Susie Green & Mermaids UK - "Trans Kid Support Charity", Susie had her underage kid get GRS

I see Pink News is locking down dissent

Comments (0)
MyPinkNews members are invited to comment on articles to discuss the content we publish, or debate issues more generally. Please familiarise yourself with our community guidelines to ensure that our community remains a safe and inclusive space for all.
You must be a MyPinkNews member to comment.
The Mermaids cope during this is fucking astounding. "Well one of the judges was on the fence about if they should be a charity or not." Yeah, based off a case brought before one of your trustees was outed as a pedo-enabler, your CEO fled because she could smell the pitchforks and you started getting investigated by the Charity Commission.
Charity Commission has issued a statement. It's fairly straightforward, but I'm sure it's already being twisted into cope about how the CC actually sides with mermaids.
They can cope all they want, that statement is 100% directed at Mermaids for attempting to silence the LGB Alliance. That they mention it is not acceptable for any charity on their register while in the middle of investigating Mermaids should have backsides clenching shut in fear because 100% their internal stuff will have examples of that.
 
Another upside is that every penny they spent litigating this pointless case is money not spent on castrating children.

Hopefully taking the Charity Commission to court won't unfairly prejudice them in their ongoing investigation about Mermaids' governance. That would be terrible.
 
Mermaids are spinning that one of the judges agreed with them, but all he actually said was that he wasn't sure that LGBA should be registered in the hypothetical case that mermaids had been had standing to challenge LGBA's charitable status and also had proven harm. Neither was the actual case in the case, as it were. Regardless, they agreed that mermaids was interfering where it had no right to interfere.
I continue to be struck by the extreme organisational narcissism of Mermaids, in that they keep being presented with opportunities to improve their behaviour, and in every case they just turn around and say "oh we were right" and continue doing it. It's a lot like the GIDS leadership; so many occasions where their failures were pointed out, and this seemingly ideological refusal to engage with often good-faith criticism.

The Good Law Project put out a similar cope that the case was rejected "on the technical ground that [Mermaids] did not have standing". Mermaids’ challenge to the Charity Commission’s decision to register LGB Alliance as a charity has been dismissed - Good Law Project (archive)

This is exactly the kind of spin I've come to expect from Maugham and GLP ("We won!" (they lost)). In this case the issue of standing is not really a technicality, as it covers much the same ground that would be covered in the claim against the registration of LGBA, which is why both claims were heard together, even though the assessment of the registration claim hinged on the standing claim being judged in Mermaids' favour.

Mermaids claimed to have standing because a challenge can be lodged by "any other person who is or may be affected by the decision" to register LGBA as a charity. So in ruling that Mermaids did not have standing, the judges were really ruling that Mermaids was not affected. From the judgment:

(58.a) "It is submitted that Mermaids has suffered, and continues to suffer, real harm as a result of the decision [to register LGBA as a charity]."

The judges cite (at para 65) the statement of Belinda Bell, the head of Mermaids' trustees, where she wrote that LGBA's charity status meant "its false claims about Mermaids … are being taken more seriously … Its ability to damage our reputation by making false claims has increased materially, as has its ability to lobby against our work. Even people who are sceptical about LGBA's claims might well think twice about publicly supporting us … Accordingly the registration of LGBA … has caused significant interference with our work, consequences for our reputation, and potential cost to us."

In response the judges write:
66. Charitable status does not come with any guarantees of funding nor any freedom from criticism or debate. It is no part of the Commission’s function (nor of this Tribunal) to tell people what to think, or to regulate public debate in a context where there are deeply held, sincere, beliefs on all sides of the discussion.
ie You don't count as "affected" when it just means that people might think more deeply about your claims!

And:
68. The free communication of information, opinions and argument about the laws which a state should enact and the policies its government at all levels should pursue is an essential condition of truly democratic government. We respectfully agree with Lord Bingham that the fundamental rationale of the democratic process upon which our society is founded is that when competing views, opinions and policies are publicly debated and exposed to public scrutiny, the good will over time drive out the bad and the true will prevail over the false. Only when differing views are expressed, contradicted, answered and debated will the legislature be able to obtain the fullest picture of the views held by those they represent in order to create laws that are reflective of and required by society as a whole. We also acknowledge that views change on an individual basis and the consensus held by society on any particular topic will evolve as new voices enter the debate and challenge the established position.

And (at para 72):
One charity may, in principle, publicly object to the way in which another charity chooses to achieve its charitable objects. […] there is no legal right to be free from criticism by those who disagree with you or to prevent those who hold beliefs that the law recognises as protected from expressing themselves or seeking to persuade others to their point of view.

