This is brilliant work again JL - thank you. The Charity Commission, police and a few others should be looking at what you have painstakingly done for them.
How is Polly still in any role at all? They are still fobbing us all off and sticking to their guns. She and a few other still there still have serious questions to answer. How did the NHS, NHS England, the CQC and the DoH let this happen? It's negligence and repeated negligence. They asked Mermaids and Susie in, knowing full well that there was no clinical or 'medical' basis for doing so as she is not a professional - she is a lobbyist. There was no evidence to underpin their interventions or policy - it's all based on fluff or a misreading and deliberate misreading of the evidence and research. Or they didn't collect then failed to analyse what they did and do have. They allowed the gaps to appear, so where did the buck stop? This is a classic case of people avoiding responsibility, accountability and then scrutiny. Then pointing at each other and saying it's all their fault.
The fact that doctors were not sending their child patients there and wouldn't refer and yet this was fought and overruled by good old no relevant qualifications Susie is utterly scandalous, no wonder they didn't want to hand over the proof.
This is a very good point - look at how this service was funded and from what pot and pots. They didn't have to jump the same level of hoops as other NHS funded services - you know those other vital and evidence-based ones. It was funded in a very odd way and meant they were apparently allowed to do what they liked, fund what they liked, behave as they liked, create their own policies and expand and collect more patients. So Susie was writing and influencing NHS policy for the whole of the UK. She was hell bent on broadening and extending her and its influence and she managed to didn't she? All those whistleblowers tried to warn what was happening and on the NHS machine went. I have no faith in all those still involved in the new decentralised 'gender clinics' they are in the process of rolling out. Students in mental health provision are still being trained in this gumpf, so we're still pushing this out in service providers.
They actually had shed loads of money - see Hannah Barnes. The Early Interventions conference in 2016 took place in a swanky London hotel - that was when Dr Anna Hutchinson ( one of the heroic whistle blowers) had what she described as her 'Oh Fuck' moment when she learnt that 99% of the children were going from the puberty blockers straight on to cross-sex hormones!! They used to send staff members around the world to conferences!! Gissajob!
The Telegraph previously mentioned that GIDS was bringing in a lot of money to the Tavistock which accounted for the lack of oversight from the wider trust. I can't immediately locate the reference but I think it probably came from Hannah Barnes' book.
When gay marriage was passed in many countries, lots of gay rights charities were going bust. Then all of a sudden money appeared for lots of organisations to push gender ideology. Big pharma/ tech are implicated plus transhumanist billionaires who need a ready supply of healthy bodies on which to experiment. It all stinks to high heaven.
Can anyone find a new angle on Stonewall, please? It seems that despite nearly a decade of misrepresenting equality law to anyone who will listen, and extracting large fees from companies who want to compete as "Stonewall Diversity Champions" - basically a protection racket! - we still do not have the Charity Commission or any Government Dept or Minister ACTING in any way to curtail the activities of SW. The Charities Commission was given "smoking gun" evidence in the case of Mermaids.
What can we do to stop or reduce payments of central and local gov grants to SW and thus reduce its influence? Genuine question.
People appear to be sitting on their hands and not acting as you suggest. Apparently a smoking gun needs to be a bit more of a fusillade before those in the government and services who could act will act. While we have people like Caroline Nokes still an MP yet again claiming all sorts of outrage without apparently checking much before she does so and reliably whenever this topic comes up (and therefore is whipping up more empty and dangerous outrage on top), the proper scrutiny of what Stonewall has been and still is up to doesn't seem to interest them much. Any organisation that thinks being a proud member of the Stonewall Gender Zealotry Champions programme is a good thing needs a wide berth. It shows they are lacking in due diligence.
Yes - she's done a brilliant job. It is almost always follow the money but this is the very nasty side of NHS 'commissioning' that needs more scrutiny. And which parts 'subsidise' other parts. I don't know how decent people manage to stay sane, healthy or kind in it as it presently operates.
Asking questions is very dangerous. Then asking again and getting answers. Look how upset they are when people do make freedom of information requests. Oh no, no, no, we didn't want anyone knowing about that information.
I liked them saying they didn't have any e-mails when Hannah Barnes' book mentions e-mails throughout. Maybe they haven't read it yet?? At the Allison Bailey case ( I think it was) someone from Stonewall said they hadn't got around to reading the Cass report yet.
There's a loophole in FoI legislation which allows public bodies to refuse to hand over -- or even to look for -- stuff which might cause undue upset, or extraordinary inconvenence in finding it, & something else (or something like that). But Mermaids must have got legal advice that this wouldn't hold up against numerous refererences to emails by Hannah Barnes. And voila, 322 pages appeared...
