Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Carrie Grant: I no longer have three daughters.

106 replies

MalagaNights · 20/05/2023 09:09

Has anyone read this today?

I'm not sure what to think. They have obviously had such a terrible time with their daughters mental health needs, 2 of them are autistic and all three identify as Trans.

Carrie accepts this as part of 'who they are' which in some ways is understandable as they obviously hope this will relieve ongoing mental health difficulties.

They also have an adopted son who required security guards at home because he was so violent.

So they've obviously been through so much and just want their children to be stable and happy.

But there seems to be many unspoken questions this pattern of all 3 girls being Trans raises.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12104609/Carrie-David-Grants-soul-baring-account-parenting.html

Carrie and David Grant's soul-baring account of parenting

Where once this couple had three daughters, now they have Olive, who is non-binary (and prefers to be known as 'they'); Tylan (who uses 'he/him' pronouns), and Arlo ('he/they').

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12104609/Carrie-David-Grants-soul-baring-account-parenting.html

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
DemiColon · 21/05/2023 23:40

literalviolence · 21/05/2023 22:16

I'm not sure that's what I've seen. More likely that parents who have more rigid sense of what men and women should do are more likely to have kids who identify against their biological sex. That said, some of the people who most purport to flout gender norms are the ones most obsessed with them. It's like they can't just quietly say 'no' to them, like many people are - it needs to be more performative. Which perhaps gives away something else about them which is maybe a need to impress or to have public acknowledgement of their cleverness/ superiority. Or they're just homophobic. I've not seen anything to suggest Carrie and David are homophobic though. Being neurodiverse does not necessarily mean you develop the level of problems which their children have which does make one wonder whether something was not really working well in their family.

I'm sure that happens, but most of the families I know with kids struggling with this are from families that are proudly progressive. Happy to have boys wear pink, but certainly not the girls.

One of the things I also noticed with these parents is they were quite perturbed when their young kids went through periods of stereotyping what they saw as male and female characteristics and behavior. They could not seem to see that this was part of the normal developmental process of noticing patterns, making generalizations (often incorrectly or too broadly), and then refining them over time as they could see more and more of the nuances of those patterns.

They didn't seem to understand that you couldn't get to the refining and understanding the real meaning of the pattern (social custom that's not binding or universal, or something more inherent to sex differences, whatever,) without making those initial, often very broad and even gross, generalizations. In the same way that many small children initially call all animals dogs, and gradually sort out that some are dogs, and some are birds, and then some are dogs, some are cats, ducks, or canaries. They seemed determined to prevent kids from seeing the patterns at all.

literalviolence · 21/05/2023 23:45

DemiColon · 21/05/2023 23:40

I'm sure that happens, but most of the families I know with kids struggling with this are from families that are proudly progressive. Happy to have boys wear pink, but certainly not the girls.

One of the things I also noticed with these parents is they were quite perturbed when their young kids went through periods of stereotyping what they saw as male and female characteristics and behavior. They could not seem to see that this was part of the normal developmental process of noticing patterns, making generalizations (often incorrectly or too broadly), and then refining them over time as they could see more and more of the nuances of those patterns.

They didn't seem to understand that you couldn't get to the refining and understanding the real meaning of the pattern (social custom that's not binding or universal, or something more inherent to sex differences, whatever,) without making those initial, often very broad and even gross, generalizations. In the same way that many small children initially call all animals dogs, and gradually sort out that some are dogs, and some are birds, and then some are dogs, some are cats, ducks, or canaries. They seemed determined to prevent kids from seeing the patterns at all.

Ah I see what you mean. Yes I guess this might be another way to make children vulnerable to being unable to see past the rigid stereotyping needed to believe yourself to be trans.

BonfireLady · 22/05/2023 07:00

Shelefttheweb · 21/05/2023 23:25

Ah, printed in Nature….
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-17794-1

Where to begin? And as mentioned, they don’t break down transgender and gender diverse by sex. The principal bias is the implied direction of effect - transgender people who are autistic, never autistic people or people with mental health difficulties who are transgender. But also noted this:

However, this association with gender identity is not specific to autism. In two datasets, transgender and gender-diverse individuals also had elevated rates of ADHD, bipolar disorder, depression, OCD, learning disorders, and schizophrenia compared to cisgender individuals.

In the discussion it has the usual trope that psychiatric conditions must be because transgender individuals are marginalised and illtreated, rather than untreated psychiatric conditions may cause disassociation with ones sex. Of course they can’t suggest the later because they have taken transgender out of DSM…

I hadn't seen this one before but just had a read.

Yep. It makes for such frustrating reading doesn't it?

Of course they can’t suggest the later because they have taken transgender out of DSM…

I think this must be the key problem for the flawed premise. I wrestled with this myself for a long time, feeling guilty that I thought it would be a lot simpler if GD was classed as a mental health condition so that anyone experiencing it could have proper access to care to alleviate their discomfort with their own body. I kept coming back to how awful it was the homosexuality was originally classed as a mental health condition, so "surely I must be bigoted".