Then, to the core of Mermaids' claims (at para 73) of counting as "affected":
[Mermaids] argues that the decision gives LGBA access to funds that will make its activities more effective, in particular as regards interference with Mermaids’ endeavours. We have found that Mermaids has no legal right to operate free of criticism, or from having it said that it is undeserving of public money in comparison to another charity. […] There is no legal right to funding, to donations or access to grant holding bodies.

And at 74, covering the bizarre claim by Mermaids that registering LGBA meant undue competition for funds:
The second way in which Mermaids put its case on the effect of LGBA’s activities was to simply point to greater competition for funds in relation to the subject matter of its objects. In deciding whether to register a charity the Commission has no quota or restriction upon the number of charities that may be registered for any particular charitable purpose. The aims of many charities overlap, such as those researching treatments for cancer in all its forms, and thus there is inevitable competition between them for funds to pursue their work.

And in what I will unfairly claim is the judges saying "fuck your feelings":
76. It is very clear to us that Mermaids profoundly disagrees with the Commission’s Decision emotionally, politically and intellectually. […] many of those that support the work of Mermaids or those it supports also strongly disagree with the Decision. […] However, applying the facts to the actual legal issue before us, the fact that Mermaids and those they support have been affected emotionally and/or socially is insufficient to provide them with standing to bring this appeal, no matter the depth of the feelings resulting from the Decision or the strength of their disagreement.

Edit: Self-hating lesbian Emperor Palpatine Stephen Whittle chimes in, retweeted by Susie Green:
whittle-lgba.png

Very good for a law professor to join in with the technicality argument. Once again, they were ruled against "Only because Mermaids" claimed to be harmed by things that charity law doesn't prevent, and as the judges ruled should not prevent.
 
I continue to be struck by the extreme organisational narcissism of Mermaids, in that they keep being presented with opportunities to improve their behaviour, and in every case they just turn around and say "oh we were right" and continue doing it. It's a lot like the GIDS leadership; so many occasions where their failures were pointed out, and this seemingly ideological refusal to engage with often good-faith criticism.
GIDS is the perfect example to understand why they are doing this. The entire operating model relies on being unquestionable. As soon as they can be questioned the whole thing runs into problems.
 
Hopefully taking the Charity Commission to court won't unfairly prejudice them in their ongoing investigation about Mermaids' governance. That would be terrible.
These idiots better hope that the LGB Alliance is actually a charity, because if it isn't, then they DEFINITELY aren't.
Edit: Self-hating lesbian Emperor Palpatine Stephen Whittle chimes in, retweeted by Susie Green:
Anyone who puts a bunch of alphabet soup at the end of their fucking TWITTER name of all things knows they have no credibility on their own.
 
Some extra insanity following the ruling in LGBA's favour.

First, from SNP MP John Nicolson:
IMG_3494.jpeg
John Nicolson dijo:
A work of fiction. The judges did not find in favour of the LGB Alliance. The judgement is available to read. Judges found that one charity could not appeal against another charity's status under current law. They castigated the Alliance for its abusive behaviour online.
If you accuse someone of making things up ("a work of fiction") then you may want to be sure of your argument! The judges did not find "that one charity could not appeal against another charity's status under current law"; if they had, there would have been no need to examine the ways in which Mermaids claimed to have been "affected" by the registration of LGBA. Instead, the judges found that the ways in which Mermaids claimed to have been "affected" were not legal rights to have been infringed (not to be criticised, access to funds).

Next, from Susie Green herself:
IMG_3496.jpeg IMG_3497.jpeg
Susie Green dijo:
Today, as I heard the news about Mermaids case against the LGBA charity status, my thoughts go to the amazing team at @Mermaids_gender who stood up for the rights of the trans community to live life with dignity and respect and free from the kind of harassment dished out by the LGBA.

The case failed on standing, which we knew was a difficult issue as the law was so complex. This does not, however, constitute a win for the LGBA. The judges were split as to whether the LGBA deserved charity status based upon the content that they produced and the lack of any actual charitable activities. They have consistently shown themselves to be a trans hate group, not a force for good for the LGB community.

For all those who are negatively impacted by today's judgment please know that I stand by the trans community today and every day. I will continue to fight back against the blatant transphobia and the governments attempts to roll back rights. And as always, I know that this statement will help me add to my already extensive block list!
"This does not, however, constitute a win for the LGBA." :story: Reminds me of the cope following the Forstater verdict at the EAT. 101 things the ruling does NOT give Maya Forstater the right to do… |Lily Maynard (archive)

"The case failed on standing, which we knew was a difficult issue as the law was so complex." Mermaids' case failed because the law does not protect a charity from being criticised or having to compete for funds, which were its claims.

"The judges were split as to whether the LGBA deserved charity status based upon the content that they produced and the lack of any actual charitable activities. They have consistently shown themselves to be a trans hate group, not a force for good for the LGB community." The judges expressly said they would not lay out their views on the hypothetical claim of LGBA's registration. LGBA is also a new charity and for most of its existence has been fighting an expensive court battle to remain a charity, so perhaps it can be forgiven for not being able to achieve much in terms of its charitable objects (this is raised specifically in the ruling).

