Rachel Meade - it's a win!

Children in foster care were one of the first target groups for trans activists to make money out of, producing reality defying, dangerous policy for staff and even for young people. Once you look at the way vulnerable children & young people were the priority to be targeted for re education, you can't unsee it.

Yep. Children longing for love and attention and to be special in someone's eyes ...

Reading more I can understand what motivates RMW but that doesn’t mean the legal advice is sound and that failure is costing money and impacting the lives of women such as Rachel

And many more generally

We need to disconnect Stonewall advice as it leads to damages

Children in foster care were one of the first target groups for trans activists to make money out of, producing reality defying, dangerous policy for staff and even for young people. Once you look at the way vulnerable children & young people were the priority to be targeted for re education, you can't unsee it.

Meanwhile, in the Meade case the tribunal found that she didn’t bring her views to work

I don’t really understand the relevance of this. Even if Rachel had brought her views to work so what? The workplace is awash with gender ideology so why shouldn’t GC be equally acceptable? Also aren’t we supposed to be bringing our whole selves to work or does that only apply to men who want to masturbate in a rubber gimp suit in the ladies but not to women who recognise that there are 2 sexes.

Blackpool is an epicentre for children's homes. Someone made an absolute fortune setting them up there than selling the company on. I think lots of former b&b and holiday apartments just needed a few tweeks and they were good to go. The council, last I heard, were going to change the planning laws to stop any more being set up. Kids were (are?) being bussed in from miles away because there was a bed for them in Blackpool.

I don't know how such an impoverished LA could afford the infrastructure to support these kids (many of whom will be miles from their families). Or how they could attract high quality staff.

I suspect a motivated tra SW would be there for loads of kids. They don't have to do anything difficult, they just affirm and sprinkle glitter.

Surely that won't be possible any more? They must follow the law, in their professional standards and practices. Won't a judge look at such a case and say, "Haven't you learned from the last one?" and be punitive?

The case wasn't about person-facing practice. It was about Rachel's personal beliefs and the emphasis was that she did not bring these to work.

it seems to me that Rachel Meade was a good SW. it seems to me that everyone who lands up in trouble over gender is good at their job, and those who champion gender are more often than not, well, not.

I have noticed an abundance of evidence that supports this.

Gender ideology is not only causing direct harms but also indirect harm in the amount of pointless time it causes public servants to spend following incoherent McCarthyist thought processes. ANYONE who thinks what happened to Rachel was reasonable really should not be in a position where they can adversely affect the lives of vulnerable people.

Not if your entire department and/or service is adhering to their stonewall training like good little bots.

i think it’ll take a decade to unpick and during that time people will leave jobs because of this sort of thing.

it seems to me that Rachel Meade was a good SW. it seems to me that everyone ho lands up in trouble over gender is good at their job, and those who champion gender are more often than not, well, not.

<bites tongue about legal profession>

This case, despite its significance being downplayed as was anticipated, is a very clear warning that all those who are making complaints to workplaces about what is posted in private fb groups are very much in the wrong. However, I would expect that this case will be used to support future claims where the boundaries will be tested regarding social media interactions.

And that premise that it is not unreasonable for someone to have a discussion about something that is topical even if the view is opposing the popular opinion will surely have weight in cases in the future such as James Esses’ case and the like.

There are many points relevant to the case that can be used in the future.

Same chambers as Ben Cooper.

https://oldsquare.co.uk/people/robin-white/

Meanwhile, in the Meade case the tribunal found that she didn’t bring her views to work, nor did she identify herself as a social worker on social media

So does this mean that the complainant (the one complaining about the social media) was wrong to complain and it should never have been entertained?

Or were they right to complain even though she didn't bring her views to work etc?

All of this. 100%.

So many captured institutions and the civil service is just as bad.

There need to be prosecutions for those in management - they have failed to be impartial and they have failed to discharge their duties. This behaviour will have harmed end users of the service. I am sure there will be vulnerable people supported by Rachel whose support was just taken away when she was wrongly suspended. I wonder what has happened to those people.

The sizes of awards are negligible relative to the harms that these women and their families face during these processes.

This is so true, we just have to live in hope that one day there will be a proper Post Office style reckoning where the brave women who've stood up for safeguarding* will be properly compensated.

*because being able to discuss changes in the law and how it impacts vulnerable people is part of being able to safeguard effectively

In 1990 I had a beloved career taken away from me because I was trans…[Deleted sensitive material.]…Some days I didn’t get out of bed. But with the help of dear friends I pulled myself round.

https://twitter.com/moira_robin/status/1668375859672100865

It's quite extraordinary that, given that experience, RMW seems to lack insight into the emotional devastation and loss of career that Rachel Meade (and so many others) have faced. And that they were unable to grieve but had to endure these long out processes and financial jeopardy in order to face down people like RMW and achieve their vindications.

The sizes of awards are negligible relative to the harms that these women and their families face during these processes.

Helleofabore · Today 09:16

Ah yes, the putative vocal chord surgery, it's coming back to me now.

YetAnotherSpartacus · Today 09:03

Once in practice, social workers have to conform to SWE's dictates or they risk being the next Rachel.

Surely that won't be possible any more? They must follow the law, in their professional standards and practices. Won't a judge look at such a case and say, "Haven't you learned from the last one?" and be punitive?

I remember getting warnings from MN about my commentary on that powerful voice. The one that White tried to deny had ‘male’ power due to the sexist discrimination against female voices, as well as the power of a male set of lungs. White wished us all to believe it was just the power from the lungs that White might lose if White had a procedure on White’s vocal cords. It was like being in an alternate universe in that discussion.

Well, Woolton and sport England would likely see this as an example of good, righteous professional behaviour, wouldn’t they?

so I expect it’s hard to tell. We need to wait for the tribunals. My own body is the HCPC which must have hundreds of thousands of registrants and takes about 5 years for cases to come to court. I’m in Scotland where Cass has, apparently, no influence at all because Scottish children are magically protected by scotch mist.

There are lots of employers who ask questions along the lines of, "Are there any matters in progress or in your recent past that might cause embarrassment in the event of your appointment and its subsequent disclosure" (I paraphrase).

I wonder if Woolton | Wolton disclosed these proceedings and AW's role as instigator of them to Sport England?

stealtheatingtunnocks

Yep. I think Cass might be looking at demographics but I'd like to know more about pathways to referrals and what professionals were involved. I'm sure social workers do a lot of reporting and suspect children in care are overrepresented.

The rot starts in universities though and I'd like to see how SWE evaluates degrees and what they expect to be taught.

Oops. Missed a bit, perhaps making the point even more relevant.

“who invited White has never apologised that they invited a male who transitioned as a male”

Should have been ‘mature male’. As in age not in emotional maturity, of course.

Thanks for the info

So they can chalk up costing the tax payer in a (hopefully huge) payout due to incredibly bad legal advice to Stonewall, who then are cited in the judgement

Shame we can’t send them the bill