Stonewall's response to Transgender Trend

[Eachpeachporch]

I wonder if anyone has had the experience of sharing the Transgender Trend schools resource pack and getting Stonewall's response to it as a reply? Does anyone have any thoughts on what Stonewall says here? Any help much appreciated! www.stonewall.org.uk/node/62946

The suicide warning .

We hope that all schools will take similarly positive steps, in whatever way works for them. But one thing we want every educator to be clear on is that they must have nothing to do with this deeply damaging publication. Yes don't let those truths near your eyes.

I notice they don't address all of the ways Transgender Trend point out that their advice violates The Childrens Act and The Education Act.

No experience sorry but this is another Stonewall style response and it's hilarious. Worth a recirculation in my opinion.

Did you get that response recently? The Stonewall link is from 2018 and although the TT pack is more than a year old(?), I'm not sure it it out of date. Whereas the Stonewall link was not correct at the time. It says:

"That’s why the ‘schools resource pack’ produced by Transgender Trend this week is so dangerous. Masquerading as professional, ‘evidence-based’ advice for schools on how to ‘support trans and gender nonconforming young people’, the pack in fact provides the reverse. It is a deeply damaging document, packed with factually inaccurate content."

There is nothing to back up the assertion that TT drafted anything "factually inaccurate".

"Not only does it fail to reflect the real experiences of trans young people, it actively encourages schools to take steps that risk them falling foul of their legal duties and duty of care to pupils."

There's no research presented, to show the "real experiences".
There's nothing to show what the "steps" are, that means schools will "fall foul" of unspecified "legal duties".

It's just hyperbole. There's no substance to it.

Just to clarify, are you saying the school has used Stonewall as a reference?

Have they opened a newspaper last year?!

Depending on what led you to share the TT guide with the school, I would go back to them with evidence of why Stonewall cannot be trusted - search threads here for info.

Again, depending on the wider correspondence, I would refer them to DfE guidance and the Equality Act.

Feel free to PM me if you want to chat more specifically.

Transgendertrend's rebuttal of research on suicidality of young trans people would be laughable if it wasn't so dangerous when read by people unfamiliar with evaluating such studies and who might give it credence.

It reads on a par with a 3rd rate psychology undergraduate's work.

@suggestionsplease1

Transgendertrend's rebuttal of research on suicidality of young trans people would be laughable if it wasn't so dangerous when read by people unfamiliar with evaluating such studies and who might give it credence.

It reads on a par with a 3rd rate psychology undergraduate's work.

Are you referring to this piece written by Michael Biggs?

www.transgendertrend.com/suicide-by-trans-identified-children-in-england-and-wales/

I'm referring to this page:

www.transgendertrend.com/the-suicide-myth/

However, the page you are referencing is also problematic..

eg. this quote "What is the evidence on actual suicide amongst trans-identified young people in Britain? I submitted a Freedom of Information request to the NHS Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS), which serves patients aged under 18 in England and Wales. It provided information from 2016 to August 2018. One patient committed suicide (in 2017) and two attempted suicide. In addition, two patients on the waiting list committed suicide (in 2016 and 2017) and two attempted suicide. This makes a total of three suicides in two and a half years."

This implies that the writer thinks he has found accurate stats on attempted suicide and completed suicide for GIDS in this time frame, but of course he does not have accurate stats. He has the stats on what has been reported to him, and these are the figures that GIDS have recorded - that have been reported to them (by who - the parents, the children themseves?)

We have no way on knowing the actual figures because not everything will be disclosed by the children or by the parents to the service. GIDS, like all other services will have a proportion of patients who discontinue engaging and don't communicate further with them. And, if, tragically, you are the parent of a child who has taken their own life I imagine you might be busy with other things than getting on the phone to GIDS quickly to appraise them of this information.

To not acknowledge these limitations when referencing the data in the article is an extraordinary oversight in this article, and in fact I can hardly credit that the supposed writer (who is apparently an Associate Professor of Sociology) would have done this. I imagine Transgendertrend has chosen to selectively edit his words and omit caveats any academic in his position would surely refer to.

We also know that parents often do not want their child to be recorded as trans when these horrific events occur. There was a thread on AIBU which referenced one such event today - where a 12 year old male-identified child who had taken their life and had requested male pronouns and male name, was referred to by their birth name and female pronouns by the family and school in reports about the death (the article detailed the child's friends protesting against the use of the birth name and female pronouns for their friend they knew as a boy, and saying that they were instructed not to pose about this issue on social media) So accurate recording of young trans people's suicides is not occurring. That suicide will be recorded as the suicide of a 12 year old female.

www.miltonkeynes.co.uk/news/people/pupils-in-shock-after-bullied-classmate-aged-12-reportedly-takes-his-own-life-in-milton-keynes-3560190

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4476792-4-year-old-assembly-girls-can-be-boys?pg=2

This is the original link that I read the full article on and which related these facts. It has been taken down now, I imagine because there is always some concern that these articles might be influential on other young people who are at risk of suicide (which I guess was also at work behind the instructions to the child's friends not to post on social media.)

All suicides are referred to the coroner so there are accurate figures for these.

was referred to by their birth name and female pronouns by the family

It's not up to the child's friends or the school how the bereaved parents refer to their own child.