It must be exhausting to be perpetually right, and have to explain how you are actually perpetually right, as with Susie and all the other trans nutters.
 
Can anyone explain the significance of Paragraph 70 to me? Because Zach Antolek is trying to spin it as a small victory.
Ver archivo adjunto 5197197
They conveniently cut it off before the end of the paragraph, which is itself one small part of the 'analysis & conclusions' section. I think they are trying to say that they aren't accusing Mermaids of lying about receiving extensive criticism from LGBA, but it's irrelevant to the case being submitted because there is no regulation preventing a charity from openly criticising the way other charities operate. In addition, if their criticism has not become more 'harmful' since being made a charity, then making them a charity did not cause material harm to Mermaids, which was the point being argued.

At least that's my interpretation, but I'm no solicitor.
1688737249906.png
 
Última edición:
It is well-founded that Zach edits quotes to change their meaning.

Twitter troons are desperately trying to find a win where they have badly lost. The case wasn't about whether the lesbians were always polite, it was about whether Mermaids had any damn business poking their noses into another charity's registration - and they didn't. They tried and failed to claim the Alliance was speaking against them as a consequence of being a charity, and therefore Mermaids had a right to demand the charitable status to be revoked. In the end, Mermaids was unaffected by the registration, partly because the Alliance opposed them, registered or not.

Hilarious to see a man as obnoxious and abusive as Zach getting sniffy about "civilized debate".
 
Can anyone explain the significance of Paragraph 70 to me?
In addition, if their criticism has not become more 'harmful' since being made a charity, then making them a charity did not cause material harm to Mermaids, which was the point being argued.
Basically this. LGBA was set up in 2019, and was given charity status in 2021. During the registration process, the Charity Commission told LGBA to rein in their more salty social media posts, which they did.
The Tribunal dijo:
49. It is also important to distinguish between activities by the pre-existing organisation that occurred before the organisation was registered and those after the registration Decision. That is not to say that the former is not capable of illuminating the rationale or motivation for later activities, and whether Mermaids “may be affected”, but any alteration in the nature or volume of activities of the newly registered charity as compared to the non-registered organisation may itself demonstrate the effect or potential effect of the Commission’s Decision. Indeed, the Commission itself can be seen as concerned that LGBA should alter its social media activities following registration, stating within the Decision itself:
The Charity Commission dijo:
37. During the course of the registration case, the Commission noted some evidence of social media activity (information that was posted or re-posted on social media) by LGB Alliance and considered that some of the language used may be regarded as inflammatory and offensive. In addition, it was not immediately obvious how some of these postings furthered any of the LGB Alliance’s purposes. The Commission was concerned that, although it promoted the rights of some groups, the activity appeared to involve, at times, demeaning or denigrating the rights (recognised by law) of others.


38. The Commission raised these concerns with LGB Alliance and in response LGB Alliance reviewed and revised its social media policy. LGB Alliance stated that it intended to adopt a less defensive and confrontational approach to social media engagement. The revised social media policy places a focus on the language and tone of the social media posts and states that staff must never: unlawfully discriminate; make offensive, abusive or threatening comments or harass or bully other people in any way or breach any laws or ethical standards.

Michael Foran pointed out that (if Mermaids had standing) the tribunal would have had to have remade the decision on whether to register LGBA as a charity — and not just decide whether the Charity Commission's decision to register was legal (as in a judicial review). Why Mermaids lost | Michael Foran | The Critic Magazine (archive)

In that case, with the judges re-assessing the whole decision, LGBA's pre-registration conduct on social media may have been given more weight (and so this is where para 70 comes in). But, of course, Mermaids was not affected in any of its legal rights, so there's no cause to re-evaluate the Charity Commission's decision to register.

Edit:
They tried and failed to claim the Alliance was speaking against them as a consequence of being a charity, and therefore Mermaids had a right to demand the charitable status to be revoked. In the end, Mermaids was unaffected by the registration, partly because the Alliance opposed them, registered or not.
The judges made exactly this point (my emphasis):
The Tribunal dijo:
71. LGBA’s activities prior to the application for registration, throughout the period awaiting registration and post registration, taken together with the evidence we heard, demonstrate clearly to us that LGBA is determined to present its view to the public and to challenge those it disagrees with, regardless of registration. Mermaids has therefore failed to establish the causal relationship claimed between the registration Decision and the effect of LGBA’s activities on Mermaids.
 
Apologies for double-posting.

This clip of Helen Joyce talking to Peter Boghossian is doing the rounds, where Helen talks about how parents who have transed their children will never give up on transgenderism, because they would have to face the reality of what they've done to their children.