That really fails the sniff test doesn't it - it's really a very poor attempt to say nothing to see here, move on now. No emails, really, none? So every bit of business was conducted with nudges, winks and raised eyebrows was it?
Read the book everyone - and it's a lesson to us all - if something is written in minutes that does not accurately reflect what was said in meetings, then say so. If you're not the one writing the minutes that is.
It does. We've been outsourcing mental health care to the police - and that's mental health care of children - for a long time and the head of the Met is saying no more. Each time a service gets cut to the bone another service ends up picking up the pieces until it's the service of last resort that is left. Those defunding services must be laughing. Services, teams, workforces themselves are now saying no. I hope they all get together, all arms of the supposed state, to tell the current government they as a coordinated voice demand change.
Not arresting women to scare us and ensuring children and adults get the help they need when they need it. And not abusing vulnerable people.
Just interested in what makes you say that, Jeremy? Do you have some experience or knowledge you are willing to share? I have a special interest in what the GMC gets up to.
And from what a few others have said and experienced the whole system of referrals. We seem endlessly stuck in these systems not working, then people being 'lost to follow up' or stuck in 'assessment'. Then when 'in assessment' no one appears to think they have liability for the deterioration or outcomes. It's as if clocks mysteriously stop. Then you can be flipped back into 'assessment' again. That can happen a few times and the patient never really passes go or has any effective treatment. It seems a clever holding pattern for when resources are few or a paralysis for when no one is able to determine what should be done. Or even who is the person or service that can make that determination and treat.
And why hasn't she been prosecuted for practising medicine without a license? She clearly was.
“I can only assume from this statement that I am not seen as a professional? I am now very confused..."
Yes, in this case "professional" means "medical professional," as in the only kind of person legally permitted to diagnose somebody or give a medical referral. In any case where a doctor at Tavistock accepted Susie Green's "referral," they were also violating the law and norms of medical practice.
Others have commented elsewhere about whether perjury was committed during cases where Mermaids testified. Might there also have been perjury by GIDS in other court cases when it claimed only to have made clinical decisions based only on medical advice. Just a thought
Yup. These are the most basic functions of any professional and they seem to have chosen to put all usual professional standards aside for some reason. How they can justify those decisions will be interesting to see. Judges often say leave it to the medics and their rigorous decision making and safety critical processes.
Failings like this need the ecosystem around them to be 'failing to see' and 'failing to check' and other lazy little oversights. It is sometimes terrifying to be a professional and with the responsibility you hold - this is why we have professional standards, systems, education, scrutiny and paper trails - it should protect us all. And so that you can navigate serious issues and justify why you made the decisions you did. Pointing fingers and shrugging won't cut it.
The absolute arrogance of some of those in this particular 'health' ecosystem often takes my breath away. And they're still at it!
This is brilliant work again JL - thank you. The Charity Commission, police and a few others should be looking at what you have painstakingly done for them.
How is Polly still in any role at all? They are still fobbing us all off and sticking to their guns. She and a few other still there still have serious questions to answer. How did the NHS, NHS England, the CQC and the DoH let this happen? It's negligence and repeated negligence. They asked Mermaids and Susie in, knowing full well that there was no clinical or 'medical' basis for doing so as she is not a professional - she is a lobbyist. There was no evidence to underpin their interventions or policy - it's all based on fluff or a misreading and deliberate misreading of the evidence and research. Or they didn't collect then failed to analyse what they did and do have. They allowed the gaps to appear, so where did the buck stop? This is a classic case of people avoiding responsibility, accountability and then scrutiny. Then pointing at each other and saying it's all their fault.
The fact that doctors were not sending their child patients there and wouldn't refer and yet this was fought and overruled by good old no relevant qualifications Susie is utterly scandalous, no wonder they didn't want to hand over the proof.
Many thanks for your kind words. Much appreciated!
Why did the NHS gender clinic give trans ideology a green light? Who was paid?
This is a very good point - look at how this service was funded and from what pot and pots. They didn't have to jump the same level of hoops as other NHS funded services - you know those other vital and evidence-based ones. It was funded in a very odd way and meant they were apparently allowed to do what they liked, fund what they liked, behave as they liked, create their own policies and expand and collect more patients. So Susie was writing and influencing NHS policy for the whole of the UK. She was hell bent on broadening and extending her and its influence and she managed to didn't she? All those whistleblowers tried to warn what was happening and on the NHS machine went. I have no faith in all those still involved in the new decentralised 'gender clinics' they are in the process of rolling out. Students in mental health provision are still being trained in this gumpf, so we're still pushing this out in service providers.
