This is part 11 of a series on parents who believe their child is ”transgender”. It was funded by, amongst others, Oxford University and is hosted on healthtalk.org. Mermaids lobby group were involved. You can access this on healthtalk’s website, here, 👇
This post focuses on parents talking about their strategies to deal with their children exhibiting suicidal ideation. For any parents who are dealing with this, for their own child, it is a terrifying prospect. To set your mind at rest please read my piece on suicide statistics in this demographic. They are no more likely to attempt suicide than any other group suffering from mental health issues.
Support forums for children/teenagers identifying as “transgender” encourage the threat of suicide to blackmail parents into medical “affirmation”. Most of the data out there is based on self-reported ”attempts”. There is a problem with suicide in those who have undergone medical ”transition” and I will cover that research shortly.
First up the author’s quote Stonewall. This is never a good sign.
I think we would have noticed if 84% of trans-identified people made serious attempts to end their own lives, however, this research is punctuated with accounts from parents who feel the medical treatment, accessed by their children, was life-saving /suicide averting.
This is what Stonewall say about suicide on their website today: They claim a 27% figure for attempted suicide and 89% have thought about it. 👇
Here is Michael Biggs on the issue of suicide. I will cover his paper on here because he is an excellent source:
Here Biggs quotes Norman Spack. He runs a clinic in Boston for children who are proclaimed as ”transgender”
I wonder if the only way you can justify these dractic measures is by inflating the risk of inaction? Here is Ross warning parents that self-harm can escalate.
No wonder these parents are terrified to practice ”watch and wait”.
Below Ali shares that her daughter was already under the care of CAMHS for mental health issues. They felt under pressure to “sort” things our in a twelve week programme, at this stage her son had not declared a “transgender” identity.
Next Ali talks about figuring out that ”gender identity” may be one of the issue and how hard it was to access support.
Ali felt the support from school was counterproductive. She referred her son to mental health services but he attempted suicide during the Christmas period.
Finally her son explains that the issue is his gender identity. Ali realises that what they need is a referral to GIDs. At this point she claims that mental health services cut them adrift.
One of the other parents does not think all her daughter’s issues should be assumed to relate to the ”trans” identity. Ross points out that, for his daughter, bullying at school and a bad relationship with her mother impacted his daughter. Bullying figures in the background of a lot of these kids. Some of this is homophobic bullying, known to generate issues with “gender identity” confusion. Research here:
I can identify with the fear of suicide for our children. What does not help is the endless propaganda and inflated risk peddled about our kids. Sadly Ross is not reassuring these parents. He is amplifying their fear.
I do this full-time and am unwaged. You can support my work here:
Researching the harms of gender identity ideology. The harms to women’s, sex based, rights and the damage done to vulnerable youth through medicalising their distress. Left alone many would simply be gay.
The Samaritans is a charity, based in the U.K, set up to help people in distress. They focus on providing 24 hour helplines, staffed by volunteers, whose aim is to avert self-harm or suicide. Apart from providing research on risk factors for suicide and they also teach media outlets how to report on completed suicides to avoid, inadvertently, fostering suicide ideation or even copycat suicides in specific demographics.
Given the charitable objectives of the Samaritans it has shown a marked failure to condemn the routine deployment of suicide threats to advance the aims of the Trans Lobby. If you are unfamiliar with the way questionable data on suicide ideation is used to promote medical responses to children with “Gender Dysphoria” I have written about it below:
The Samaritans have written extensively about how the media should avoid over-sensational media reporting, and simplistic narratives associating suicide with a specific demographic. They write, knowledgeably about suicide contagion and “clusters” of suicides associated with, for example, high-profile suicide of celebrities. They acknowledge the specific vulnerabilities of young people and yet…The Transgender Lobby break this code on a regular basis and are amplified by media outlets and even MPs. Yet the Samaritans remain, studiously, silent about the regular breach of its media guidelines on suicide by Trans Lobby groups.
So, why would the Samaritans ignore the most egregious breach of its media guidelines even though they *know* there is no epidemic of suicides in Gender Dysphoric youth? Could it be that they have been Stonewalled? Lets have a look at their CEO, Julie Bentley. She joined in October 2020 and had previously been CEO of Girl Guiding and Action for Children.
Her chosen profile on twitter has the tell-tale sign of pronouns in the bio, and proud proclamations about kindness and social justice along with the inevitable “feminist”.
