Question re mermaids

[IchbineinBerlinner]

Is it accurate to say that Mermaids are a charity ran by parents who are not accountable to medical and psychological bodies ? Id really appreciate if someone could let me know if this is right

It is indeed correct, and not only that they are driving changes within medical and psychological bodies (or at least trying very hard too)

They even ignore advice from Samaritans in regards to reporting on suicide.

Yes that is correct. I believe they have a legal person on their team too (not 100% sure on that one).

@blueharry yes they have a legal dept and utilise the skills of solicitors firms and barristers chambers who can offer pro bono assistance.

Yes, the head of mermaids is an IT consultant.

Mermaids are a registered charity and will have a constitution which sets out their charitable objectives. They have a (strangely small)!board of trustees who are there on the basis that they have the skills required to run a successful charity. Those trustees are most likely appointed by the existing trustees who will be the ‘members ’

They are accountable to the charity commission for their compliance with charity law

If they are also a registered company (idk if they are) they will also be accountable to companies house

They will be accountable to their funders to comply with the conditions of their funding

The trustees should hold the chief executive to account but in reality, I imagine SG does what the hell she likes

Great thanks

Does anyone know why no legal case has been brought against the head of mermaids for illegally taking their child out of the country for a sex-change operation (removal of testicles and inversion of child’s penis) before it was legal to do so?

You can look at their accounts and legal documents on the charity commission website

Well the founder of Mermaids used to be an IT manager, and I think the other lady, Helen someone is from a PR background.

Does anyone know why no legal case has been brought against the head of mermaids for illegally taking their child out of the country for a sex-change operation (removal of testicles and inversion of child’s penis) before it was legal to do so?

This isn't quite what happened, and also in my understanding the only person who could succeed in a legal case against SG is her own child who doesn't want to.

^ Ok I'm thinking "legal" is a typo for illegal.

Basically in our country JG could claim damages that she was taken by her mother to another country for an unethical operation, but JG doesn't want to do that, they are fine with it. No one else can claim on their behalf.

The JG case was before the “taking girls abroad for FGM” legislation. And the child was, at that point, legally not female.

Does anyone know why no legal case has been brought against the head of mermaids

DrLadyBits the only possible reason I can think of is that, at the time, it was not in fact illegal to do so. The child was 15 and had surgery in Thailand on or soon after their 16th birthday. I understand that such surgery has subsequently been banned in Thailand for children.

Would it be legal for a parent to undertake such a trip today? Surely social services would be all over a parent who took their teenager to another country to have their genitals removed?

Ah ok, and, the JG case also made Thailand change the law making the operation illegal.

Surely social services would be all over a parent who took their teenager to another country to have their genitals removed?

Wishful thinking.
When it comes to trans it's all about affirmation, support, encouragement, no questioning, no debate, even deep within social services.

Mermaids don’t seem to like mental health professionals. This is a 2018 request from them. Scroll down to recommendation 1 which is removing psychologists. Psychiatrists and psychotherapists from the process.
data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/women-and-equalities-committee/health-and-social-care-and-lgbt-communities/written/91159.html

Wishful thinking.
When it comes to trans it's all about affirmation, support, encouragement, no questioning, no debate, even deep within social services.

I find it so difficult to accept that our country would tolerate the elective removal of a healthy teenager's genitals. Sterility and loss of sexual function for the rest of their life. Surely, surely the school would raise concerns, the GP a social worker?!

apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/Accounts/Ends75/0001160575_AC_20190331_E_C.pdf
They pay their key staff very, very well
and do not clarify who made the massive donation in the year

That 2018 submission from Mermaids, which is their official request to our parliament, has at 2.5, reducing the age at which cross sex hormones can be given. Apparently an age 16 limit is arbitrary.

And at 1.4 “hormone suppressing treatment should be accessible to all in a timely manner”. It is safe apparently.

And the child was, at that point, legally not female.

Really? I thought the legal age for legally being recognised as the opposite sex was 18, or is it not? I understand that there'd have been no legal case anyway because of the fgm laws not being in place, but I'm just confused on this point.

Also, thinking the Samaritans guidelines on reporting of suicide, I've written before to online websites and stuff where they've quoted Mermaids on suicides and pointed out that they're not following the guidelines. Some of the sites have amended their articles slightly or just posted a Samaritans link in or something as a result. I'm just wondering now if not following the Samaritans guidelines would be something that the charity commission would care about? Or does it not matter, because it's just a best practice guideline rather than a legal requirement?

Sorry for all the typos in my post.

the JG case also made Thailand change the law making the operation illegal

I understood that that wasn’t the case. I believe they were on course to do this and SG got in there just before it happened.