Child gender issues in the UK

[SifuPhil]

When you professionals who you appear to wish to represent choose to quote people do you routinely add words to what others have said, AND remove the caveat they included in their comments?

As any fair minded or even reasonably literate person can see you have done both when you presented in parenthesis these words: "Peer into the minds of innocent children".

How many children of "tender years" do you personally know that are NOT innocent?

Moving on you appear to believe there is no harm in asking children anything, so long as you are professionals following rules set down for you. If that is the case then you are in conflict with the US lawyer I mentioned called Goldwater, who spoke about the need for privacy in personal relationships (he also spoke very notably about the "manifest susceptibility to manipulation and control"). If a professional trained to follow rules which are very strict etc. etc. came into your home and asked your children questions like: "Do you love your mummy?" would you feel that an intrusion in their lives I wonder?

I have not tried to assert professionals are not necessary to assess children in some circumstances, (to return to the thread topic). Furthermore I have read how difficult some found it to be granted permission to study "What children and young people can tell us about divorce and separation" (the name of a book by Julia Tugenhat). She said she was refused permission to speak to children in the UK schools she approached, but persevered and managed to interview about fifteen children, she was introduced to outside our schools system. Those worst affected by the break up of their parent's relationships tried to hide their feelings, for example by saying "I'm not bothered about my dad", but when she dug deeper she found they very much "cared about not seeing their fathers" but felt unable to say so until they could trust Tugenhat to keep their views anonymous, so they could not hurt their mothers.

Well, it seems that first you are against professionals intervening in children's mental health. Then in your last paragraph you seem to support it.

Which is it?

 

[grahamg]

I like to jump to someone's defence but it is necessary to follow theargument closely

How many children of "tender years" do you personally know that are NOT innocent?

Break

Well, it seems that first you are against professionals intervening in children's mental health. Then in your last paragraph you seem to support it.

Which is it?

Hi SifuPhil, everything good with you?

I get tempted sometimes to step into discussions to assist another forum member who I feel may be treated unfairly. However, as in this case, I do sometimes fail to follow the exact argument being put forward or under dispute too.

I can't tell you "How many children of tender years I personally know that are NOT innocent", but luckily I haven't argued whether there are ANY OR NOT.

There did used to be a legal principle in the UK called "The tender years doctrine" formulated by a judge called Bowlby, but the law now changed allowing children to be taken into the court process more since then, thus challenging the belief that the child should consider their parents as being an omnipotent focus of knowledge and wisdom.

Beyond that there was once a very popular UK tv show called "Only fools and horses" where for comedic effect there was a child called "Damien" whose uncle believed him to be the devil.

I did argue that Julia Tugenhat (a professional) performed a great service by speaking to children and young people to try to better understand the way they were being affected by divorce and separation of their parents. However, she wasn't in any way interfering in their lives, or making judgements about their mothers which might be used against the parent they lived with, and they wouldn't have been trusted by those children if she had been doing she said. Everything she wrote in her book was totally anonymised and couldn't be linked to anyone, so a very different situation from the one where court welfare officers come in and condemn a parent following prying into the child's mind (though as I've repeatedly said I agree this does have to happen where there is a risk of harm/abuse affecting the child).

I hope this explanation goes some way to assisting your understanding of my position, and I seem to remember you supporting another discussion we had recently, though I've forgotten the exact circumstances.

 

[grahamg]

I am sorry that your experience was so painful and traumatising, I can see the pain remains to this day.
Graham, you may or may not be aware of my childhood spent as a slave with all that word implies. I have mentioned it in the past. Certainly it is anathema to me to deprive any child of their rights on any level, or to advocate the separation of children from parents unless absolutely necessary. I work in the trenches, many of my clients are Syrian refugee children, suffering PTSD as a result of the horrors of war. I have lost two to suicide this year. I am certain they will not be the last.

Whatever pain or traumatising experiences I've had I do know I am amongst a whole throng of parents and grandparents excluded from their children's lives in the UK, all domne under the current family law system here.

Those children from Syria do appear amazingly resilient sometimes when you see them emerging from bombed out homes in devastated towns with whatever adults remain there to care for them. Good luck to you and all those other good people trying to help them.

The only right I seek to deprive a child of is summed up in the comment by a professor Akira Morita speaking at a UN forum on the rights of the child some years ago, and it went along these lines: "What a child needs is the relationship with their parent not some notion of children's rights" - or to use another phrase I've comes across "A family court can destroy a child's relationship with their parent but it cannot force it to develop".

Finally I didn't know your story and am of course pleased you managed to emerge from such a difficult start in life.

 

[hearlady]

The newspaper today reports there are 50 children a week being referred to sex gender realignment clinics, in the UK, some as young as 4, those aged 11 or over may be treated with powerful hormones to prevent them going through puberty

I find this absolutely heartbreaking and wonder how have we come to this ? in my view children shouldn’t even know about this type of thing, they are innocents being robbed of their childhood, at a time when they should be carefree, having fun, their main concern about where their next bar of chocolate is coming from

God knows what this generation will turn out like, surely life is confusing enough for them these days........


http://www.mirror.co.uk/all-about/doctors

When, How does the medical system the UK work? Do doctors get paid by insurance companies?
Is it anything like health care in the U.S.?