Many of us have tagged Samaritans into tweets promoting suicide in our Gender Dysphoric youth and asking them for public statements to condemn the practice. This is just one example but I have done this myself, many times.
Previously Julie has been CEO of Girl Guides and Action for Children. Both these organisations are Stonewall Champions. It is not clear if Samaritans are paid up members of the Stonewall racket but Julie is an enthusiastic supporter. This is clip from an archive copy of Stonewall lists of supporters. As there are some high profile departures from the scheme Stonewall no longer allow public access to their supporter information.
Girlguiding has been the subject of some controversy under Bentley’s tenure as it was under her that the organisations became mixed-sex and guide leaders were terminated for raising concerns. Here is a link to her statement given at the time:
The response neatly side-steps the issue of Adult, male guide leaders. It also ignores a girls right to bodily privacy especially because some of these girls will have developing bodies and may already be menstruating. That is a time when many girls are self-conscious about their bodies and bodily functions.
Bentley also reveals that she was taking advice from a Trans Lobby group. Note that below she says that only in *some* instances are separate facilities used.
This remains a controversial topic for the Girl Guides long after Bentley has moved on. This is one of the guide leaders causing a fuss this week. You can read more about this below and note that women were expelled for warning this would happen.
Here Julie Bentley commends ex CEO of Stonewall, Ruth Hunt, who was responsible for turning Stonewall into a Trans Lobby group. 👇
Bentley continued her support for new CEO, Nancy Kelley.
Bentley has also spoken along side controversial Transing kids charity Mermaids. Two clips below, One from 2017 and an endorsement in 2020.
Samaritans have even promoted articles propagating articles about Transgender Suicide as far back as 2016.
Prior to Bentley’s time at the charity they also hosted “Dr” Helen Webberley of Gender GP. Webberley has had her registration suspended and is currently awaiting the outcome of another tribunal which is scrutinising her medical practices. Webberley was guest speaker at their AGM in 2016.
More recently Bentley nailed her colours to the mast as controversy blew up about Stonewall and she made it clear which side she was on.
I hope this explains why the Samaritans are maintaining a stubborn silence on the harms done in the name of Gender Identity Ideology. We are sterilising children, as young as 10, by putting them on Puberty Blockers which are invariably followed by cross-sex hormones. For males they will have stunted genitalia which will, even under their paradigm, make attempts to create a neo-vagina more difficult. Girls are put on a pathway to double mastectomy and often hysterectomy which is a response to vaginal atrophy induced by long term testosterone use. I cannot think of a situation more likely to see a spate of future suicides as regret kicks in. If CEOs of Charities don’t have the courage to do their job they should be removed.
While we are entitled to some celebration as more and more organisations extract themselves from Stonewall we are not going to be able to rest on our laurels. We face an uphill and lengthy battle to undo the damage. Firstly there will be multiple organisations keen to step into the breach and hoover up the Trans pound. Secondly Queer theory is embedded in our universities and churning out graduates saturated in (Judith) Butler Bollox. Whilst many of us were concerned that the European Union is captured there is a danger we could become tied to a U.S trade deal that comes with strings attached. The list of companies and public bodies who were indoctrinated by Stonewall is long. Even though Stonewall Champions list is shrinking (hence why it is no longer publicly names its supporters) the indoctrinated remain in those organisations.
Here is the archive list of Stonewall supporters. We need to root this ideology out of all of these organisations and it is going to take a long time. Help me keep going, if you can, below.
Researching the impact of Gender Identity Ideology on women & girls as well as the consequences for Lesbians, Gay males and autistic kids. I do this full time and have no income. All my content is open access and donations help keep me going. Only give IF you can afford. Thank you to my generous donors.
Wallace Wong is a Gender Identity Specialist based in Vancouver. He boasts that, of the 1000 children in his care, 500 are children from the looked after system. That is children who are, in some way, wards of the state. Wallace Wong works for the Ministry of Children and Families and also has a private practice.
He arrived at his current career path after noticing how many “transwomen” were impacted by the HIV/AIDs crisis. He initially began working with adults but soon noticed that the age of those with “Gender Identity” confusion was becoming increasingly younger.
You can listen to the full audio at this site. I imagine that many of you may diverge from their larger aims (as do I) however, given the dearth of coverage in other media outlets I will link to their research. This is the only way to honour my commitment to provide primary sources, where possible. The link is below.