They actually had shed loads of money - see Hannah Barnes. The Early Interventions conference in 2016 took place in a swanky London hotel - that was when Dr Anna Hutchinson ( one of the heroic whistle blowers) had what she described as her 'Oh Fuck' moment when she learnt that 99% of the children were going from the puberty blockers straight on to cross-sex hormones!! They used to send staff members around the world to conferences!! Gissajob!
Dusty
I heard Anna speak the other night - truly mind-blowing.
The Telegraph previously mentioned that GIDS was bringing in a lot of money to the Tavistock which accounted for the lack of oversight from the wider trust. I can't immediately locate the reference but I think it probably came from Hannah Barnes' book.
When gay marriage was passed in many countries, lots of gay rights charities were going bust. Then all of a sudden money appeared for lots of organisations to push gender ideology. Big pharma/ tech are implicated plus transhumanist billionaires who need a ready supply of healthy bodies on which to experiment. It all stinks to high heaven.
and good old Stonewall, just helped make the whole thing work smoothly together.
Can anyone find a new angle on Stonewall, please? It seems that despite nearly a decade of misrepresenting equality law to anyone who will listen, and extracting large fees from companies who want to compete as "Stonewall Diversity Champions" - basically a protection racket! - we still do not have the Charity Commission or any Government Dept or Minister ACTING in any way to curtail the activities of SW. The Charities Commission was given "smoking gun" evidence in the case of Mermaids.
What can we do to stop or reduce payments of central and local gov grants to SW and thus reduce its influence? Genuine question.
People appear to be sitting on their hands and not acting as you suggest. Apparently a smoking gun needs to be a bit more of a fusillade before those in the government and services who could act will act. While we have people like Caroline Nokes still an MP yet again claiming all sorts of outrage without apparently checking much before she does so and reliably whenever this topic comes up (and therefore is whipping up more empty and dangerous outrage on top), the proper scrutiny of what Stonewall has been and still is up to doesn't seem to interest them much. Any organisation that thinks being a proud member of the Stonewall Gender Zealotry Champions programme is a good thing needs a wide berth. It shows they are lacking in due diligence.
You named it. Bullseye$.
Yes - she's done a brilliant job. It is almost always follow the money but this is the very nasty side of NHS 'commissioning' that needs more scrutiny. And which parts 'subsidise' other parts. I don't know how decent people manage to stay sane, healthy or kind in it as it presently operates.
Asking questions is very dangerous. Then asking again and getting answers. Look how upset they are when people do make freedom of information requests. Oh no, no, no, we didn't want anyone knowing about that information.
I liked them saying they didn't have any e-mails when Hannah Barnes' book mentions e-mails throughout. Maybe they haven't read it yet?? At the Allison Bailey case ( I think it was) someone from Stonewall said they hadn't got around to reading the Cass report yet.
Dusty
There's a loophole in FoI legislation which allows public bodies to refuse to hand over -- or even to look for -- stuff which might cause undue upset, or extraordinary inconvenence in finding it, & something else (or something like that). But Mermaids must have got legal advice that this wouldn't hold up against numerous refererences to emails by Hannah Barnes. And voila, 322 pages appeared...
That really fails the sniff test doesn't it - it's really a very poor attempt to say nothing to see here, move on now. No emails, really, none? So every bit of business was conducted with nudges, winks and raised eyebrows was it?
Read the book everyone - and it's a lesson to us all - if something is written in minutes that does not accurately reflect what was said in meetings, then say so. If you're not the one writing the minutes that is.
Sorry I think it was someone from Mermaids in the LGB Alliance case :)
Yup Hannah Barnes
This all stinks to high heaven and beyond. How on earth was this allowed to happen? The police should definitely get involved.
It does. We've been outsourcing mental health care to the police - and that's mental health care of children - for a long time and the head of the Met is saying no more. Each time a service gets cut to the bone another service ends up picking up the pieces until it's the service of last resort that is left. Those defunding services must be laughing. Services, teams, workforces themselves are now saying no. I hope they all get together, all arms of the supposed state, to tell the current government they as a coordinated voice demand change.
Not arresting women to scare us and ensuring children and adults get the help they need when they need it. And not abusing vulnerable people.
The captured Stonewall, gold stickered police?
The courts should get involved.Susie Greed (intentional) should be inducted!
The GMC needs to be investigating the doctors involved.
The GMC is captured, too, I'm afraid.
What a spiral of woke mendacity!
Just interested in what makes you say that, Jeremy? Do you have some experience or knowledge you are willing to share? I have a special interest in what the GMC gets up to.