It was watching Buck Angel and Blaire White discuss it in relation to children and the medicalised pathway that straightened out my thoughts on that one. They were very clear on the dangers to children and that it should be a mental health condition. Strangely, it felt like "permission" that my gut instinct on it was OK. They don't talk about autism, but the general conversation is still very interesting.

The Truth About Trans Kids, From Trans Adults

I sit down with trans man (and icon) Buck Angel to discuss our thought on transgender children, detransitioners, puberty blockers, hrt, and the state of tran...

https://youtu.be/f8GtmWxKbO8?t=0

RedToothBrush · 22/05/2023 08:06

IsItUs · 21/05/2023 17:56

I have sympathy for them, and what parent really isn't doing the best they can. Very few.
I've met both the Grants - I don't know them. What I will say is that I was so impressed by them, I remember their kindness to this day. It stuck with me. Other celebrities were at the event but the Grants stood out for my family. A snapshot maybe but they went above and beyond with no press around or benefit to themselves.
None of parenting comes with a manual that fits every scenario. A family can have more than one neurodiverse child, and I'm sure it can get really complicated.

The Grants.

Too kind?
Too trusting?
Too naive?

Never taught their kids to be firm, have personal boundaries, to be able to say no, to be a little selfish at times?

They put their kids on parade and their kids were maybe taught to be grateful for everything. And never say "I don't want to"?

Inadvertent doormats to society?

They say the way to hell is paved with good intentions. I can definitely see this, in the dynamics what happened in my family.

I don't think always being kind is a good thing. Sometimes there is a need to be a little tougher and to say no, to be selfish and to realise that the world around you may not be deserving of you being kind...

And that's a hard life lesson. One these kids need to learn but may never get the opportunity.

LonginesPrime · 22/05/2023 10:56

I get that they're so accustomed to the world of celebrity that they might have a blind spot when it comes to personal boundaries and privacy, but what I find the most distasteful is that they would publish and promote a book about their children's most private mental health crises while some of them are still children.

It reminds me of those parents who showcase their kids' meltdowns and distress on social media for the world to gawk at. It's a huge conflict of interest because the parent is consenting on behalf of their child to something that is potentially to the child's detriment but which benefits the parent financially.

Even if you take a charitable view that they've published the book 'to help other parents', why would they prioritise the needs of other random strangers over the privacy of their own struggling children when it comes to such sensitive issues?

I wouldn't have so much of a problem with this if the children were anonymised, but obviously they are already in the public eye and deliberately trading off of their existing celebrity, so that's the opposite of what they've done.

I do feel sorry for everyone involved, but publicising their children's struggles like this is appalling.

Shelefttheweb · 22/05/2023 11:17

BonfireLady the Nature paper is where your article is drawn from (the link was on your article). But I came across this picture recently which I think well illustrates the point about correlation and causation:

Carrie Grant: I no longer have three daughters.
nothingcomestonothing · 22/05/2023 14:18

As an adopter who has experienced child to parent violence, and knowing several other adopters who've experienced it much more severely than me, I just do not believe that their local authority paid for burly security guards to sit in their living room. I can well believe their son has significant needs, as residential placements aren't exactly given out like smarties, but security guards? No.

I am deeply uncomfortable about the way these parents have chosen to publicise private and difficult information about their children, birth and adopted. I certainly don't think they're in any position to write parenting books, as I think that apart from anything else they have completely painted their children into a corner re the gender ID stuff. Have they had a chance to grow out of gender confusion, as the majority of children do given time and space, when their parents are publicising their trans identity and gaining plaudits for it?

BonfireLady · 22/05/2023 14:32

Shelefttheweb · 22/05/2023 11:17

BonfireLady the Nature paper is where your article is drawn from (the link was on your article). But I came across this picture recently which I think well illustrates the point about correlation and causation:

Ah OK. I hadn't read the Cambridge one in ages.

Great picture 😂 A perfect illustration of the issue with it all being flipped the wrong way round as a starting point.

The equivalent would be if a bunch of cat accessory providers (cat flaps, bowls, scratch poles etc) decided they needed to make everything from reinforced materials because of the evidence of the damage cats can do.

It's just utterly flawed science.

Needapadlockonmyfridge · 23/05/2023 09:03

They were was on The Today programme r4 just now... I missed most of it, will catch it on Sounds.

BabyStopCryin · 23/05/2023 09:07

I think they have a book to sell… on parenting.

AmaryllisNightAndDay · 23/05/2023 09:40

I think they have a book to sell… on parenting.