The clips in my piece were included in the vimeo embedded in the above link. I have listened to it, in its entirety, and can attest to the accuracy of the transcribing. It is a long presentation and I can’t do justice to all of the issues it raises but below is a brief overview.
Wong argues that we must not confuse gender incongruence/roles with being Transgender but most of the examples supplied are of boys who like “girly” things. Expect lots of references to princesses and pretty things. He dismisses research showing high rates of desistance in children who, historically, claimed a trans-identity. He argues that “gender” is innate and quotes some research about hard-wired neurological causes based on MRI scans proving #LadyBrain. He also quotes some self-reported adherence to sex stereotypical behaviour, typically associated with the opposite sex. I suspect Wallace has not heard of the, Shakespearean, quote “the wish was father to the thought” (Henry IV, Part II). We are treathing retrospective wish fulfilment as if it is peer reviewed evidence. Laverne Cox & Caitlin Jenner are wheeled out to confirm the idea that children know they are trans age three. Caitlin, you may remember managed to father five children and win Olympic medals during his male life. Laughably, at one point a video commentator appears to think the existence of Facebook “genders” has some sort of evidential significance.
He is also at pains to dismiss any concern that confusion could arise between emerging homosexuality and a proto transkid. Similarly he argues that high rates of autism can be expected because both autistic traits and transgender traits are biologically determined. High rates of co-morbid mental health issues are to be expected, he argues, because being transgender is hard.
Below Dr Wallace seems keen that we should know he is seeing patients as young as 3. He also makes it clear about the fast pace of this change and the fact that research has not kept pace with this development.
Below is where Wong makes the startling admission that 50% (500 out of his 1000 referrals) are from the Ministry of Children and families. This means they are somewhere in the care system and commonly referred to as “Looked After Children”. Dr Wallace doesn’t appear to have much professional curiosity about the exponential growth in “transkids” over this period.
Jenn Smith (also based in Vancouver) is a male who expresses “feminine” and ascribes this to his experience within the care system. Jenn argues that children in care are particularly vulnerable to “identity” issues which also extend to “gender identity”. It was Jenn Smith who first made me consider this aspect of the debate.
You can catch up with Jenn Smith on his YouTube channel and here Jenn Talks specifically about this issue here:
Listening to Jenn Smith talk it is hard not to be concerned about an estimated figure of one in ten LAC (Looked After Children) identifing as transgender. This is contrasted with an estimated figure of one in 200 of children residing with their birth families. Another disturbing dimension is whether the indigenous children, over-represented in LAC settings, are also being medicalised as “transgender”. This has dangerous echoes of the scandal of sterilisation of indigenous peoples which is a stain on Canada’s history. If they are included in this population, of transkids, that is a damning indictment of those tasked with the welfare of children in British Columbia.
Wong does identify the dangers of social contagion in his presentation. I suspect this is now such an obvious phenomenon he feels obliged to address it. He prefaces the quotes below with some arguments that the internet has allowed “trans children” to develop an awareness of their identity and find acceptance, and knowledge, in on-line communities. Below, he at least acknowledges the dangers of kids, particularly those “on the spectrum” (referring to Autism I assume) to be swept along with trans-ideation.
Astonishingly he acknowledges that 20% of Transgender kids are autistic but this is simply dismissed because autistic kids and transgender kids are “born this way“. This is not an uncommon feature of arguments from Gender Identity proponents. Once you embrace the belief of an innate gender identity you can find evidence everywhere and fit facts to confirm your hypothesis. Conversely if, like me, you are a sceptic the ideology has more holes than a string vest.
He introduces videos throughout his presentation and one is a parent whose child came out to them at three years of age. I have not included the parent’s quote but suffice to say, like a lot of these tales, it is a boy who likes pink and sparkly things. We are told that her original therapist counselled a watch and wait approach and quoted an 80% figure for expectations of desistance. The same presentation proceeds to rubbish a study based in the Netherlands which supported this observation.
What the audience are not told is that there was only one Gender Identity clinic in the Netherlands so the researchers made the, entirely reasonable, assumption that loss to follow up could reasonably be correlated with desistance. The alternative was that the child had been taken abroad, and paid for treatment, rather than access the free treatment within the Netherlands.
Wong also rubbishes another study which found that most of the boys grew up to be gay. The unfortunately named “Sissy boys” were identified for their Gender non-conforming presentation. Here Wong argues that the study was flawed because they did not use boys who said they were actually girls. It does not seem to have occured to Wong that it was the 1970’s. Identifying as the other sex was not a social norm at the time. It is the near ubiquity of teaching about Gender Identity in our schools (especially in Canada) that has left a generation thinking you can choose your sex.