And from what a few others have said and experienced the whole system of referrals. We seem endlessly stuck in these systems not working, then people being 'lost to follow up' or stuck in 'assessment'. Then when 'in assessment' no one appears to think they have liability for the deterioration or outcomes. It's as if clocks mysteriously stop. Then you can be flipped back into 'assessment' again. That can happen a few times and the patient never really passes go or has any effective treatment. It seems a clever holding pattern for when resources are few or a paralysis for when no one is able to determine what should be done. Or even who is the person or service that can make that determination and treat.
"Susie Green... Former IT professional, Psychopath, Mother."
She should have been jailed years ago ! How could she get away with child abuse?
The same way the McCanns did. You just need to know the right people.
so true Jeremy, and wrap up something as worthy and compassionate... I’m refusing the be kind crap, and you can hear the “awwwwww’s’ unquestioning.
I’ve always said if they were Ethyl from Methil ( fife village ) they’d have been jailed years ago , sick bastards
Absolutely true! That's one of the things that makes me so angry about that case.
(Off-topic, but I'm currently on holiday a few miles from Methil!)
Totally o/t but if you’ve time and like seafood go to the seafood restaurant in St Andrews it’s amazing
Enjoy fife is gorgeous
Apart from downtown Cowdenbeath lol
and ghoul
Yes, ghoul is the right word!
Genital mutilator.
I wish I could double 💜 this comment
Why isn’t Susie Green in jail for child abuse?
And why hasn't she been prosecuted for practising medicine without a license? She clearly was.
“I can only assume from this statement that I am not seen as a professional? I am now very confused..."
Yes, in this case "professional" means "medical professional," as in the only kind of person legally permitted to diagnose somebody or give a medical referral. In any case where a doctor at Tavistock accepted Susie Green's "referral," they were also violating the law and norms of medical practice.
Perhaps it suited them to let her be the ‘professional’. But I’m just constantly cynical 🤨
Exactly my question . She seems to be a monster.
sexist stereotypes mean that most people are unable to conceive of women as abusers.
Others have commented elsewhere about whether perjury was committed during cases where Mermaids testified. Might there also have been perjury by GIDS in other court cases when it claimed only to have made clinical decisions based only on medical advice. Just a thought
Yup. These are the most basic functions of any professional and they seem to have chosen to put all usual professional standards aside for some reason. How they can justify those decisions will be interesting to see. Judges often say leave it to the medics and their rigorous decision making and safety critical processes.
Failings like this need the ecosystem around them to be 'failing to see' and 'failing to check' and other lazy little oversights. It is sometimes terrifying to be a professional and with the responsibility you hold - this is why we have professional standards, systems, education, scrutiny and paper trails - it should protect us all. And so that you can navigate serious issues and justify why you made the decisions you did. Pointing fingers and shrugging won't cut it.
The absolute arrogance of some of those in this particular 'health' ecosystem often takes my breath away. And they're still at it!
It’s a medical scandal of greedy proportions, if one can say that!
Everything close to this is highly questionable!
Many thanks JL. Saw what you did there - a (Susie) Green light!
😁
Excellent article JL.
Many thanks, Dulle. Appreciated!
I hope the Charity Commission is taking note of this attempt to hide the evidence.
I have knowledge I'm unfortunately unable to share at present, but the GMC have worked with GLADD and Stonewall to produce guidance for trans patients: see e.g. https://www.gmc-uk.org/news/news-archive/new-guide-for-lgbt-patients-on-what-to-expect-from-their-doctor. They link to Stonewall and the LGBT Foundation on their website: https://www.gmc-uk.org/ethical-guidance/patient-guides-and-materials/LGBT-patient-guide.
Thanks as ever, JL.
This is so clearly a medical scandal and is crying out for a public inquiry.
Can we get a medal struck for Hannah Barnes?
I posted in some detail about this last night but will cross post this again.
Thanks again
Dusty
Thanks, Dusty!
The more we hear about controversial Mermaids, the more concerned we become!
Rightly so, us ‘bigots, transphobes and nazis’ have been ignored or poo-pooed for too long.
May the long arm of the law reach out to Susie Green. Despicable woman, and Polly Carmichael. Both complicit in this scandal.
Green is very high on my list of people for whom there is nothing too bad that can happen to them.
💯
she may end up in jail, then she gets a new cellmate- a trans sex offender....
Hannah Barnes said that the Tavistock depended on GIDS for the revenue it brought in.
I published a couple of articles in a Sri Lankan paper. I am Padraig Colman.
https://pcolman.wordpress.com/2023/03/05/time-to-think/
https://pcolman.wordpress.com/2023/03/19/time-to-think-2/