I probably wont be buying this one, though the one they write in five years time might be interesting.

you couldn't get to the refining and understanding the real meaning of the pattern (social custom that's not binding or universal, or something more inherent to sex differences, whatever,) without making those initial, often very broad and even gross, generalizations.

That's interesting, especially as it applies to what children are being taught in schools and pre-school settings. The contradictions between what they see and what they're taught about sex and gender could be jarring and hard to navigate safely.

Also... hearing about families with multiple children medicating I am starting to wonder if there will be real economic impacts and demands on the health service in a few years time. Even if children aren't allowed to transition it's not hard to start medicating from age 18 onwards and for years afterwards. Long term use of anabolic steroids isn't healthy.

PaleBlueMoonlight · 23/05/2023 10:38

Needapadlockonmyfridge · 23/05/2023 09:03

They were was on The Today programme r4 just now... I missed most of it, will catch it on Sounds.

It was basically an advertorial for their new book.

MalagaNights · 23/05/2023 11:05

I've worked with many families with children who are violent towards their parents. None of them had security provided by the LA, ever.

They will often phone crisis cahms lines and get told to call the police, which initially they do, but soon realise they can do nothing.

These families are hidden from society, as they can't get any support and they have a sense of shame about what they endure.

On the one hand it's good that the Grants are sharing their experience of the extreme needs of some children and that they weren't able to manage them. But they are giving false expectations if people think 'oh you could get those security guards that are provided to families in'.
No such thing exists.

OP posts:
BonfireLady · 23/05/2023 20:30

There have been a few posts saying/intimating that the private security was funded by the LA.

I don't think it states this in the article.

I'm wondering if my post about residential schools with LA funding may have caused a misunderstanding? I can't imagine any situation where the LA would fund security guards in a family home. This part must have been privately funded by them.

nothingcomestonothing · 23/05/2023 20:58

BonfireLady · 23/05/2023 20:30

There have been a few posts saying/intimating that the private security was funded by the LA.

I don't think it states this in the article.

I'm wondering if my post about residential schools with LA funding may have caused a misunderstanding? I can't imagine any situation where the LA would fund security guards in a family home. This part must have been privately funded by them.

It's in the article:

For three months we had security guards, paid for by the local authority. I know this sounds crazy, but it happens. Big burly guys on your sofa. When Nathan did explode, the security guards were really scared

I call bullshit on that, which makes me wonder what else in the book isn't entirely candid.

BonfireLady · 23/05/2023 21:20

nothingcomestonothing · 23/05/2023 20:58

It's in the article:

For three months we had security guards, paid for by the local authority. I know this sounds crazy, but it happens. Big burly guys on your sofa. When Nathan did explode, the security guards were really scared

I call bullshit on that, which makes me wonder what else in the book isn't entirely candid.

Phew! Glad I wasn't the cause of misinformation. I couldn't remember what I'd read in the article.

Well on that note.... FFS. Those of us who have to fight for funding to support our children know how stretched it is. I appreciate that they presumably wanted to do everything they could to keep him at home with the family but there comes a point where the needs of the other children (to live in a home without the constant violence that would warrant security guards) outweigh the needs of keeping everyone together. I can't understand how or why the LA decided to fund this.

EmmatheStageRat · 23/05/2023 22:07

BonfireLady · 23/05/2023 20:30

There have been a few posts saying/intimating that the private security was funded by the LA.

I don't think it states this in the article.

I'm wondering if my post about residential schools with LA funding may have caused a misunderstanding? I can't imagine any situation where the LA would fund security guards in a family home. This part must have been privately funded by them.

No, it definitely says it in the article. I’ve a vested interest in retaining this information as I am an adopter to a traumatised teen who is disabled due to her pre-natal experiences and who is also violent, aggressive and emotionally abusive to her much younger sister and I. Unfortunately, I am not rich or famous so I will never have security guards deployed to my battle field of a home by my local authority.

IcakethereforeIam · 23/05/2023 22:07

If I was called Carrie Grant and had three daughters I would have called them Judy, Judy and Judy.

Takes coat and leaves <not sorry>

SmashedApricot · 24/05/2023 09:56

Justme56 · 20/05/2023 12:34

I find it very confusing with the headline photo as 2 present very much as girls. Has anyone even asked why they started saying they were boys upon the arrival of the adopted son? It would be one of the first questions I’d ask if it was one of my children. Why would you adopt a fourth child if you had 3 with a range of significant issues. I remember reading that one couldn’t cope in a school for autistic children (after being excluded from main stream). According to Carrie this resulted in them having PTSD on top of everything else. Goodness knows how she had time to jet round the world and write books with all this going on.

My thoughts too . Who was looking after the kids and how did they cope ? Maybe a succession of nannies that just gave in to the kids for a quiet life ?

DunkingMyDonuts · 25/05/2023 10:29

The sad thing is whatever they do - it will always be wrong. Their kids will throw all the help back in their face in the years to come.

