James Esses Case - Evidence-based therapy

[RoastChicory]

There has been an update from James Esses, who was suspended from his psychotherapy course as he set up a petition to make sure therapists were allowed to explore issues with gender dysphoria patients and not simply affirm the patient’s self-diagnosis.

Shockingly, it appears that the U.K. psychotherapists association put pressure to expel James from the course. They are therefore also now part of the case. If James wins, this would set a very important message to similar associations.

Email copied below

Update on Expelled from my university course for holding gender critical views

Dear Supporters,

Thanks to the overwhelming support I received from my original crowdfunding, my lawyers have now been able to draft and lodge my claim. My lawyers are Akua Reindorf, who wrote the Reindorf review into the treatment by Essex University of its gender critical staff, and Peter Daly of Doyle Clayton Solicitors, who acted for Maya Forstater in the appeal that established gender critical beliefs such as mine as being protected from discrimination.

My claim is in the Employment Tribunal, because both of the Respondents provide workplace qualifications. These are litigated in the Employment Tribunal because of section 53 of the Equality Act 2010.

The First Respondent is Metanoia. The acts of discrimination I am litigating are set out in my original crowdfunding page.

The Second Respondent is UKCP, the United Kingdom Council for Psychotherapy. This is the main registration body for councillors and psychotherapists in the UK. These are not regulated professions, so they don’t have a regulator in the same way that Doctors have the General Medical Council, or solicitors have the Solicitors Regulation Authority. But UKCP is in many ways a quasi-regulator, because registration with the UKCP (or one other counterpart) is required in order to qualify formally as a counsellor or psychotherapist.

It has come to light in Subject Access Request responses that UKCP were far more involved in Metanoia’s actions towards me than I had previously realised. Metanoia were liaising with UKCP, who were putting pressure on Metanoia in how they dealt with me. My claim is therefore also against UKCP, on the basis that its actions instructed, caused or induced Metanoia’s discrimination against me, as well as those actions being discriminatory against me in their own right. As with Metanoia, I am litigating against UKCP on the basis that it is a qualifications body, but also on the basis that it is a Trade Association – both of these are within the Employment Tribunal’s jurisdiction under the Equality Act 2010.

This is, as far as I am aware, the first claim for gender critical belief discrimination brought against a registration body or quasi-regulator like UKCP. This is therefore an important case because it will have relevance for other regulators and other regulated professions.

This is, as far as I am aware, the first claim for gender critical belief discrimination brought against a registration body or quasi-regulator like UKCP. This is therefore an important case because it will have relevance for other regulators and other regulated professions.

The implications are substantial and disturbing.

I just saw this too, OP. Glad to see you've started this thread already: James needs lots of support in this.

It's interesting that it appears to be the first case brought against a regulatory body. I was on the Baroness Nicholson webinar on Friday and she said how she'd come to this fight after a visit from a group of nurses who'd lost their jobs as a result of refusing to do an impossible procedure on a male body. I imagine a cervical smear on a TW or similar scenario. Doing so would have breached the Nursing & Midwifery Council code of practice but they lost their jobs regardless of that.

As a judge in the males in women's jails case indicated, judicial reviews may not be the way forward for us. Perhaps James Esses's route will prove more successful. Fingers crossed (but not before doing some digging).

No. This is the guy who when faced with a girl saying that they are now a boy, wanted to ask - What makes you feel that way? What has been happening in you le life? Basically, to do psychotherapy.

Not to just say - of course you are, have some testosterone and we’ll add you to the mastectomy waiting list.

Do you mean losing his role as a volunteer for Childline, anaily?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9847741/Man-lost-job-Childline-raising-fears-children-rushed-changing-sex.html

Thanks, OP. This sounds really worrying.

Is there a crowdfunder?

• just searched. found on crowd justice, using James Esses' name, for anyone else who is able to dig.

"What makes you feel that way? What has been happening in you le life? Basically, to do psychotherapy. "

The aim of the therapy tying to find a cause? Some trauma perhaps? To then fix that with the goal of the trans kid no longer identifying as their gender? So the child is gender conforming? Sounds eerily similar to conversion therapy. I can see why childline dropped him. Hopefully all the children he came into contact with are followed up with. Promoting extreme forms of self hate is not therapy.

The aim of the therapy tying to find a cause? Some trauma perhaps? To then fix that with the goal of the trans kid no longer identifying as their gender? So the child is gender conforming?

I see where you have misunderstood Ainally. The aim is not to make the child “gender conforming”. It’s to help them come to terms with the reality of their sexed body and perhaps to help them with the stigma they might encounter for not wearing clothes or behaving in ways that others in society might expect in relation to their sex.

I wish James well. These are important issues that need to be aired in court, publicly.

The main stigma and mockery comes from GC people telling them to conform to gender stereotypes according to their anatomy. The reality is they are trans.

