ICO threatens Gender Clinic with court over Mermaids involvement .

[MrsOvertonsWindow]

The Telegraph is reporting that the ICO has threatened GIDs with court action for denying that they have records about their involvement with Mermaids. A courageous parent who was concerned about the inappropriate influence Mermaids had on GIDs issued some FOIs. The Trust claimed that it "did not hold" emails or minutes of meetings .

Mermaids previously accidentally published emails between Susie Green from Mermaids & Tavistock staff that led to the ICO fining Mermaids for a data breach. In the light of this, the ICO doesn't believe the Trust's denials and has ruled that “on the balance of probabilities” they do have relevant emails. It's a criminal offence to hide, alter or delete information requested via an FOI and it looks as if the ICO are prepared to throw the book at them

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/04/30/tavistock-nhs-gender-clinic-threatened-court-action/

Well there's a reason she took Jackie abroad for hormones and surgery she couldn't get in the UK.

Surgery that then forced a change in the law in the country she went to.

She says its cos we had a backwards policy on gender medicine. That's medicine that had no evidence based research demonstrating long term benefits (research that she's done her best to actively block in this country).

Others might say she couldn't get it in the UK cos ethics and lack of clinical evidence.

She now lobbies for quack healthcare which over rids safeguarding and makes a mockery of consent / ability to make informed decisions.

The conflicts of interest are staggering. As are the power she gained from bull dozing others and blagging when they should have been questioning her lack of qualifications and how all this has a questionable angle due to what she did with her son.

Consider where we'd be now without Susie and Jackie and Mermaids in terms of conversations about this.

Ironically Greens own ego and her epic promotion above her abilities is also the thing most likely to see the house of cards crumble into a massive medical scandal in the UK but there we go.

I very sincerely hope that sackings happen and consideration is given to criminal acts having occured. But I don't think anyone will ever be held accountable unfortunately. I have no faith not trust in the system to actually acknowledge the scale of the failing here.

Green is nothing more than a lobbyist and idealogue who corrupted good quality healthcare for children.

Indeed. And was involved in writing their standards of care.

https://www.wpath.org/SOC

Hmm also in the telegraph today is this:
^www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/05/28/terminally-ill-brits-deserve-access-to-experimental-treatme/?utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1685263871-1^

its about how terminally ill patients should get easier access to experimental drugs. It's concerning that it's raising its head as comment in the Telegraph today of all days.

Even more so this is slightly weird for me, as earlier this morning I was googling about quackery and came across an article talking about the Medical Innovations Bill in 2014 and what was debated in the Lord's about it. This bill which never passed was on exactly the same subject.

This is going off piste from the thread topic but I think the article is worth quoting because, I think you will see the parallels with concerns about the Tavistock and what has ACTUALLY happened with experimental treatment. If anything there is an argument to TIGHTEN our regulation.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/dec/12/quacks-charter-untested-medicines-bill

Dr Sarah Wollaston, who leads the Commons health committee, said the medical innovations bill proposed by Lord Saatchi would endanger patients and undermine genuine medical research.

The bill, which is being debated on Friday in the House of Lords, appears to have government backing but is opposed by a growing band of doctors and medical experts.

Wollaston said even the insertion of safeguards forcing new treatments to be approved by a qualified doctor was insufficient to improve the “very bad” legislation.

“Actually, the amended version says you only need one other doctor – it’s one or more other doctor,” she told the Today programme. “This is a quacks’ charter. It removes essential protections from patients. It actually won’t advance innovation at all, and in fact if anything it’ll undermine clinical trials.”

Dominic Nutt, a spokesman for Saatchi, said the bill would give “clarity and consistency and confidence to those doctors who seek to innovate but are nervous of doing so”.

He said untested Ebola drugs had been used on dying patients and the UK needed laws to allow the same to happen here. However, Wollaston said this could already happen in Britain when the medicines had a chance of working.

“That just makes the point,” she said. “They were allowed to use these treatments, and this is what so many people have lined up to say, is that you can already use these treatments in those kinds of circumstances, so you don’t need this bill.

“All this bill will do is introduce a Saatchi defence for quack doctors who are actually promising that parachute that has just been raised. It’s false hopes for people instead of evidence-based treatments.”

The bill was questioned in the House of Lords by Prof Robert Winston, a fertility expert, who spoke of how his father died aged 42 after a series of innovative medical treatments to try to cure what began as a minor infection.

The Labour peer said his father, Laurence Winston, died after an initial innovative treatment for a minor infection proved “quite inadequate”, and another innovative procedure led to the development of an abscess.

Winston said he had endured a sleepless night before speaking against the medical innovation bill, but said he was concerned that the proposals would allow irresponsible innovation

I think you probably get why I think it's worth highlighting both the old article AND the telegraph comment piece on this thread.

