Mermaids endorsement of West Yorkshire Police

[LizzieSiddal]

mobile.twitter.com/Mermaids_Gender/status/1136964888344088578

Not many of the responders to her tweet, seem to agree with her.

Duh, *spot on

The left always eats itself and is why many of the right wing MRAs laugh their tits off about the clash between feminists and the transexuals. They just say well you deserve this shit for being a feminazi so you can deal with the transnazi.

I’m left but but not a social justice warrior and it can be amusing when people have to face the reality that being tolerant of everything doesn’t work. When there’s 100s of strict Muslims protesting about LGBT classes in Birmingham the woke folk don’t know what to do with themselves because they can’t just blame it on people being pale stale and male

Susie's problems are broader than that.

1. There is the regular problem of small organisations who receive funding. Susie has done very well with what was initially a kitchen table set up. Not that I agree with her, but her motivation and approach mirrors parent led charities such as Susie Lamplugh or Anthony Nolan. Some get funded and grow, others remain niche operations that often do important work supporting families coping with obscure illnesses, bereavement etc. Indeed the sort of charity I like to support.

The growing is the problem. Lottery or other funding will allow you to hire staff and expand reach, but it also means you lose control, both to funders and to professional staff. I think this will happen to Susie.

1. Mermaids is in a odd position. Susie may have simply wanted to support families in a similar position to her own, in part to help herself. She made some difficult decisions which many people question. What better than then to have those decisions lauded.

But its not like that. Mermaids became the poster charity for a highly controversial movement. Lets face it. Plenty in the TRA movement have faces for radio. Susie in contrast presents as a caring mum, with her Butterfly daughter. The whole gender identity argument relies on the fact that people know from a young age that they were born in the "wrong body", so transitioning kids provide a crucial justification to every middle aged AGP who wants to wear a dress. Mermaids is also useful because a lot of the US and international links are around "treatment" approaches for children.

The movement needs Mermaids. If it starts wobbling, and Webberley, staff problems at the Tavi, and the Times articles are causing it to wobble, Stonewall and others strongly identified with the TRA agenda will be worried. Mermaids falling would lead to a domino effect. If the current widespread affirmation only approach is rejected, and medicating children only after stringent checks for motivations and co-morbidities, it would suggest a need for similar gatekeeping with adult transitioners. People will want Stonewall out of schools and others will question whether the reputational advantage of Stonewall sign off is worth the cost. My guess is that Susie will continue to be under fire from the loonier fringe, whilst the more tactical are scratching their heads and wondering who on earth might replace her. Munroe Bergdorf?!

My advice to Susie. Quit whilst you are ahead. (Honestly talk to people in different fields who started charities but struggled with growth.) Mermaids will come under increasing pressure and will eventually fail. And a lot of the pressure will fall on her as she is so closely identified with her charity. Go now whilst you still have a positive reputation (other than with the nasties at MN) and hand the poison chalice to your successor. There is nothing too wrong with the retirement home in Spain, with a sun and Sangria lifestyle and your friend Helen down the road who might offer you some counselling or consultancy work.

I wrote that before spotting that Munroe and Susie formed a mutual admiration society on Twitter yesterday.

I repeat my advice. Susie be careful.

Mermaids Charity existed before Susie Green.
Susie Green grew it, wrote the policies & made herself and incredibly influential person (despite having no professional qualifications in child development, Safeguarding or medical background). Susie Green through her position as CEO of Mermaids Charity has influenced public policy which affects all children.
The trustees of the Charity will be held to account eventually, so too those who failed to do due dilligence & scrutiny.

Mermaids Charity has no understanding of Safeguarding/ Child Protection frameworks & has undermined those that exist.

2016 article by Julian Vigo:
'When lobby groups like Mermaids dictate policy and discourse around gender identity, kids lose'
(extract)
He goes on to detail the acts of a controlling mother towards her child, M’s personal diagnosis of J’s alleged gender dysphoria, and a system which failed this child. Together, these various failures demonstrate a pattern of abuse and a mother who, Hayden writes, “deprived [her son] of his fundamental right to exercise his autonomy in its most basic way.”

What the judgment shows is that reports made by the Local Authority’s Housing Department, J’s school, the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC), and Social Services gave M’s behaviour towards her child (including her approach to J’s “gender presentation”) a pass simply because she was receiving support from Mermaids, a UK-based charity that claims to support parents of children who identify as transgender. Observations like these show major conflicts of interest between Mermaids and the government agencies named in the judgement.

Susie Green, the CEO of Mermaids, began her trajectory into the transgender debate through personal investment. She took matters into her own hands regarding her son’s gender dysphoria, leaving the country for the USA, then Thailand, when the National Health Service (NHS) would not undertake the treatment she thought her child needed. Mermaids is entirely comprised of parents like Green, who have either a child who self-identifies as having gender dysphoria or have started seeking professional help for their child. Despite the fact that Mermaids is not a professional organization, it has managed to push its way into government policies such as the House of Commons Select Committee “Transgender Equality” report (within which Mermaids is referenced twenty times) and has successfully convinced local school systems and councils that its form of “support” is tantamount to professional ethos.

In short, we have governmental policies being decided via a support group that functions as a political lobby — a political lobby which justifies its authority because of government championing. (The NHS, for example, cites Mermaids as “a charity that helps children with gender identity issues and their families.”) More surreal is the fact that some of the Mermaids members regularly give lectures to nursing students and NHS staff. The fact that medical and legal documents are produced by basically taking the word of desperate, if not confused, parents equates to both a shocking oversight and the tail wagging the dog.

Make no mistake, Mermaids is not a body of psychologists or trained healthcare professionals — it is merely a group of parents who have a child they believe to be transgender. Unlike other professional organizations, Mermaids is just a support group and therefore not accountable to medical and psychological bodies or government institutions. Under the leadership of Green, Mermaids harbours vested interests in dictating political discourse around transgender identity." (continues)

www.feministcurrent.com/2016/10/26/lobby-groups-like-mermaids-dictate-policy-discourse-around-gender-identity-kids-lose/