Starts about 01:07:25 in the full video.
Helen Joyce dijo:
There's a lot of people who can't move on on this and because that's the people who have transitioned their own children.

So those people are going to be like, you know, the Japanese soldiers who were on Pacific islands and didn't know the war was over. They've got to fight forever.

That this is why this is another reason why this is the worst, worst, worst social contagion that we'll ever have experienced. A lot of people have done the worst thing that you could do, which is to harm their children irrevocably, because of it.

Those people will have to believe that they did the right thing for the rest of their lives, for their own sanity and for their own self respect, so they'll still be fighting. And each one of those people destroys entire organisations and entire friendship groups.

Like, I've lost count of the number of times that somebody has said to me of a specific organisation that has got turned upside down on this: 'Oh, the Deputy Director has a trans child', or, oh, 'the journalist on that paper who does special investigations has a trans child', or whatever, the entire organisation gets paralysed by that one person.

And it may not even be widely known at the organisation that they've a trans child, but it will come out, like people will have sort of said it quietly, and now you can't talk truth in front of that person. And you know you can't.

Because what you're saying is you, as a parent, have done a truly, like, human rights abuse level of awful thing to your child that cannot be fixed.

There are specific individuals who are really actively against women's rights here and it's not known why they are, but I happen to know through the back channels that it's because they've trans their child. And so those people will do anything for the entire rest of their lives to destroy me and people like me, because people like me are a standing reproach to them. I don't want to be I'm not talking directly to them, I don't spend my time bitching about them.

But the fact is that just simply by saying, we will never accept natal males in women's spaces, well, it's their son that we're talking about. And they've told their son that he can get himself sterilised and destroy his his sexual function and women will accept him as a woman. And if we don't, there's no way back for them and their child. They've sold their child a bill of goods that they can't deliver on and I'm the one who has to be bullied to try to force me to deliver on it.

So those people are going to be the people who will keep this bloody movement going, I'm sorry to say, because they've everything to lose and it's a fight to the death as far as they're concerned.

Another thing doing the rounds again is the Tortoise podcast about GenderGP. I mentioned it a few pages ago, but here's the audio and an AI-generated transcript. Webberley comes across as a narcissist and a quack.

Gender GP: inside the world of private trans healthcare - Tortoise (archive)

[00:00:00]
Basia Cummings: Hello, it’s Basia here and you’re listening to The Slow newscast from Tortoise. Last year, we set out to tell the story of an institution that found itself at the centre of a fierce battle over trans healthcare and rights. The journalist, Polly Curtis spent months investigating what had really gone on at England’s only NHS clinic, which treats children and young people who are questioning their gender.

[00:00:24]
Helen Webberley: I would start from an acceptance that there are individuals who, for the course of their life, will continue to identify in a particular way.

Polly Curtis: But are there also individuals who won’t?

Helen Webberley: Absolutely.

Polly Curtis: How do you know the difference between the two if you’re making a decision to refer for puberty blockers?

[00:00:52]
Basia Cummings: In the tavistock. Inside the Gender clinic, polly set out to answer a question is it right to give puberty blockers and hormones to trans children? But over the course of the six part series, a more complex picture emerged.

[00:01:07]
Polly Curtis: And maybe the whole story of what went wrong at The Tavistock tells us something bigger about the ideological age we’re living in, where these battles are dividing generations and breaking families, and how these arguments at the extremes don’t allow for the truth, which is nearly always in that grey area.

[00:01:32]
Basia Cummings: The series was set against the news that the service was closing.

[00:01:36]
Woman: I was in the kitchen looking at my phone, talking to other parents, and we were happy. We’re very happy.

[00:01:48]
Man: I saw the breaking news notification and I just thought it felt like a punch in the garden.

[00:01:55]
Basia Cummings: News that was welcomed by the Tavistock’s critics, but a source of despair to those who saw it as a lifeline because it was the only route for young people to seek treatment for gender dysphoria on the NHS. Since that announcement, the deadline for a new service to open this spring has come and gone. So there’s a kind of limbo. But there’s one aspect to this story that we didn’t cover in that series, and that’s the role of private medicine. It’s been there all along, but now, in this limbo, it’s an even more important story to tell. This week on The Slow newscast, polly investigates the world of private providers treating young trans people. Over to Polly.

[00:02:49]
Polly Curtis: The story of The Tavistock’s Gender Identity Development Service is the story of an institution operating in an evidence vacuum and engulfed by a culture war. First, the clinic stood accused by trans rights activists of being too slow to treat young people with puberty blockers and hormones. Then it stood accused by some of its own clinicians of rushing untested treatments. The truth is that both those things happened depending on the Tavistock clinician. You saw some prevented treatment, people felt they needed some, fast tracked it too quickly. All were tasked with an impossible judgement. How do you clinically assess whether a young person will still be trans in years to come, or whether it’s just a staging post in their development? There was no rulebook and without any decent evidence, some of those judgments became a leap of faith. Internal tensions at the clinic spilled out into the open and landed the Tavistock’s centre stage of the furious row over trans healthcare. But there’s another complicating factor to the story of the Tavistock. It’s always been there on the margin and it keeps on coming up.