Why is it that procedures involving experimental treatment in physically healthy children appear to be more lax than those in place for terminally ill patients?

There's also this related to the Tavistock and GIDS in today's Observer:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/may/27/nhs-data-breach-trusts-shared-patient-details-with-facebook-meta-without-consent

NHS data breach: trusts shared patient details with Facebook without consent
Observer investigation reveals Meta Pixel tool passed on private details of web browsing on medical sites

"The Tavistock and Portman NHS foundation trust in London shared data with Facebook when users clicked the information page for its gender identity service, which specialises in working with children who have gender dysphoria. Data was also shared when users viewed the webpage for the Portman Clinic, which “offers specialist help with disturbing sexual behaviours”, and clicked for details on how to be referred to the service."

All the papers released (going back to this thread/OP about the FOI) seem to be here:

https://twitter.com/nurturaluk/status/1662574824470859778?s=46&t=WHoOZZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

Thanks for that @RedToothBrush That's a useful comparison. I had always understood that it was possible to try out relatively untested medicine in extreme circumstances but only after "jumping through certain hoops" so to speak.
Quite devastating to realise the extent of the experimentation that's still happening to these vulnerable children and that so many in the NHS are in thrall to this dangerous ideology and the influence of groups like Mermaids.

However, Wollaston said this could already happen in Britain when the medicines had a chance of working.

And this is something that needs to go into the new, rigorous safeguarding code that now has to be developed.

When a lobby or agency is pushing and marketing highly emotive sob stories to get a law in place when there already is capacity in law for this to be done honestly and properly then it must be assumed that this additional law is to permit exploitation and personal benefit.

We live in times of vile people without morals or conscience who will exploit and push whatever loophole they can, and laws will have to change to fit the times.

Green has caused damage, undoubtedly.

But what is going on that the NHS has allowed an unqualified, non-professional member of the public, who had pursued a very extreme path of treatment for her child, to inform their treatment of children?

This is the NHS. Supposedly committed to treatment based on evidence. Full of qualified medical professionals.

And they've let some random extremist dictate how they treat CHILDREN?

They've hosted links to the 'Eunuch Archive', which led to them having to report themselves to the police.

They've referred to WPATH, a group of highly dubious extremists who are now pushing 'Eunuch gender' openly.

They are removing body parts from children.

The NHS should be more robust than this.

It has left itself open to being abused. It has let itself be used to carry out the most outrageous programme of treatment on children, based on ropey ideology and no evidence. It has enabled sterilisation and extreme body modification of children.

I have just read the email chain where SG lays into Carmichael for not being treated as a professional.

Carmichael's reply is grovelling and apologetic. SG and 'the families' consistently deriding GPs as being transphobic if they don't refer, GIRES pushing to get the process speeded up and reduce the number of meetings before prescribing.

Effectively Green treated GIDS as the medical arm of Mermaids.

Exactly @ArabeIIaScott and I’d lay the blame for that squarely at the door of the chair of the trust from 2015-2022 Paul Burstow. Former Lib Dem MP & minister and still heavily emeshed in Lib Dem party.

Even if Susie Green doesn't see anything wrong with what went on, clearly the Tavistock does or they wouldn't have tried to hide these emails.

Its early, I'm not well so do I understand this right?

If I clicked on the tavistock website ( I most certainly have done in the last few years) that was then shared with facebook/meta?

Why?

And whilst there are parallels, in terms of gender medication we're talking about experimental treatment on healthy children, which is a world away from terminally ill patients.

Having run and been the sole director of a tiny enterprise dealing with SEN students, if I'd received that email id have had to refer it and take advice on what response to give and what an agreed and appropriate stance to take would have been. And we weren't giving off label drugs to kids!

It all feels like the minute they jeopardised one kid's future they couldn't roll anything back or they would be 'transphobic'.

There will always be deluded people and extremists looking to influence the NHS or access power or vulnerable people.

The systems need to be rigorous and robust enough to ensure that all NHS treatment is evidence based and in the best interests of the patients, not the pushers.

As ever, useful idiots enable harmful breaches in safeguarding.

Well, they're either useful idiots or something more nefarious.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-malign-influence-of-mermaids-is-becoming-increasingly-clear/

This link needs to be part of the investigation...did it lead back to targetting young people using their algorithms?