@SpindleWhorl

I wish James well. These are important issues that need to be aired in court, publicly.

I'm taken aback that it has to happen in an adversarial tribunal setting.

There may well be some interesting facts to surface about UKCP's governance and whether an appropriate discussion was held at the regulators before they intervened in this covert way.

The aim of the therapy tying to find a cause? Some trauma perhaps? To then fix that with the goal of the trans kid no longer identifying as their gender?

You're pre-empting the outcome of the therapy there. Not a good look.

If the child has trauma it's generally a good thing to recognise and try and fix. Or would you prefer to ignore the trauma and just affirm? Meaning the child is still deeply unhappy because the trauma hasn't been alleviated.

If there is no trauma and the child is genuinely dysphoric then affirmation will help.

But until a therapist explores the child's feelings in full they won't know which category they fall into.

@anaily

The main stigma and mockery comes from GC people telling them to conform to gender stereotypes according to their anatomy. The reality is they are trans.

All of them? Every single one with no exceptions? How do you know?

And lol at the notion that those that are gender critical encourage children to conform to gender stereotypes. Do you not know what the word 'critical' means?

@anaily

The main stigma and mockery comes from GC people telling them to conform to gender stereotypes according to their anatomy. The reality is they are trans.

As the very proud mother of a butch lesbian, who has been fully supported in wearing the clothes she wanted, right from the time she was able to express a preference, you couldn’t be more wrong.

Anyway, to return to the thread topic, this is indeed an incredibly important case. Evidence from the Tavistock and earlier studies all indicate that the vast majority of children with gender dysphoria will, given time and support from decent counselors, grow up to be gay or lesbian. Attempting to freeze them into some supposed “gender identity” when what they are experiencing is a phase of confusion during growing up is one of the impending scandals of our time.

That therapists are being pushed into doing so, despite that overwhelming evidence, is something that this case will hopefully begin to address. Many thanks to James and all other therapists who are fighting this fad, and also to those who help to crowdfund such essential cases.

Therapy should not aim to have a particular end in mind what gender affirmation does.

I got interested in this by becoming aware of a few teenage girls saying they were trans. One I have known since birth and has significant untreated special needs, others with complex family backgrounds.

There are many reasons for someone to feel uncomfortable with their sexed body and it is really important that they are explored before hormones and surgery are involved.

GC ppl believe men should be entitled to wear whatever they want - dresses, skirts, heels, make up, whatever - Abd that that does not make them women, it makes them gender non confirming men

This is why Eddie izzard in the days when he said “they’re not women’s dresses, they’re MY dresses, I buy them!” Was so brilliant (sadly those days are long gone)

telling them to conform to gender stereotypes according to their anatomy.

You're very confused. You might be thinking of people like Mermaids who are telling them to use adopt "gender identities" and take hormones according to their sexuality and interests.

Oh my god. The absolute injustice of it all. I want to scream. I don't know how poor James can bear it (I suppose he hasn't been left with much choice). I just read all the details, including the "offending" petition, and there is nothing remotely inappropriate about anything he said. This whole situation is really really frightening. What the hell is going on? Will be digging, of course.

GC philosophy is boys will be boys, girls will be girls. That any other combination is wrong and needs to be corrected. No deviation or anything.

@anaily

GC philosophy is boys will be boys, girls will be girls. That any other combination is wrong and needs to be corrected. No deviation or anything.

Errrr no it's really not GC is be whoever you want. Genitals aren't important in that - females can be HGV drivers and males can wear dresses.

TRAs seem to say if you're male and want to wear dresses you're trans.

Or is that not what TRAs say at all?

Anyway, to return to the thread topic, this is indeed an incredibly important case. Evidence from the Tavistock and earlier studies all indicate that the vast majority of children with gender dysphoria will, given time and support from decent counselors, grow up to be gay or lesbian. Attempting to freeze them into some supposed “gender identity” when what they are experiencing is a phase of confusion during growing up is one of the impending scandals of our time.

I would hope that any discussion has been evidence-based but my apprehension is that it hasn't been.

If I were the quasi-regulator in this case I would hope to be very confident that the official stance of the organisation is wellgrounded in theory as well as evidence or I would anticipate a very rocky road for that organisation in the near future that might need them to consult the terms of their insurance and liability coverage.

@anaily

GC philosophy is boys will be boys, girls will be girls. That any other combination is wrong and needs to be corrected. No deviation or anything.

You appear to have entirely misunderstood the situation. This thread is about a court case that is important for the women who frequent this board and continuing to derail it because of a misunderstanding on your part is frustrating for others who do understand.

Perhaps you could go and read up about gender critical feminism and specifically the form it takes on this board, before you jump in on a topic you have no idea about. This thread might be a good place to start:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3145470-Break-it-down-for-me