[00:04:03]
A TIF: I tried going privately for my testosterone.

[00:04:05]
Patient: It was taking so long. I’d looked at going private with Gender GP.

[00:04:09]
Polly Curtis: Often it’s just a throwaway line in the conversation.

[00:04:13]
A TIF: And what happens in Practise is people go to a private route, it doesn’t stop something from happening, it just stops it from happening in a way that it’s actually financially accessible.

[00:04:23]
Polly Curtis: As the waiting list for the Tavistock grew, more teenagers paid to go private. And when a judicial review of the Tavistock service halted treatment for a time, it became the only route. Staff at the Tavistock could only watch on.

[00:04:37]
GIDS clinician: Their body was starting to masculinise and the parents decided to seek treatment privately. So they sought treatment through a private provider.

[00:04:46]
Polly Curtis: Because you hadn’t referred them?

[00:04:49]
GIDS clinician: We weren’t in a position to refer because of the judicial ruling. I knew the family young person for many years and we had done the sort of extended assessment. It had been extended a bit longer because actually, I didn’t think that the child was sufficiently mature enough, I think, to make a decision.

[00:05:13]
Polly Curtis: Time is one of the big tensions in this story. For teenagers whose bodies are developing according to their birth sex, it can become a race against the clock to access treatment. Currently, the Tavistock is taking no new patients and the first new services aren’t due to be up and running until the autumn. Patients can be added to the waiting list, but they’re likely to have to wait years before they’re seen. If you’re looking for specialist help right now, there is nothing on the NHS and the private sector is stepping in.

[00:05:49]
Helen Webberley: I’m not that savvy on the whole business side. But I said that …

Polly Curtis: You described yourself as a businesswoman.

Helen Webberley: I know, but I’m not. I’m a doctor. At the end of the day, I’m a doctor. Peddling in business.

[00:05:59]
Polly Curtis: In the limbo between NHS services, I wanted to investigate where people are going for help now and how the Peddling private sector is stepping in. Most of all, I wanted to know whether these services are safe, because when the NHS falls away, who can you trust? One parent describes it to me as the Wild West.

[00:06:29]
Helen Webberley: Hello. One more.

[00:06:38]
Polly Curtis: Helen Webberley is 56 and lives in central Cardiff with her husband and one of their five adult children. Do you want us to leave our shoes here?

[00:06:46]
Helen Webberley: No, it’s fine.

[00:06:48]
Polly Curtis: She’s welcoming, warm and relaxed.

[00:06:51]
Helen Webberley: My name is Dr Helen Weberley. I’m a GP and a gender specialist. I live in Wales and I’m the very proud founder of Gender GP.

[00:07:00]
Polly Curtis: I expect her to be more wary of journalists, given some of the highly public and contentious battles she’s fought over the course of our four hour long conversation. She is open and passionate rather than guarded in her telling of her story.

[00:07:14]
Helen Webberley: I love being the kind of person that will sit on the edge of the bed and hold that person’s hand and say, I understand this is really scary for you and I’m going to do all I can to help you and your family.

[00:07:26]
Polly Curtis: Helen Webberley trained as a GP, but was always more interested in how people felt than in complex diagnoses. She says she always has to look up the right prescription, but she can read her patients like a book. She had no specialism in gender. It all started for her in 2015, when a patient walked into her surgery in Blanau in the valleys of South Wales.

[00:07:48]
Helen Webberley: One day a person came in who looked, to all intents and purposes, like a man and we chatted and then they came back another week later and I noticed, well, this time I noticed that they were wearing a bra and they had pink nail varnish on. And we chatted and then next time there was a few more female attributes that they presented with. And I was like, So you want to take female hormones, like to grow breasts and things like that? And she was like, yes, that’s what I want to do. And I was like, wow, that’s just wow, that’s just goodness. I couldn’t kind of get my head around it, that that would be something that I could possibly do or that somebody or that would be right, really.

[00:08:35]
Polly Curtis: She did the research and learnt about the adult service at the Tavistock. But looking at her patient, who’d never left Wales before, she thought they couldn’t manage the journey to London, let alone repeat visits.

[00:08:48]
Helen Webberley: So I said, let’s I’ll do it. I said, I’ll do it’s fine. I just knew it was the right thing to do, so I did it and it really helped her.