If they have told the girls it is just a phase/ bandwagon and to get over it - WRONG "you should have respected my feelings and done x/y/z"

If they accepted their new gender and respected it - WRONG "you should have realised I was going through x/y/z and supported me to see another way"

If they just gently accept their children's feeling and carry on as usual - WRONG "I wanted you to tell everyone how proud you were of me and my new status, and your quietness showed you were secretly ashamed"

If they trump it from the rooftops and tell everyone - WRONG "you embarrassed me and it was MY information to share, not yours"

We have NO WAY of parenting children that decide to live in a way no other generation has. We are at a loss and even think you have it correct, you are in for a shock in the years to come when they tell you how wrong you got it

Slothtoes · 26/05/2023 08:44

DunkingMyDonuts that prediction sounds worryingly right. I wonder if part of this in some situations is about kids knowingly or unwittingly finding an issue of inevitable adult loss of authority, to force their parent/s (and authority figures like teachers) to think on their feet on an issue that the adults can only ever fail at. In an age of social media particularly, that suddenly hands a lot of power to the gender identity-claiming young person. It also puts a lot of focus on the listener and how they deal with it, less so on the young person, which may feel good to the young person.

And also the opposite can also be true- I do also agree with a pp on a previous page in this thread that gender identity might be a way for relatively privileged white middle class teenagers with trauma to try to express that- to say that things are so wrong that they now think something completely unreal is real and now everyone else has to support them in that. There, it’s maybe more about an invitation for the adults concerned to come out to fight for them, to support them, make the young person feel important and secure and the focus in a way they really need to feel.

We don’t know what’s going on with any family obviously. My take home from others’ experiences is just that professionals need to be trained and funded to look at each case individually and deeply and carefully over time. Social transition should be treated as cautiously as medical transition should be. CAMHS might as well not be there for the time it takes to access help so that service needs massive funding increase.

Is there more we could do, like maybe could secondaries all have the mental health equivalent of a school nurse, on site, accessible, signposting to immediate counselling help? I just feel suddenly getting into gender identity is a visible symptom of a much wider mental health crisis at population level for young people. And we need to be able to help them all a lot more effectively then we do now.

Redebs · 26/05/2023 08:46

holaholiday · 20/05/2023 09:51

I read the times magazine article on them the other week and likewise I was thinking ??!!!especially as they went on to adopt another child with even more severe needs…I don’t know why they didn’t consider their own birth children’s needs before they went on to adopt another.

How were they even allowed to adopt?

ZeroFuchsGiven · 26/05/2023 08:58

I looked here back in April when Tylan had their breasts removed to see if it had been mentioned but I couldn't find anything. I wasn't brave enough to start a thread. But the rabbit hole I fell down reading about the grants really kind of upset me.

This whole thing seems so disturbing to me, I just cant get my head around it at all.

Allthegoodnamesarechosen · 26/05/2023 09:12

PermanentTemporary · 20/05/2023 19:58

I certainly think that publishing pictures of the children is incredibly damaging and the DM shouldn't have done it; incredible that the parents thought that was ok.

It’s a very old picture though. Two of the girls have not yet discovered their male identity, and the boy is not 13.

nothingcomestonothing · 26/05/2023 09:25

DunkingMyDonuts · 25/05/2023 10:29

The sad thing is whatever they do - it will always be wrong. Their kids will throw all the help back in their face in the years to come.

If they have told the girls it is just a phase/ bandwagon and to get over it - WRONG "you should have respected my feelings and done x/y/z"

If they accepted their new gender and respected it - WRONG "you should have realised I was going through x/y/z and supported me to see another way"

If they just gently accept their children's feeling and carry on as usual - WRONG "I wanted you to tell everyone how proud you were of me and my new status, and your quietness showed you were secretly ashamed"

If they trump it from the rooftops and tell everyone - WRONG "you embarrassed me and it was MY information to share, not yours"

We have NO WAY of parenting children that decide to live in a way no other generation has. We are at a loss and even think you have it correct, you are in for a shock in the years to come when they tell you how wrong you got it

I think 'whatever you do, it'll be wrong ' is parenting adolescents of any identity, isn't it? I don't necessarily think that the gender identity stuff is that different in that sense than any other way young people have tried to seperate and differentiate themselves from their parents over the generations.

But what we've got now is a perfect storm. Of young people trying to work out who they are and doing it in ways with potentially permanent life altering consequences. Whilst being encouraged both overtly and subtly by adults with vested interests quite different from the young people's. And by big businesses who can make a lot of money from life long medical patients. And by powerful lobbies influencing policy so that concerned parents or other trusted adults cannot protect the young people from harm while they go through this task of adolescence.

The young people developmentally are doing what young people have always done and need to do, it's the behaviour of society which is different with this. And the young people and their families will of course be the ones left dealing with the consequences.