(by who - the parents, the children themseves?)

By their medical records or primary care physicians, presumably. Honestly, what a very silly thing to say. They're going to know if their patients die.

That suicide will be recorded as the suicide of a 12 year old female.

Not by trans lobby groups. They are almost ghoulishly diligent about recording anything like this. And it's very unlikely that they miss any, suicides of young people are relatively rare and get considerable attention on local media and social media. If there is a trans angle to be found, they will find it.

That suicide will be recorded as the suicide of a 12 year old female.

Which is an entirely accurate description given that it isn't possible for the child to have a GRC. People do look at causes but suicides are generally multifactorial, and child suicide is very rare in all cases. I imagine if the child identified as a boy and this is thought to be a factor it will be brought up at the inquest.

@Ereshkigalangcleg - but that's not the point being made at all. The point that is being made is that that suicide will probably not be recorded as the death of a trans person. It will be recorded as the death of a girl.

Which means it wouldn't be in the suicide figures that transgender trend are holding up as being low.

Michael Biggs also looked at the audit report for child and young person suicides which backed up the GIDs figures. Transgender identity is not a major factor in child suicide.

Which means it wouldn't be in the suicide figures that transgender trend are holding up as being low.

The audit report looks at being "LGBT" as a possible factor in child suicide.

All suicides are referred to the coroner so there are accurate figures for these.

People don't seem to understand this.

I kept saying gender dysphoria children. I meant DYSPHORIC. damn thumbs.

'Trans' kids aren't commiting suicide. Gender dysphoric kids are.

Threatening parents that their kids will 'commit suicide's if they don't affirm them is utterly unethical.

Suicide is a complex issue, and to pin it down to one reason is not possible. The Samaritan's say this. (Will find link)

To keep publically advertising that gender dysphoric kids commit suicide is to create that reality by making mentally unwell children believe that they will want to commit suocide of they are not affirmed. It is planting a seed.

It is manipulating parents to give on to their child's delusions. It is the strongest most powerful threat to a parent; the threat of harm to their child.
This way they stonewallermaids/GIDS can override the parent's natural and instinctive doubts of putting their children on a damaging lifelong medical pathway.

It is coercion. Let's coerce the people that protect this child into allowing us to medically interfere with them.

It's fucking sick.

If stonewall/mermaids care so much about these children then why are they not funding varied research? Why are they not having conversations about all possible solutions? Why are they not engaging with all different specialists accross many fields. Why are they not providing multiple solutions?

Because they are being funded by people who do not actually care about children.

Threatening the parents with suicide is a very effective way to get them to step aside.

To keep publically advertising that gender dysphoric kids commit suicide is to create that reality by making mentally unwell children believe that they will want to commit suocide of they are not affirmed. It is planting a seed.

This. It's completely unethical. One of the main antecedents for child suicide is "suicide related internet use".

@suggestionsplease1

Transgendertrend's rebuttal of research on suicidality of young trans people would be laughable if it wasn't so dangerous when read by people unfamiliar with evaluating such studies and who might give it credence.

It reads on a par with a 3rd rate psychology undergraduate's work.

Just noting here that Stephanie Davis Arai who runs transgender trend was shortlisted for the John Maddox prize.

The John Maddox Prize for Standing up for Science recognises the work of individuals who promote science and evidence, advancing the public discussion around difficult topics despite challenges or hostility.

She is forensic. Little wonder she is relentlessly targeted.

If stonewall/mermaids care so much about these children then why are they not funding varied research? Why are they not having conversations about all possible solutions? Why are they not engaging with all different specialists accross many fields. Why are they not providing multiple solutions?

Quite.

To keep publically advertising that gender dysphoric kids commit suicide is to create that reality by making mentally unwell children believe that they will want to commit suocide of they are not affirmed. It is planting a seed.

If there was an increase in the number of suicides, that would sort of prove their point.

@sacredfeminina

Threatening parents that their kids will 'commit suicide's if they don't affirm them is utterly unethical.

Suicide is a complex issue, and to pin it down to one reason is not possible. The Samaritan's say this. (Will find link)

To keep publically advertising that gender dysphoric kids commit suicide is to create that reality by making mentally unwell children believe that they will want to commit suocide of they are not affirmed. It is planting a seed.

It is manipulating parents to give on to their child's delusions. It is the strongest most powerful threat to a parent; the threat of harm to their child.
This way they stonewallermaids/GIDS can override the parent's natural and instinctive doubts of putting their children on a damaging lifelong medical pathway.

It is coercion. Let's coerce the people that protect this child into allowing us to medically interfere with them.

It's fucking sick.

If stonewall/mermaids care so much about these children then why are they not funding varied research? Why are they not having conversations about all possible solutions? Why are they not engaging with all different specialists accross many fields. Why are they not providing multiple solutions?

Because they are being funded by people who do not actually care about children.

Threatening the parents with suicide is a very effective way to get them to step aside.

I wish to fuck that one of the newspapers would look at this language used by Mermaids and Stonewall and expose it for what it is.

This thread has gone a bit off-topic.

OP, even if you've been sent that as a reply in recent days, I'd go back and say you couldn't find any rebuttals supported by evidence, you assume that was a simple oversight, and could you please have the evidence that challenges what TT say in their guide?