[00:08:57]
Polly Curtis: As I talk to Helen Webberley, I’m struck by how she’s so sure her instincts are correct that she just knew it was the right thing to do. Even early on, when she knew so little about treating gender dysphoria. She’s a million times more certain than the director of the Tavistock Clinic, Polly Carmichael, who told me much of their job was about managing uncertainty.

[00:09:24]
Polly Carmichael: The service was and continues to be about, which is, a sort of genuine curiosity and not having all the answers and managing the uncertainty about the outcomes for these young people.

Polly Curtis: Helen Webberley prescribed cross sex hormones for her patient. Did it feel like an important moment in your life?

[00:09:44]
Helen Webberley: Definitely. I’ll never forget her, never forget that gratitude. I never forget the way something so small that I could give this person would mean so much and make such a difference.

[00:09:55]
Polly Curtis: Helen Webberley strikes me as a restless soul she’s always looking for something new to get her teeth into. She also says that she has an entrepreneurial streak.

[00:10:05]
Helen Webberley: And over the years, I’ve tried all kinds of things. I bought some commercial properties and there was a cafe in one of them and I’m like, okay, I’m going to run a cafe. And then there was one time I was like, okay, I’m going to buy some brown furniture on ebay and I’m going to do it up and sell it for loads of money. I bought a campervan and I made a little website called Hire Me. If I look back, I was waiting for some kind of idea that would come through.

[00:10:30]
Polly Curtis: Helen Webberley tells me she loves new technology and in 2015, she’s drawn to Telemedicine and the burgeoning world of private online Practise. So she builds a website to share her medical knowledge. She adds diagrams and information to help people better understand a whole range of conditions. There’s a page about HRT, and then she adds a page for transgender healthcare, based on what she’s learned from that first patient.

[00:10:56]
Helen Webberley: The way it feels like in my head is that I made it on that day, and then when I woke up the next day, it’s like, oh, my goodness. It’s almost like it’s like a massive snowball has just rolled down the hill. And now it’s huge.

[00:11:06]
Polly Curtis: By luck or algorithmic design, that page starts to rank very highly on Google search for trans healthcare, and it’s the first thing that came up. It’s getting thousands of hits.

[00:11:17]
Helen Webberley: People were emailing me and reading the stuff that I was writing, and so I took this page off there and I made a new website specifically for transgender information and care and called it Gender GP.

[00:11:31]
Polly Curtis: And that’s how Gender GP is born. A trick of an algorithm, just at the point where there’s a huge surge in the numbers of young people seeking help for gender dysphoria. As the emails pour in, dr Webery starts consulting privately with them and prescribing the hormones they say they need. There were no alarm bells going off in your head thinking, Is this right?

[00:11:56]
Helen Webberley: It’s not at all. It just felt fine. It felt, I’m a doctor, I have a medical degree, I have a licence to practise medicine.

[00:12:04]
Polly Curtis: Was it exciting?

[00:12:06]
Helen Webberley: Tremendously exciting, to have people say, oh, my God, you’re the first person that’s ever understood me, the first person who’s ever listened to me. I’ve been to see so many people, and you’re the first person that’s ever made me cry with happiness rather than cry with sadness. And all my patients were telling me that. And what I was noticing with these transgender patients is it was just immensely rewarding. The fear at the beginning of the consultation and then the joy at the end of the consultation when they’re just, like, crying with relief. I mean, just amazing job satisfaction.

[00:12:41]
Polly Curtis: It sounds like an almost intoxicating experience for Dr Webberley. She was hooked. Initially, she only sees adult patients, but that changes in late 2016. Can you remember the first child who came to you?

[00:12:56]
Helen Webberley: 100%. It’s like these marker moments, isn’t it? And I was in a taxi on my way to theatre with my sister. We were going to see an amateur dramatics production in Manchester at Theatre. And I checked my phone for my emails and there was an email from a 16 year old and he said, Hello, Dr. Webberley. I’m transgender. And I know that you help people and I know that I’m only 16 and I wonder whether you’d help me. And I was like, oh, my God, now what am I going to do? And I showed my sister and I said, oh, and she’s a schoolteacher, actually. And she was like, oh, Helen, you can’t. She said, that’s just taking it too far. These are children, these are young people. That’s just too much. You can’t do that.

[00:13:45]
Polly Curtis: But Helen Webberley is not one to shy away from a challenge. In fact, she runs towards it.

[00:13:51]
Helen Webberley: So I saw him in my clinic and I was like, yeah, you are a boy. You got a few girly attributes going on there, but you’re a boy in and out.

[00:14:02]
Polly Curtis: She prescribes the testosterone he and his mother are asking for .

[00:14:07]
Helen Webberley: These trans masculine people who’ve got a female oestrogen hormone profile, and you give them the testosterone profile that their body is craving for and it just unleashes life like you’ve never seen it.

[00:14:20]
Polly Curtis: That idea that someone’s body might crave the hormones of the opposite gender is highly contested.