Wong then utters this statement which shows he is utterly disregarding any research that suggests he may be making an egregious error. To much laughter he dismisses any caution with this facile statement. Apparently, if the 80% is correct he is lucky enough to be seeing the 20% who would persist. Crassly he also argues that some of those kids may not appear in the figures because they will have committed suicide. As I have said, many times, there is just no evidence for this epidemic of transgender suicides in adolescents. Wong may feel blessed and lucky but it was bad luck for any child who walked into his office.
All of which takes me to the more egregious aspect of the advice Wong is dishing out. The question of how to overcome barriers to access to Gender Identity treatment was raised. Wong requests that this part of his presentation is not taped and then, after a side swipe at the gate-keeping goverment, he advises: “Pull a stunt. Suicide, every time, they will give you what you need“
This series is looking at the vulnerability of Children in Care; who have no parents to speak up for them. Not all the parents in Vancover are absent. It was also Vancouver who imprisoned a father who opposed the provision of testosterone for his teenage daughter and refused to remain silent. It would be interesting to see who was the Gender Identity Specialist involved in that case. Is there a connection?
I could not say but I certainly want to do a series on parents caught up in this nightmare.
If you can support my work it will be appreciated. Below is one way to do so until we get more media outlets willing to cover the issues I cover on my blog. Only if it is affordable and regardless my content will remain free.
My next piece will be on the percentage of kids in care referred to GIDs, in the U.K. Are the researchers concerned that these, vulnerable, kids have no parents to question the medical interventions proposed? Or. Are they worried children in care are not being treated fast enough? Watch this space.
Researching Gender Identity Ideology and its impact on Women and our Gay Youth. Support is always appreciated (I have no income). All my content is open access so if you can’t speak publicly, and want to support those who can, only IF you have spare cash, this helps me keep going.
Parents entrust our kids to the School/Teachers to look after their safety and well-being, in our stead. Forcing our girls to share mixed sex spaces, and hiding information from parents is a grave dereliction of that duty.
Transgender Guidance in Schools.
More and more parents have begun to raise concerns about School guidance, supposedly, developed to accommodate Transgender pupils. Grass roots organisations, such as SafeSchoolsAlliance, have emerged to challenge these policies. In 2020, transgender guidance has been withdrawn in Kent, Cornwall, Shropshire, Barnsley, Warwickshire and Oxfordshire. There are challenges underway in three further schools, of which I am aware. Thus far all the guidance has been withdrawn rather than face a legal challenge.
The Oxfordshire case is illustrative of a problematic attitude to the protected characteristic of sex. A 13 year old girl challenged Oxfordshire County Council via a Judicial Review. Her case aimed to gain recognition of the conflict between the protected characteristics of Sex & Gender Reassignment. The guidance from the Department of Education argues that the protected characteristic of Gender Reassignment covers pupils who identify as Transgender. Link to government guidance is here
Here is the relevant excerpt and look who is advising them! GIRES!
This is despite the fact under 18’s cannot apply for a Gender Recognition Certificate or, legally, obtain Sexual Reassignment Surgery, in the UK. The Transgender pupils are therefore anatomically indistinguishable from the rest of their natal sex.
Rather than face a judicial review the council withdrew the policy. They are clearly hoping to hide behind the skirts/trousers of the EHRC. Oxfordshire issued a statement which contained no apology, to the female pupil. Instead the Council ends with a statement about the safeguarding of its trans-identifying pupils. Nothing about a duty to safeguard, potentially vulnerable, natal girls.
In this post I want to specifically focus on the way parents are regarded in these transgender toolkits. Both the parents of children who manifest as Gender Dysphoric and the parents of other pupils. I estimate I have looked at about twenty of these guidance packs. Below are examples of what they have to say about parents.
Most of the guidance refers to the high rate of suicidal ideation, in our trans-identifying children. Yet the policies repeatedly state there is no, inherent, safeguarding risk. If our children reveal a state of gender confusion , to a member of staff, they are reminded that this is confidential information, not to be shared, even with the child’s parents. How can schools claim our children are at a high risk of suicide attempts and, simultaneously, state there are no safeguarding issues. How is it Ok to conceal this information from parents?
Suffolk council divides parents into the good and the bad ones. The good ones “work alongside their child”. Are the bad ones those who think the best outcome is a reconciliation to biological sex and not a lifelong dependence on BigPharma?
