Webberly Vs Joyce

There's a definite whiff of Dolores Umbridge about HW.

One has to be cruel to be kind you know. 'little trill'

FWIW, it's a medical degree that makes someone a medical doctor, not the medical licence. The only reason you'd not be able to call yourself a doctor any more is if your degree was obtained fraudulently or something like that.

I've only watched the Julie Bindel one so far but Webberley is terrifying. It doesn't matter that she's talking illogical bollocks, she's not doing this for us, she's setting out her stall as someone to buy meds from, and she is very professionally putting across the points that trans people want to hear. They will lap up what she says, and disregard what her opponent says as Webberley comes across as very reasonable and concerned and knowledgeable.

I think a PP.l described her as a psychopath and I don't think that is far.off.

Ah, right. Thank you.

Isn’t HW a GP without any specialist training?

She said in the interview with GB News' Ben Leo the other day that her registration had lapsed/she'd not renewed it. As far as I know doctors are like nurses and midwives in that they have to do a certain number of clinical hours and professional development over a given period in order to renew their registration. Of course, if a doctor had been up before a fitness to practise hearing which had gone against them, even if that was overturned in the High Court, it might seem a convenient or even an elegant way of leaving the profession.

There are plenty of terrified, confused, and credulous parents out there, as well as those who are abusive, deluded, mentally ill themselves.

That was what DH said too.

But I can’t comprehend a parent watching that, hearing her deny any accountability for the children she’d harmed (J for example), and think it was a good idea letting her have any say over medication prescribed to their DC.

Can't wait to listen to this.

@ArabellaSaurus True. It's hard to argue to with disingenuous, passive aggressive people because of all the dishonesty.

Yes. I reckon she's had media training from the head tilt brigade. How to present yourself as unthreatening and victimised by all - while spouting dangerous views about sterilising children and claiming that of course 8 years olds can consent to their future infertility, incontinence and loss of sexual function.

I thought Helen made a great effort and Jo was good with questions. But it did highlight the challenges (that we all understand) of how to challenge all this effectively in the face of outright lies, fake stats and claims of perpetual victimhood.

People with personality disorders are very, very hard to debate with. You have to play the game, and playing the game means you are playing their game.

I'm exhausted after watching both interviews. I can't imagine how Helen Joyce must feel now! I think she did a good job but it's impossible to debate with someone like Webberly, with her ad hominem remarks about HJ not being a medical doctor (even though she isn't either) and refusal to comment on any signal case or acknowledge her own dodgy cases! She's so dangerous in that she could sound semi plausible to the novice listener. Though I think even if I knew nothing about the issue I'd still come away thinking she had committed serious malpractise and harm to children.

Webberley is pretty good at staying calm, obfuscation, ducking out of answering by playing indignant, ignoring hard questions, and changing the subject. She made a lot of her medical background, which could sound convincing to someone without much knowledge (or awareness of her tribunals etc). And yes, she can end up quite often controlling the conversation.

She's a manipulator and very good at playing victim, changing it round, controlling the narrative, avoiding accountability. Slippery.

She knows what rhetoric to use for broad brush points, peppers her speech with key phrases like 'unkind' and 'trust' and 'believe'.

She is a very, very dangerous woman. Thank god she's at least not practising in this country, but how many children may she have harmed in addition to the ones we know about?

She has a kind of low-key, con artist charisma about her. Ever so calm, matter-of-fact and that soft-spoken, almost ASMR voice that sounds very reassuring. I can absolutely see lots of parents feeling in very safe hands with her. And that’s the scary thing.

Finished.

Possibly the most galling line repeated ad nauseum by Webberly in both the HJ and Julie Bindel discussion was, "well, I think we have to be very careful [about saying X completely reasonable and evidence-based thing]" vs a total absence of needing to be very careful about prescribing life-altering drugs to children (including in doses liable to quite literally kill them, as HJ pointed out).

I have come away from those discussions feeling that, while HW may well be operating according to a particularly malignant brand of self-interest in the stance she's taking, it is very clearly aided and abetted by a total want of basic reasoning skills.

Re wondering where the male rape victims are: ask your gay men friends.

Yes. There is no such thing as bad publicity. She’s only concerned with raising her profile to a converted audience wondering where to get the drugs. Now they know.

So scary to listen to HW (still on the JB interview ). She doesn’t answer a question clearly and just keeps interrupting JB. Very difficult to listen to for more than 20 minutes, but I will persevere. I’m wondering where all the male rape victims are…

I can’t believe Webberley came right out with it, and said that her colleagues are getting around the PB ban by prescribing other drugs that basically do the same thing.

Not, me, though, Guvnor - i’m not practicing as a doctor right now.

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know why she isn’t practicing at the moment?

@HildegardP SOME parents want the best evidence based care for their children.

SOME parents are utterly convinced that if they don't affirm their children great harm will come to them.

SOME parents would prefer their child to be the opposite sex for reasons of their own.

SOME parents like the attention provided by having such a 'special child'

ALL parents worry that whatever they do, they're doing it wrong.

Dunno, I think Webberly is approaching, if not already at, that point in the Andrew Wakefield saga where all his, "I'm a doctor doncha know & I care about these children, & I've got my very own research, & loads of my colleagues who you don't know because they go to a different hospital, agree with me" started to look plain shifty to people who up until then had no particular interest in the controversy he'd created. He naffed off to the US too.

Sure, she pulled sad faces, blustered, & tried to wring hearts but those aren't behaviours that normal people value in their childrens' doctors. When push comes to shove, people want to know that their children are getting the best that medical science can offer, not treatments based on vibes, & if that's what they want for their kids, it's a very small step to ask oneself if cranks like this should be anywhere near anyone's kids.

I’m still stunned that she turned up at all.

Mad, and noncey, lest we forget.

Jo Coburn was doing what everyone who has ever interviewed Webberley and her ilk should have done all along - asked the hard questions based on a good understanding of the situation. This is exactly what the BBC should have done years ago.
Webberley didn’t cope well with it because she’s not been put under proper scrutiny before.

Aren’t you, in fact - aha - a mathematician!?