[00:14:27]
Helen Webberley: Their emotions start matching their identity and then when they get their first crack in their voice or their first hair on their chin, it’s just like Christmas all at once. It’s truly phenomenal to watch it develop. As a doctor.

[00:14:44]
Polly Curtis: When I was talking to the staff at the Tavistock, they told me that they start by accepting that what a young person is feeling is real, rather than questioning it. That’s what they mean by an affirmative approach. It seemed to me that, at least in theory, this was a tactic designed to build trust with a young person before taking them on a more exploratory therapeutic journey, which might last several years before the start of any medication. Of course, the reality at the Tavistock was that things varied enormously. Some clinicians accepted their patients gender identity at face value. Others were more probing. At Gender GP It’s clearly very different. She says she never doubts what her patients say to her. She won’t question their experience.

[00:15:35]
Helen Webberley: Counsellors, psychologists, therapists are all vital parts of this, but I saw that they were being used to do the assessment, the assessment of whether you are transgender or not. And I’m like that’s such a waste. Why don’t we believe that they are transgender and then use those psychologists and counsellors and therapists to help somebody in their journey? And if in that helping somebody in their journey, it actually becomes clear that they’re not transgender at all. We haven’t lost anything, we haven’t cut anything off or changed anything. We’re just working through it and actually that’s never happened.

[00:16:14]
Polly Curtis: Helen tells me this a few times, that nobody who’s been treated by Gender GP has ever changed their mind, that circumstances change but identity doesn’t.

[00:16:25]
Helen Webberley: We’ve never had anybody who hasn’t been transgender. There have been people who have said, I can’t do this, I’m going to stop. Never had someone who’s changed their mind. You know that horrific thing that people are so scared about? I’ve just not seen it.

[00:16:40]
Polly Curtis: So when you talked about that first teenager who came to you and when you first met them, your response was, you’re a boy. Was that an assessment?

[00:16:53]
Helen Webberley: It’s a belief, it’s a confirmation.

[00:16:56]
Polly Curtis: She’s telling me that at Gender GP, diagnoses are made on belief rather than clinical judgement. The first teenager Dr Webberley saw was 16, but the child who changed everything for her was 12 and came to be known as Patient A. Patient A was referred to Helen Webberley by Susie Green, who at the time was chief executive at the trans young people charity Mermaids. Today, Susie Green works in fundraising for Gender GP, raising money for people who can’t afford treatment. Patient A was born biologically a girl and had a twin who was also a girl. But for as long as everyone could recall, patient A had presented as a boy. Patient A was already being treated by the Tavistock and had been prescribed puberty blockers. But under their rules, they would have to wait until they were 16 to get the cross sex hormones to start their puberty as a boy.

[00:17:56]
Helen Webberley: And this 12-year-old sitting in front of me was the most boy thing I’ve ever seen, if you like. And he was saying, when can I have my puberty? When can I have my puberty? And GIDS was saying, when you’re 16, not to be 16, definitely not to be 16. And it’s like, I can’t wait that long. So that’s why they came to see me. As soon as I saw him, I’m like, I’ve never seen it more obvious, kid, that needs to start puberty now.

[00:18:18]
Polly Curtis: The most boy thing I’ve ever seen. Is that enough? It feels flimsy to me to diagnose someone in this way. It also assumes rigid gender stereotypes in which girls are girly and boys are boyish.

[00:18:34]
Helen Webberley: Otherwise, when? 13? 14? 15? 16? What’s going to happen? This kid would not have made it. He definitely wouldn’t have made it. You know, Mum was saying that he would she didn’t think that he would make it properly, like suicide make it if we didn’t do something. And I believed her. And so we treated, so I treated, I treated him. I knew it was a brave thing to do, I knew it was an unusual thing to do, but it felt absolutely the right thing to do, but it was the one that started all the trouble.

[00:19:03]
Polly Curtis: The trouble came thick and fast. In 2017, Helen Webberley was prevented from practising medicine by the General Medical Counsel, the GMC, over her treatment of Patient A and two others. In 2018, she got a criminal conviction for operating a medical practise without a licence. So Gender GP moved its registered office to Hong Kong to escape UK regulations. It’s now registered in Singapore. In 2022, her husband, Dr Michael Webberley, was struck off by the GMC for what they described as a catalogue of failings over how he treated young people and prescribed puberty blockers and cross sex hormones. The GMC also found he’d failed to adequately assess patients. Then, in March this year, the High Court rejected a previous ruling against Helen Webberley, which had found that she had failed to give proper advice to a patient about the impact of hormonal treatment on their future fertility. In that judgement, Mr Justice Kay was clear that his decision was in no way a verdict or endorsement of the work of Gender GP.