Barnsley expresses the hope that parents will be concerned for their child’s welfare but is clearly sceptical. At no point, in any of the policies, is there an understanding that parents, who express caution, are the ones acting in the best interests of our children. Every pack I have examined is suspiciously keen to emphasise actions the child can take independently of their parents.
More sinister is an open statement that a school, in this case a Catholic school, can put in place a transition plan that does not involve the parents! This is my old school and I have young relatives who attend there.
Here is another Catholic school which labels parent’s as prejudiced. It then goes on to make the claim that Parents/Guardians may not be the most appropriate people to guide their child through transitioning! Why is transitioning our children seen as an unmitigated good? A direct attack on parental duty of care and parental rights from the Catholic Church!. I am an atheist but it is quite astonishing to see the undermining of Parental responsibility emanating out of Catholic schools.
Leicestershire Council appear to see themselves as a Tavistock (Gender Identity Services) referral agent: Actually stating here that Teachers & School Nurses, even Youth Workers are able to make referrals!
Where are the parents in the Leicester guidance? Once again the confidentiality of the child is placed in the foreground. What this actually means is that the school has the right to keep secrets from the parents. Even whilst so many of these packs claim our children are at a significant risk of suicide attempts. Still it is not a safeguarding issue?
This next clip is even more disturbing. The Leicester policy sets out a scenario where one of the parents will be actively deceived about what is going on.
Of course we can all think of scenarios where parents are a risk to the safety and well-being of their child. Why are parents, who question the uptick of girls (and boys) with Gender Dysphoria, labelled as problematic. Having navigated this territory, for my male child, I was keen that he was afforded protection but not at the expense of the female pupils. Puberty can be a difficult time for teenage girls and they too deserve dignity, privacy and protection. Like the parent below I was able to navigate a careful path between the two protected groups. Unlike this parent, from the Cornwall guidance, I was not faced with a Social Justice Warrior undermining these careful arrangements.
The Cornwall policy was jointly drafted with a female police officer. I was surprised the statement on the left made it into the document. Apart from a disturbing focus on links to reporting #HateCrime it was not the worst Transgender policy I read. It is, however, a, regrettably, low bar. The document also brands parents as potentially prejudiced and again argues that the child may have a perfect legal right to exclude parents from any role in preserving their healthy bodies.
You can read about the Fraser Guidelines, and Gillick Competence, mentioned above here. Activists argue that transitioning children /teens against their parent’s wishes is in line with the rights of young people. You will start to see more references to these guidelines and Gillick competence. This is intentional and designed to draw a false equivalence to access to contraception. References will also be clothed in Human Rights speak and references to bodily autonomy.
A lot of these guidance packs go to some lengths to make sure schools know they can honour a pupil’s preferred name and pronoun. School systems can be amended to reflect this. There is no need for a legal name change. They also point out that, once a pupil reaches 16 they no longer need parental permission.
Shropshire also favours hiding this information from parents who are not “supportive”. I know, first hand, of parents who only discovered what was going on, with their own child, when a letter was sent home with a new name & pronouns. Do not tell parents can be a very dangerous message. Some parents have children with eating disorders, psychiatric co-morbidities, and other conditions which the school may be unaware about.
The pack which seems to be the template for most of the packs I have seen remains in operation. This is the All Sorts pack, from Brighton and Hove. A pupil’s right to confidentiality is elevated above parental obligations, or the rights of other pupils. Again, because they claim it is not a safeguarding issue it can be kept from their own parents and the parents of other children.
Where a parent raises a concern, about a male-bodied person in girls changing rooms, the pupil/parent’s are admonished for denying the “girlhood” of the other pupil. In this scenario, I as a parent of a trans-identifying male, agree with the female pupil and her parent’s concerns. I would not want my son to be exposed to the hostility, that would likely ensue, from such a stance. At the same time, if the guidance is followed, I would be totally unaware my child had formally claimed trans-status at the school. Who does this protect? Not my son. Not the girls in his school.
Another common feature of the Transgender Guidance is the near ubiquity of signposting to Mermaids Charity. This charity is a keen advocate for keeping secrets from parents. Here is an article on their website. It was modified so children could quickly exit the site and avoid their parents discovering they are seeking counsel on Gender Identity Issues.
The BBC has now amended their guidance to remove signposting to Mermaids and other trans lobby groups. I wonder how long it will take for all School guidance packs to do the same?
