Potential Systemic Safeguarding failures in NSPCC / Childline illustrated by appointment & ending of relationship with Munroe Bergdorf Thread 2

[R0wantrees]

link to previous thread: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3605120-Munroe-Childline-s-first-LGBT-campaigner

NSPCC statement by CEO Peter Wanless
www.nspcc.org.uk/what-we-do/news-opinion/munroe-bergdorf

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3609218-Hi-from-Safe-Schools-Alliance-UK

That article by Kirkup is incredibly good. To the point, blunt and clear.

A very serious phenomena in relation to this issue is that all of the social media and tech corporations including twitter, youtube and facebook have invested heavily in mindfulness training for their staff.

I do not have a problem with mindfulness in theory, it is just a form of meditation and I have been meditating for years in my own way.

Practically however there is a serious problem.

Many consultants, corporations, charities and therapists offering mindfulness training are wither knowingly or unknowingly promoting controversial Buddhist spiritual movements, movements that have a long history of allegations of being cults and of serious abuses including sexual abuses.

The trojan horse effect works like this mindfulness > tantra > neo-tantra / neo-Reichian body psychotherapy > = sexual abuses and the promotion of sexual minority interests past the point of equalities and into the level of insanity that we are currently witnessing.

This is all made worse by the fact that many senior people in tech corporations are highly intelligent, influential people who are neuro-atypical and whose intelligence does not make them immune from brainwashing, in fact, as we have seen with the TRA issue, such people are often very vulnerable to coercive control and manipulation.

Wow. That’s a powerful piece of writing.

Someone should tweet it to LOJ, stat!

The near media blackout is worrying

It has all the hallmarks of a Sunday Papers news story.

There are a lot of themes to be picked up, fact-checked and run past lawyers. The new information, from the Rubberman himself, that the NSPCC were aware of his online persona and ignored it, just adds to the unfolding events.

If the NSPCC thought that they would get away with handling/blocking/reporting safeguarding concerns on Twitter, then the weekend and next week is going to be a shocker for them, I suspect.

I posted that I thought James Kirkup would be the one shining light in the media who would cover this and he hasn’t let us down.

I hope James Kirkup follows it up with a rubberman article.

The BBC, the Guardian and the Independent have all, by implication, presented the mere fact of a journalist asking questions as some sort of campaigning action. This is not a trivial matter. In this, they are contributing to the dismal trend of treating journalistic inquiry and expression as fair game for attack: see Donald Trump and sadly, Boris Johnson’s press conference this week for examples.

👏

The safeguarding culture in youth trans organisations seems to be non existent. From this piece reporting on a Gendered Intelligence youth conference last year:

'Although I am not a parent, I have been “Dad” to countless young trans people; I have provided or assisted access to first binders, packers, picking up and taking first hormone injections, writing coming out speeches to parents and schools, I have had young people on the brink of ending their lives sit in my kitchen and drink cups of tea and hold on for just a couple more minutes until they could walk out and get themselves home safely. I know what it’s like to be looked up to.'

'Being looked up to' as the motivation rather than the wellbeing of the young people - written by someone in their 30s. Providing binders, hormones, packers without parental knowledge - I assume without parental knowledge otherwise why would a young person need to write a coming out speech?

The whole article is full of red flags along the lines of 'what is age anyway?' It's from the Diversity Trust, the director of which, Cheryl Morgan, features in this Andrew Gilligan article: www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/police-used-violent-transgender-activist-for-equality-training-x0mktgclw

I forgot the link! archive.is/6pHIX

That James Kirkup article is really good

The Spectator lead the way in exposing Kids Company while other MSM outlets were making excuses for Batmanghelidjh so hopefully they will run with this in the same courageous manner

Yesterday evening I wrote
"At the moment, the coverage seems to be bias puff interviews (BBC), Bias vitriol opinion pieces (Guardian Owen Jones) & blog pieces stitched together like this from MailOnline.

I am waiting for the actual investigative journalists to report!"

Thank you James Kirkup (again)

I wonder if we shouldn't send paper copies of his article to the BBC, Guardian, Independent, Mail Online editors who have responsibility for people identifying as journalists with clear training needs?

The BBC, the Guardian and the Independent have all, by implication, presented the mere fact of a journalist asking questions as some sort of campaigning action. This is not a trivial matter. In this, they are contributing to the dismal trend of treating journalistic inquiry and expression as fair game for attack

Exactly right. This is a very good article and gets straight to the issues.