Now this - possibly of interest to those on the ICO thread too:

Rights body ‘captured’ by gender ideology

EHRC watchdog told school to transition pupils to their ‘true identity’ or face discrimination claims

"Staff at the equalities watchdog told a school that they had to socially transition a pupil, it has emerged, amid warnings that the organisation has been “captured” by gender ideology.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) warned a school that if it did not allow pupils to use single-sex facilities, which matched their “true gender identity”, it “would constitute an act of discrimination”.
The letter has emerged after Baroness Falkner, its chairmann, successfully faced down a coup by activist stafff as she tried to rebalance the commission’s approach to trans rights. Her allies said the “shocking” letter was the kind of behaviour at the “captured” organisation that she was attempting to changee_.
A source at the EHRC said: “Ideologues had captured the EHRC before Baroness Falkner took over, we know now from the Cass Review [on gender identity] that socially transitioning a child is not a neutral act.”
Complained to Mermaids
The school’s head teacher received the letter in 2016 after a girl in year 10, who identified as a boy, complained to Mermaids, the trans lobby group, that teachers were not letting her use the boys’ changing rooms or play rugby.
After Mermaids passed the complaint to the EHRC, the watchdog’s solicitor wrote to the head teacher urging them to support the child’s gender transition.
The solicitor sent passages from guidance used in Brighton and Hove, which was not the area that the school was based in, stating that trans pupils should be able to take part in PE, competitions, and sports days “in a manner consistent with their gender identity”.
The EHRC employee then asked the school to confirm what they were doing to “support” the students’ transition.
Documents seen by this newspaper show that in the same year EHRC staff met with Mermaids as part of a “scoping exercise” to see if there were any test cases on trans discrimination that they could take to court.
Any legal action could have set a precedent, though it is understood that none of the cases that Mermaids proposed were deemed suitable to pursue."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/05/31/baroness-falkner-equality-human-rights-commission-timeline/

I would like to say I'm surprised by that article however sadly I'm not.
I am glad to see that the gloves are off on our side after the failed attempt to oust baroness Falkner and the best part of it is we don't need to use any of the TRAs tactics of lies and smears we just need to tell the truth and show the evidence of what they have been doing.
I honestly believe that this is the beginning of the end for the wokeratti they over played their hand and invited the world and their dog to look at them in the full light of day and we should thank them for doing our work for us.
Maybe we can start asking questions about who decided that we should be allowing people to apply for false documents like passports and drivers licences that lie about a person's sex by self-id as that was never passed by any government so each passport issued with a false sex marker is a criminal offence and someone needs to be jailed for it

^EHRC staff met with Mermaids as part of a “scoping exercise” to see if there were any test cases on trans discrimination that they could take to court.
Any legal action could have set a precedent, though it is understood that none of the cases that Mermaids proposed were deemed suitable to pursue.^

They were actively looking for a case to get the law changed so a confused teenager could put herself at risk of sexual harassment and violence, and so the boys could also be put in a very difficult position where they could have ended up accused of voyeurism and where their own privacy was not considered?

Where were the parents in the case with the letter to the school -seven years ago! Frozen out, or terrified of saying no because 'professionals' had told them their child would harm herself, or wholeheartedly cheerleading?

Any legal action could have set a precedent, though it is understood that none of the cases that Mermaids proposed were deemed suitable to pursue.

Thats a telling statement in its own right. No case had enough grounds to establish discrimination was occurring and/or was compelling enough to break to court in other ways.

The fact that there was a significant enough counterargument that was felt could be used to even stop a legal attempt is very interesting.

Especially given the context being institutional capture and a desire to actively get through trans reform.

Mermaids wasn't overseeing cases with sufficient strength - instead it relied on abuses of power and bullying institutions into getting ahead of the law.

Fascinating.

Looks as though there might be another article coming soon:

medium.com/@segreen100/daily-mail-anti-trans-witch-hunt-episode-7-692-b3eef8ab5b95

SG was asked (by the Mail) to comment on:

"• The allegation that you were referring children to Tavistock for gender treatment, against the wishes of their GPs and behind the back of Mermaids, which was at the time reassuring parents that they do not get involved with medical pathways. 
• The allegation that you encouraged children down a medical pathway needlessly and without proper assessment, and created a needless urgency and fear among parents to comply. 
• The allegation that you created a work environment in which, while debate was encouraged, tense and uncomfortable situations arose when an employee disagreed with you on, for example, trans women competing against cis women in sport. Such an environment led to workers quitting the charity. 
• The allegation that alongside GIDS, Mermaids was medicalising homosexuality, complicit in a form of gay conversion therapy, in which children who were simply gay were encouraged to be transgender. 
• The allegation that while at Mermaids, you pushed GenderGP to be the pharmacy of choice for parents."

At the link above

Ah I see mermaids are trying to pin this all on sg, nice it was all big bad Suzzie doing this behind the backs of everyone even at mermaids😱
Nice try mermaids but we know that this goes all the way through mm from pedo apologists trustee right down to the "volunteers" manning the message boards

"Helen Webberley has since been completely vinidicated and the service delivered by GenderGP was noted by the medical tribunal when they cleared her of all wrongdoing as being ‘at the vanguard of trans healthcare’."

Is this so?

From the linked article. (Not quite sure what 'vinidicated' means )