Gizza Job; This is a truly exciting time to join Mermaids
Is a charity that seeks a 'strategic litigation specialist', ignores evidence and focuses on the welfare of its income streams, really best placed to advocate for the needs of vulnerable children?
With admirable ironic timing, on the same day that Sajid Javid announces an inquiry into gender health care for children, suggesting that the political fears over the ‘trans issue’ are comparable to the scandalous silence over sexual abuse of children in Rotherham, I note that Mermaids are looking for a new Director of Legal and Policy.
The former Director Lui Asquith ‘is moving onto pastures new after establishing a legal and policy department from scratch over the last four years’ (and has already deleted their Twitter account).
The post is for a ‘driven leader’ who is ‘committed to improving the lives of young trans people in the UK’ . The message from the CEO Susie Green in the ‘job pack’ is inspiring
This is a truly exciting time to join the charity; there’s no other organisation like Mermaids. Whatever you do here you will be supporting our work to achieve our mission and make positive change for transgender, non-binary and gender diverse children and young people for generations to come. Given the challenges facing young transgender people on numerous fronts, it is more important than ever for the charity to step up. If you want to be involved in one of the most significant civil rights movements of our time, then this is where you need to be.
I had a look at the job requirements and thought the following were interesting
Act as an expert to develop strategic legal initiatives and develop and manage Mermaids’ litigation portfolio
work closely with our strategic litigation coordinator to implement initiatives
Oversee the team in identifying and assessing legal and policy advocacy opportunities
An ‘essential quality’ for any applicant was ‘Experience of using strategic legal work as a campaign tool’
But then sadly I noted that I would have to add all my social media accounts to my application. So actually applying would seem a troll too far even though I was very keen to test their repeated assurances that they value diversity and a variety of experiences. But if I did apply, what would I say in section 9 of the application form - why would I be great at this role?
Why I would be great at this role
I know the law around child protection, Gillick competence, parental responsibility and consent to medical procedures. And I am not sure that Mermaids ever have - or worse, ever cared to. And for an organisation quite explicitly wanting to rely on ‘strategic litigation’ to further their mission statement (more trans kids more of the time) this seems a strange anomaly.
It is interesting that Mermaids concede that this ‘legal and policy’ department did not exist four years ago. That means in 2016, when they encouraged a mother to cause significant harm to her son and then angrily protested about the court judgment that ensured his protection, they adopted this bizarre stance without the benefit of any ‘strategic litigation specialist’.
But in 2019 Mermaids could no longer have any excuse for ignorance. It was their own Director who set out their understanding of the law in a blog post. I commented in a guest post for Transgender Trend that it was ‘very troubling’ to find the Mermaids legal adviser apparently oblivious to the legal structures around children and their capacity to consent.
Why it was skated over became obvious at the conclusion of the blog
….someone’s gender identity, at any age, must be respected. A child identifying as trans, whether it has been submitted this is as a result of harm or not, is identifying as trans and that must be respected throughout proceedings…More often than not, if a child says they are trans, they will be trans.
This isn’t an attempt to blur the line between the child who is ‘Gillick competent’ and the child who is not. It’s a wish to erase it completely so that the wishes and feelings of a 4 year old carry the same currency as do those of a 16 year old. Anyone who has ever met a child or can remember being a child knows that this is nonsense.
But in terms of family court cases at least, it seemed that by 2019 Mermaids’ mission had been met without them attempting ‘strategic litigation’ as by this stage a High Court Judge didn’t even raise an eyebrow at two unrelated foster children in the same family both ‘transitioning’ at the ages of 4 and 7.
In 2019 the climate of fear that Mermaids and others had fostered was in full effect. Anyone objecting to the social transition of primary school children or the medical transition of 12 year olds was a ‘hate fuelled bigot’ who should be drummed out of their jobs or even reported to the police. The impact of their continued propaganda, reliance on fake suicide statistics and non existent evidence about the ‘harmless reversibility’ of puberty blockers can be seen starkly in these illustrations from the Cass Review interim report.
But the cracks were beginning to show as various grass roots organisations and courageous individuals challenged the prevailing orthodoxy around the affirmation path - ‘affirming’ irreversible medical interventions for children too young to consent to a tattoo or able to buy cigarettes. Notably, Sonia Appleby the Safeguarding Lead at the Tavistock was able to show that she had been prevented from doing her job effectively and awarded damages of £20k.
If Mermaids were promoting ‘strategic litigation’ by 2020 then they clearly weren’t very good at it. Their attempts to intervene in the Keira Bell case were rejected. Their ‘strategic litigation’ so far appears to be an attempt to force the Charity Commission to de-register the LGB Alliance over fears for their own income stream. This is apparently funded by Trans Ally Supremo Jolyon Maugham’s ‘Good Law Project’ but if I were Mermaids Legal and Policy Director I would be urgently questioning this direction and focus from a charity that purports to represent the interests of vulnerable children.
The cat is out of the bag now for Mermaids, and is walking all over the kitchen counter tops. They got as far as they did by a mixture of credulous celebrity endorsement and riding the wave of a culture of fear and compliance. I do not think there is any litigation that can save them now, no matter how ‘strategic’. If Javid is serious about this investigation into the climate of fear around ‘gender’ treatment for children then he needs to go upstream and confirm just exactly what was poisoning the environment at the Tavistock. If he does, there he will find Mermaids, Stonewall and numerous other lobby and campaigning groups who all bear responsibility for this.
But they didn’t entrench their positions alone. They were empowered and encouraged by a political and journalistic class who were both cowardly and complicit. The irony will be that Javid’s inquiry may need to look very closely at politicians themselves.
I would be very happy to attempt to guide Mermaids out of the toxic mess they have both created and exploited. There remain vulnerable gender questioning children who need to have adults in their corner, to support them and explain things to them. This is a charity which could do valuable work if it could just let go of the regressive and harmful ideology of gender identity expression and affirmation at all costs.
But I don’t think they would welcome my input. Because it would mean a significant change for this organisation, away from science denial. I will leave you with their own words as they attempt to justify legal action against the Charity Commission
To be registered as a charity, an organisation must be established exclusively for charitable purposes, as recognised in law, and pursue them in a manner which gives rise to tangible benefits and which outweigh any associated harms.
If I were to be appointed as their Legal and Policy Director then our first and very urgent meeting would be to consider that statement. I suspect that I too would soon be off to find pastures new.
Thanks for the heads up. Think I'll apply. I can identify as a strategic lawyer as well as then next man (and its bound to be a man).
"the wishes and feelings of a 4 year old carry the same currency as do those of a 16 year old." A common attitude amongst 'predatory males'. REDFLAG!