My Next blog will explore this document? Based on a project funded by the Government Equalities Office,
Here is what they have to say about parents. This is a lie. The Equality Act does not mandate pronouns.
This blog is in response to the consistent use of versions of the above phrase. Parents are being told a failure to comply with medicalisation, for their “gender confused” offspring, will result in a significant risk of suicide. Lobbying organisations are using suicide rates of “trans” kids to influence public policy, advocate for legislative change and dictate clinical guidelines for kids/teens with Gender Dysphoria. Despite the headline grabbing claims the data does not stand up to scrutiny.
A selection of headlines:
A more recent one from September2019 includes a direct demand that legal change is required to mitigate against these suicides:
These are not isolated examples. This theme is used consistently by lobby groups, in particular, Mermaids. Below is a link to a taped Mermaids representative in a training session. When an audience member notes that some academics have criticised the data, on trans suicides, the trainer warns that academics can still be transphobic! Mermaids Training.
Full statement from Mermaids on World Suicide Day here. Note the statistic of 45% is still in use. They also then quote the general suicide rate, in under 19s, to support their case. This is not disaggregated to show any link to Trans identity. World Suicide Day
Here is a slide presentation, used by Mermaids, during a presentation at a conference in front of an audience of lawyers, press, NHS representativesand government officials. This was on 18th November 2016 at the Trans Equality Legal Initiative.
Two key pieces of research are used to make claims of high suicide rates/attempts in the trans community. The first one is a study commissioned by PACE RaRe and the other was commissioned by Stonewall. These studies may not have reached a wide audience but their message informed the ITV drama “Butterfly” : which made liberal use of the suicide narrative.
Here is a detailed debunking of the suicide stats, authored by Associate Professor Michael Biggs, prompted by the ITV drama “Butterfly” : Suicide data.
Here are some key excerpts:
That’s FOURcases over a decade. Each one a tragedy for the individual, and their parents, but in no way supporting the ,manufactured, public perception, of a suicide epidemic in Trans youth. These figures have been published by leading MPs who seem to be uninformed about their unreliability.
Here is Susie Green (CEO of Mermaids) claiming she is aware of 4 trans-suicides in just one year. There is no evidence to support this statement.
Here is a full analysis of the data in the above study, in particular questioning the way these statistics have been used by Lobby groups. Suicide Myths
Below is a brief snapshot highlighting that the central figure is based on 13 trans young people who self-report attempted suicide.
Included in the above report is correspondence with one of the authors of the study expressing concern about how the data has been used. Below is one example:
The author of the study had this to say about the way organisations, with an agenda, are using their data:
The second study under analysis is one commissioned by Stonewall, with an introduction by, former CEO, Ruth Hunt. The full report is here
Attempts made to obtain the methodology were not forthcoming. In Academia it is absolutely expected that any published research is open about their methodology. This is so it can be critically evaluated and it’s robustness tested. No peer-reviewed journal would accept research without knowing that the data set was available to scrutiny. The Stonewall research was not subject to peer review and no dataset was forthcoming. 👇
A detailed list of criticisms is here:
It is well demonstrated that Lesbian and Gay youth are more likely to be bullied and have suicidal tendencies. Research needs to disaggregate the data to include sexual orientation however a research subject identifies. This is the only way to understand what is going on. Hence point three, above, is important.
Remember that the Samaritans warn, repeatedly, that irresponsible reporting can foster suicide ideation in vulnerable groups. They warn it is dangerous to over-simplify narratives about suicide cases. In addition to focus on one of the deceased characteristics can harm those who share that trait. (Please note that this in no way negates the real experience of individuals living through genuine distress either due to sexual orientation/ Gender Dysphoria or, as is often the case, both).
For parents with children/teens with Gender Dysphoria, the way the suicide narrative is presented can generate understandable anxiety. By way of reassurance I repeat the guidance from the Gender Identity Services (GIDs) own FAQ page.
Here are also Polly Carmichael (Director of The Tavistock, Gender Identity Clinic) on the suicide statistics and how they are used:
The aim of this blog is to inform enough people to rebut this narrative when we hear it. Whether that is in real life, diversity training, or on social media. Please do also let Samaritans know when you see this irresponsible coverage. I live in hope they are moved to make a public statement, or at least, a private overture to those peddling this dangerous narrative.
Acknowledgement: Thanks to Professor Michael Biggs and Transgender Trend for all the work they do.