 

[hearlady]

I might as well state the reason I'm asking.

I grew up in a family who thought of doctors as gods. You didn't question your family doctor or get a second opinion.

As I grew older I began to question more, not enough, but more about why certain procedures were done, why I needed this med or that contraption, etc I began to refuse certain referrals that seemed totally unnecessary.


My niece is low income. Her middle son was diagnosed as ADHD. Another family member familiar with ADHD questioned it. She didn't see it and said if he was diagnosed it would mean she could get more money on assistance from the government. I'd never heard of that.

My daughter said a 2 yr old boy in her daughter's daycare comes dressed as a girl. Even being very liberal she feels it's more being pushed by the parent at this point. I see the child then maybe be referred for gender reassignment because she was meant to be a boy.

My point in all of this is follow the money. Reassignment surgery is the new plastic surgery and it comes with counseling and psychology and pharmacology, etc,etc.

Disclaimer: I do not think most health and legal professionals are unethical.

 

[Sunny]

A two-year-old girl dressed as a boy? If this is a "transgender" type of issue, I would say there is no bottom limit to human idiocy.

But maybe we're reading too much in? Maybe the kid just likes boys' clothes better? Lots of girls' clothes look a lot like boys' anyway. Sounds less odd than having a two-year-old boy dressed as a girl!

 

[JaniceM]

I might as well state the reason I'm asking.

I grew up in a family who thought of doctors as gods. You didn't question your family doctor or get a second opinion.

As I grew older I began to question more, not enough, but more about why certain procedures were done, why I needed this med or that contraption, etc I began to refuse certain referrals that seemed totally unnecessary.


My niece is low income. Her middle son was diagnosed as ADHD. Another family member familiar with ADHD questioned it. She didn't see it and said if he was diagnosed it would mean she could get more money on assistance from the government. I'd never heard of that.

My daughter said a 2 yr old boy in her daughter's daycare comes dressed as a girl. Even being very liberal she feels it's more being pushed by the parent at this point. I see the child then maybe be referred for gender reassignment because she was meant to be a boy.

My point in all of this is follow the money. Reassignment surgery is the new plastic surgery and it comes with counseling and psychology and pharmacology, etc,etc.

Disclaimer: I do not think most health and legal professionals are unethical.

I don't mean to go off-topic, but to address what you said about your niece and her son:
A lot of research material I've found recently (although it's not new) includes the 'trend' of getting everyone possible onto the 'disability' rolls. And the biggest increase in recent decades have been KIDS.

In this locale- not counting kids because I don't know any- I'd have a hard time thinking of anyone I've known in recent years who isn't 'on disability.'
Health care providers can have long-term 'consumers,' and gain benefits from the drug companies if they diagnose and prescribe.

 

[hearlady]

As,I said I'd never heard of children being given diagnoses so they would be eligible for more assistance and I don't know if this was truly the case. If her relative didn't have experience with ADHD my niece may never have questioned it.

Another disclaimer before I go on: I believe there are transgender people. I believe people have ADD, ASHD, bipolar, etc.

I think some people are encouraged to seek transgender surgery with the promise that they will get wonderful lady parts or a great male member however find they were misled and extremely unhappy. I don't know this. I don't know anyone personally. I'm GUESSING some experience bad gender jobs just as some have had bad boob jobs. They could have been encouraged not for their well-being and happiness but for the mighty dollar.

I think this because of small articles here and there in magazines and because of the whole modern health system conglomerate. I could be totally wrong. It's just something I think about.
I base it partly on my experience with breast cancer and reconstruction and how they "sell" you more surgery than most people need. I was a shrewd shopper and am very happy but could definitely been sold a lot of long painful procedures to have the perfect rack. That means 3 sizes larger. My sister in law went that route and is filled with regret. I apply that thinking to transgender surgeries. It's only as good as the responsible ethical doctors that the patient has.

As for the 2 yr old I fear the parents being exploited for their open thinking and being steered toward a wrong diagnosis of which the healthcare system will be the only beneficiary.

 

[Shalimar]

I don't mean to go off-topic, but to address what you said about your niece and her son:
A lot of research material I've found recently (although it's not new) includes the 'trend' of getting everyone possible onto the 'disability' rolls. And the biggest increase in recent decades have been KIDS.

In this locale- not counting kids because I don't know any- I'd have a hard time thinking of anyone I've known in recent years who isn't 'on disability.'
Health care providers can have long-term 'consumers,' and gain benefits from the drug companies if they diagnose and prescribe.

Scary. I can't speak for other countries, but here in British Columbia, Canada, where I live, getting anyone on disability is a long drawn out process. I have never heard of anyone who was not almost completely incapacitated either physically or mentally not being refused the first time they applied.