PVC free for the moment though!

has been pitched to the Mail, the Mail on Sunday, the Telegraph, the Times and the Sun. The Sun has everything that was in the public domain on Saturday including a transcript of the video. Make of that what you will

I suspect there are men who don't wish to open up to wider debate whether it is unreasonable to masturbaye in their workplace toilets. In order to protect themselves or their bro-mates, they'll happily overlook the safeguarding failures of a children's charity.

'Although I am not a parent, I have been “Dad” to countless young trans people; I have provided or assisted access to first binders, packers, picking up and taking first hormone injections, writing coming out speeches to parents and schools, I have had young people on the brink of ending their lives sit in my kitchen and drink cups of tea and hold on for just a couple more minutes until they could walk out and get themselves home safely. I know what it’s like to be looked up to.'

Not a parent & not an adult with any understanding of Safeguarding , child development or appropriate boundaries.

This is about adults' using vulnerable children for their own validation.
Its reckless & dangerous.

Yes, thank you James Kirkup for looking at the facts and proceeding from there. As opposed to those deciding what happened first and then going looking for 'facts'. I wish we had more journalists and fewer 'journalists' - the latter are thoroughly cooked frogs by now. I sat through the OJ/MB video - at the end when the NSPCC statement is on screen it's cut before the bit about MB breaching the NSPCC's safeguarding and equalities policies!

More sunlight please.

@ROwantrees yes that's how it reads to me. I sent that article to my MP who refused to make a safeguarding assessment of it.

It has all the hallmarks of a Sunday Papers news story.

It does.
A slow burner which isn't just a one off story, but a huge scandal which the papers seek to run a big series and make their name off.

However they take a lot of time to do, and for the Sundays to really feel confident to go for it with. And in the meantime the problem is allowed to fester somewhat.

I don't know.

I'm not sure we will see anything on the subject yet. Its almost as if someone is waiting for something more for these charities to put the noose around their own necks to the point that there is a catastrophic fall out. And the newspapers know that it will eventually happen, and are just taking notes along the way, waiting for the blow out to happen in an almost vulture like manner after the fact rather than an preventative one against the predator.

I sent that article to my MP who refused to make a safeguarding assessment of it.

Many MPs dont understand or prioritise Safeguarding.
It doesn't inform their response.

The best thing to do is to provide them with the Safeguarding assessment in as simple as terms as possible & ask for a yes/no acceptance of the potential risk.

MPs refusual to listen to Safeguarding concerns needs to go on record alongside the charities, organisations & lobby groups.

I suspect there are men who don't wish to open up to wider debate whether it is unreasonable to masturbaye in their workplace toilets. In order to protect themselves or their bro-mates, they'll happily overlook the safeguarding failures of a children's charity.

I think sadly this is true. The Telegraph ran a good article last week on the problem of men watching porn on public transport, and the BTL comments were swamped by the dirty mac brigade saying "don't like? Don't look," seemingly totally oblivious to the fact that they were defending men carrying out a sexual act in public (because let's face it, if you're watching porn for the quality of the cinematography or the directorial flair, you're doing it wrong).

I'm pleased that Janice has James, The Spectator and The Times watching her back.

This covers Part I and sets the record straight about Bergdorf.

Part II: The Repercussions will follow in due course, I'm sure.

As James Kirkup identifies, this is the most important part of the statement by NSPCC CEO Peter Wanless because this is the Safeguarding decision:

"The Board of Trustees and EB want to be totally clear that the reason we stopped working with Munroe has nothing to do with the fact that she is transgender.

The driving force of the decision the Board took was concern around the lack of process that our organisation used when deciding to work with Munroe. This is not Munroe's doing but is much more a failure of our systems and processes than anything Munroe has done while engaged with us, and something we have to learn from.

When appointing an ambassador we are required to consider whether the relationship supports our ability to safeguard children and be influential in safeguarding children. The board decided an ongoing relationship with Munroe was inappropriate because of her statements on the public record, which we felt would mean that she was in breach of our own risk assessments and undermine what we are here to do. These statements are specific to safeguarding and equality."

That he felt obliged/pressured/inclined to wrap it up almost to the point of obscuring it to those disinclined to prioritise Safeguarding children over adults' needs is unfortunate.

Those who are deliberately ignoring it are demonstrating their priorities.

Agreed many MPs don't understand safeguarding. However, due to this MP's professional background, I would assume they do.

I wonder how many more years of pointing out what can plainly be seen women have to do?

This person is a 'content creator' for the NSPCC, apparently.

Sorry, posted the same screenshot twice!

No Melanie, it’s not ok for you to chat with random teenagers via private online messages.

The only reason MB was criticised and not you, was because we didn’t know about you.