I can see that the Tavistock have been hugely negligent in their research, it is very obviously so, and am not defending them at all but re recent posts I don't doubt for a moment that there has been some very dodgy stuff going on in too many places, but it is an accepted theory/finding that adults with PTSD (eg combat veterans) etc do have/develop changes in the volume of the hippocampus related to prolonged stress and trauma, so to me, to look for whether children who have been severely traumatised have similar effects, in principle does not seem to be wrong or strange. How they do that is another issue, and I don't have the info on that aspect.
I will say now that I am a bit out of the loop on info with some of the specific people mentioned in recent posts, but I think my points stand in principle.
Batmanghelidjh said "Most of us are only programmed to be frightened for short periods without getting some relief. But the 1.5 million children who are abused and neglected every year in the UK are actually being frightened chronically without rest or relief. The consequence is often disturbed behaviours and violence.
"If the maltreatment of children is altering their developmental pathways then we are not dealing with children who are morally flawed. The public perception is that these children are just like anyone else until they come to the point of doing something bad. Then the public decides these children have made a thought-through decision, when the vast majority will not have thought at all - their violence was almost instinctive." www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2010/jun/ucl-scientists-research-effect-fright-brain
This to me says that the intention is to look at whether the MH effects on children are similar way to women who have been abused long term, similar to the maddening and devastating effects of gaslighting and prolonged periods of jeopardy and dread, and whether that is reflected in brain scans (no doubt in part so that people who have experienced abuse can have say look there is proof that I am struggling with something real, I'm not imagining my messed up MH).
Suggesting/saying that prolonged trauma and stress can result in can make a person reactive, emotionally dysregulated, hypervigilant etc, and that can be 'programmed in' to a person, warping their overall character traits and reactions to what it might have been had they grown up in a loving and stable environment, resulting in MH issues such as, PTSD, cPTSD, Borderline Personality Disorder etc is not controversial to me. Neglect and abuse (both a kind of torture) changes people, and more so in situations where there are multiple stress factors. I am not any kind of woo believer at all. Very far from it.
To me, looking at that aspect of learned behaviour/ reactions has nothing to do with any claims that 'bad behaviour' is then either inevitable or completely excusable (in that there is no responsibility at all), it merely shows that there are effects. What happens next is still to happen, brain plasticity and working at triggers and responses can help to a greater or lesser extent depending.
These issues in my view should be addressed by helping a person to face and overcome their MH and behavioural issues, understanding what has happended to them and how to get better, to try to undo the harm caused re-write the damaged learning, not have an approach that reifies and validates maladaptive coping strategies or gives unquestioning affirmation etc eg as with transitioning.
It suggests to me that so much more money needs to be out into MH are if we want to make any meaningful changes to the behaviours we see all across society. (and we need quality boundaried and sane MH professionals but that is another issue)
To me it is treatment strategies (and some practitioners) maybe more than the diagnoses that have had the very serious flaws (that is a big issue)
Some of these people and centres actually started out with the intention of bringing recognition to sufferers of child abuse, and exposing the (many) groups of powerful men who systematically abused children and the harm they have done.
I now I also know that well coordinated entryism exists to pervert the cause and aims of an organisation, thanks to the TRAs, the MRAs and the examination of their strategies exposed on this board. So I find it interesting how the Tavi has turned out.
My own feeling has always been that a key 'benefit' of the unquestioning affirmation approach is in protecting those people who may have abused or neglected children whether by sexual abuse, psychological abuse or by some kind narcissism/ Münchhausen type situation. Not all children suffering gender issues will have been abused of course, but I have no doubt that many have been,as well as the obvious hideous pressure of gender stereotyping on girls.
I feel that just as we have been making some progress with women's rights, MeToo etc, we have the MRA/TRA backlash, and similarly and not coincidentally that as we make some progress with exposing child sexual abuse, increasing safeguarding for children, deeper investigations etc, I think there is the backlash (fight back might be a better word) to this too. We have the multiple Girl Guide safeguarding issues; young children being exposed to and exploited in heavily sexualised sitautions in drag clubs, drag queen story times, McK's enticing children to the glitter family etc etc.
Some perverted people (men) will have an interest in all of these negative outcomes for children; adults in bodies that have not undergone puberty; distressed children growing into aduts who have had no real investigation into their emotional health and who may remain trapped in magical thinking and self blame, vulnerability; the widespread attempts to normalise of kinks and fetishes. The Edward Lords and Dr Megs.
You can call me paranoid, but I do not think any of these things are coincidental.
I think that this entryism and fucking perverts and their flying monkeys getting into positions of power and influence, and science and psychology, is (obviously) a massive, massive problem.
I have no doubt that there will be people in the midst of this whose very purpose is to throw doubt onto people who are doing good work with sufferers of CSA and trauma, and it makes it very difficult sometimes to see who is on the 'right' side and who is actually helping children and abuse survivors.
I do think for years people who have suffered child CSA, and those who have wanted to help them, have been subject to very similar kinds of discrediting and gaslighting meted out to women and to women who have suffered domestic violence, and rape in particular, but also they experience this on a coordinated societal level, in keeping with the reach and influence of paedophile rings, the control being exerted in a similar but slightly different way to the use of prevailing misogyny to allow abusive men to continue abusing. Who would have thought that adult nappy wearing 'furries' would be a fetish that a) exists, and that b) may be accepted, as c) it seems to be acceptable on Twitter.
Sorry for the long post. Had to get it out. Its a huge murky issue and I wish I had more capacity to read more about it , and to post the links that have led me to join all this up, which has led to me having so many questions and concerns.
Thank you Bowl for mentioning the oestrogen issues re MH and girls being on puberty blockers. Its so worrying. Blocking could actually be making them more unstable. I got my shit together (I hope) prompted by recent posts.