength to live their lives without regrets, some struggle with the trauma for life.

Support groups for adults in this situation will be needed in the coming decades.

I could see a scenario where SG has seen something coming and has left in order to take up work in the states or Canada or Australia. The statement being short may be because she's left them all to face it while she swans off

This is so important. One of the reasons the middle aged men who self ID as women so relentlessly pursue the transitioning of children is because it's so hard to challenge without centring a vulnerable, often mentally unwell child. Too many parents simply cheerlead their children, abandoning (through fear I know) tough love, while family, friends, colleagues, schools & communities hesitate to challenge, giving them immense power to direct the narrative.
Hence safeguarding and the long term needs of these children are abandoned for the poster children they become.

I'm wondering if they've uncovered a Serious Incident that Mermaids didn't report to the Charity Commission. That lack of safeguarding ...

I don't think a house cleaning exercise is likely to be possible to Mermaids due to brand damage tbh.

What I would like to see now is Mermaids reversing to pre 2015 Mermaids, which advocated watchful waiting and meaningful support to children suffering distress about their gender.

What’s the point? There are so many better organisations already established doing just this.

Oh it will be Kids Company all over again where the corporates and celebs are concerned. They will have had no real idea what they were bandwagoning, and they will jump off as soon as the shit really starts hitting the fan. However, since they aided and abetted irreversible damage to children, never mind the harm they have done to a whole generation of children brainwashed by the gender cult, and to wider society forced to comply with all the rainbow washed policies, they should NEVER be let off the hook for this.

as I understand the set up, mermaids sign post to Gender GP (the Webberleys) who are now based in Spain because he was struck off in the UK and they can still prescribe puberty blockers for UK children from there?

is that correct?

so is her livelihood at stake, if mermaids is less 'trans positive'?

I found mermaids to be completely fixated with transition . There was no part of mermaids that was designed to support a gender questioning child to explore things in a logical, safe way. no room for any other way but transition. no support of you where a parent who supported their child but ultimately felt the child just needed more time to work things out before making such huge decisions ( which ultimately was the case ) huge amount of parent shaming and coercion ( or attempts )

I hope one day this is widely known publicly as the intent of that organisation is self centred, one sided and harmful. I don’t event think they have capacity to realise this.

The harm they will have caused under the guise of help will be abhorrent when it comes out. I hope for the sake of children that need rational support and guidance that one day it does and soon.

New role for Emma Watson?

Good luck. Remember the bar is quite low for asking for an ECHNA, the only criteria are :

whether the child or young person has or may have special educational needs (“SEN”); and
whether they may need special educational provision to be made through an EHC plan.

Don't forget that the child does not need to be 2 years behind and they do not need to have already spent £6000 both common myths perpetrated by Schools and LAs.

The beauty of an assessment is that it unlocks an Ed Psych assessment and report which isn't diagnostic of ADHD but they are more attuned to varieties in presentations, which can help with the 2 setting criteria needed for the ADHD assessment referral.

Perhaps something to consider in the future if you feel necessary.

Have thought some more about what might be going on at Mermaids. I think we can be 99% certain that Green has left in a hurry because a scandal is about to break. The most likely thing is that the Charities Commission has unearthed more of what we already know - an absence of proper vetting practices in recruiting staff and trustees; a failure to implement safeguarding around things like chat groups and phoneline support; poor data protection.

While it would be good if the police were finally involved or the charity was about to be slammed by the judge in the LGBA court case, that seems less likely.

The beauty of the trans child is its media friendly and can be clearly visually seen. Whereas adhd or autism is invisible in a photograph, self harm is off limits and sexual abuse has legal implications and issues over the right to privacy.

None of these things exist in the world of the trans kid or the drag artist kid.

Celebrities can't exploit the issues for their own benefit in the same pr friendly way.

RedToothBrush I cannot like your post enough. These are children who are in a great deal of distress and that is hard. It is not pretty, it is not uplifting, there is no easy solution,. They are extremely vulnerable children and what responsible parent would showcase their child in the way that Susie and some other parents do?

I think there is a need for a great deal of publicity about the issue in order for change to be accepted, but ultimately once that happens, I hope it vanishes from the spotlight and these children and families are able to quietly get the appropriate support that they need.

The fashionable charities to donate to are now more likely to be things about food banks not gender identity too.

I was at an event the other week where a comedian very popular with that particular crowd was speaking. He mentioned having fundraised for Mermaids in the past and I looked round to see who was applauding - I estimated that it was fewer than half the attendees. Now, it's a mixed demographic, with a genderwoo-ist element, to be sure, but still very varied, and some might not have known who Mermaids are, although the word "trans" was mentioned. However, I'd have expected those who didn't know to have been applauding just because they like the comedian.

When the same comedian mentioned that he would shortly be raising money for the food banks and Shelter, everybody applauded.

It's mind blowing when you think how fucked up this all is.

Green managed to get Posie Parker threatened with arrest, for saying publicly that Susie Green had had their child's penis removed. And because saying that can't possibly be an offence, she decided to go after the terminology.

And the police meekly complying. it's so fucked up.

It may not be a specific criminal offence, but it's most certainly unlawful to remove a child's healthy body parts, whatever their sex.

It is. The problem is that if you do it in another country, you're not subject to UK laws. If you smoke cannabis on holiday in the Netherlands, for example, you're not going to be prosecuted when you come home.

The reason that parents who take their daughters abroad for FGM can be prosecuted is that a specific law was created to deal with that scenario. Before that law was in place, what they were doing wasn't illegal.