[00:20:20]
Judge Kay (voiced by an actor): The sole focus of this appeal has been the quality of the Appalache clinical practise in relation to one patient, patient C. This appeal does not raise any wider issues about the wisdom or otherwise of administering puberty blockers to the younger age group who wish to undergo interventions for gender reassignment with full parental agreement.

[00:20:44]
Polly Curtis: Throughout the GMC battle, Gender GP has been operating without Helen Webberley, using remote therapists and doctors to carry out consultations. But now she is free to practise again.

[00:21:03]
James Barclay: I think what I’ve seen is more and more young people who’ve been accessing treatment through the through the private sector.

[00:21:11]
Polly Curtis: The arrival of Gender GP back in 2015 was felt inside the Tavistock.

[00:21:17]
James Barclay: I’m just trying to think when it first became more aware, I mean, it began, it seemed to begin around sort of 2015, 2016 sort of time.

[00:21:26]
Polly Curtis: That was when Gender GP launched.

[00:21:28]
B: Was that apparent to you that that was happening?

[00:21:31]
James Barclay: Yeah.

[00:21:33]
B: Conversation internally about that.

[00:21:35]
James Barclay: I think the conversation around that was, is this provider working within the agreed guidance? And if they were working within that guidance, I suppose that sort of led us to think about, well, what, what were they doing, what was, what were the assessments?

[00:21:51]
Polly Curtis: James Barclay is a senior clinician at the Tavistock Clinic. He’s always struck me as a measured and honest voice in this story, so measured that he’s careful about how he responds to questions about the more troubling elements of private trans healthcare.

[00:22:07]
James Barclay: We have our model of work. It can kind of cut across that, I suppose, because I think we like to sort of take quite an exploratory assessment and evaluate approach, quite a steady approach, and private lives have a different model, really. And I think there’s a bit of a worry about is sufficient time given to that sort of approach, to really exploring things there’s. So much ground to cover, I would say, in the work. I suppose I’d ask, how does another clinician reach an informed view, a safe view that this is an appropriate step to take?

[00:22:39]
Polly Curtis: As the waiting list for the Tavistock grew, james Barkley was seeing something new patients arriving, already on medication, obtained privately. Suddenly, the Tavistock wasn’t the only route to puberty blockers in town, which is.

[00:22:54]
James Barclay: Quite a tricky situation to navigate because the family are coming with good intentions. They’re trying to do their very best. Their young person what they’ll say they’ve exhausted all the attempts and trying to support the young person, keep the young person going. It’s usually a sign of how desperate, I think, that people feel.

[00:23:14]
Polly Curtis: Gender GP can’t or won’t tell me how many patients they’ve treated since they started. They confirmed there are currently nearly 10,000 patients on their list. More than a thousand of those are below the age of 18. Their website promises a multidisciplinary team approach. There are information gathering sessions, follow up discovery sessions and optional counselling, all of which is done online. Doctors working for Gender GP prescribe the medication privately, but they do sometimes work with NHS GPs to advise on drug regimes. Pharmacists can decline to honour private prescriptions, but Gender GP says it has a network of providers willing to work with them.

Polly Curtis: Getting hold of the medication isn’t the only challenge for private patients. Some need to find someone to give them injections or they need to learn to do it themselves. And all need regular blood tests to monitor for side effects. Then there are the costs. I’ve got their price list up on my screen. So it starts with a £195 setup fee. There’s a monthly subscription of £30 pounds and then sessions range from £30 to £65 an hour. Remember, Gender GP has around 10,000 patients on its books right now, so if they were all to pay that monthly subscription, that’s a monthly revenue of £300,000. Then there are the prescription costs. Those range from £28 for three month supply of Oestrogel to £40 pounds for one month supply of Testogel. Puberty blocking injections come at about £270 pounds for a three month supply. Helen Webberley says she’s never had a complaint from anyone she’s treated. I’ve spoken with parents who have accessed drugs privately and watched as their children’s bodies changed over months and they felt relieved and happy for them. But others are worried about what’s happening.

[00:25:24]
Sarah: Mother’s Day last year, she just turned 17 and we were at a cafe having breakfast together with me and my son.

[00:25:32]
Polly Curtis: Sarah’s child is one of those who has used Gender GP. Sarah is not her real name and she’s voiced by an actor.

[00:25:40]
Sarah: Then she hit me with this on trans thing and my preferred name is Jack, but you don’t have to call me that until you feel ready. And my pronouns are he and I just kind of I didn’t know what to think, really. I just kind of looked at her and I said, well, okay, thank you for telling me. And I can see that you’re quite nervous about telling me, that’s okay. But you need to give me time and I’ve got questions that I’d like to ask you about later.

[00:26:13]
Polly Curtis: Sarah’s instinct at that breakfast was to stay calm, process the news and work out how she felt, but more importantly, how her child really felt. It turns out that she didn’t have the luxury of that time.

[00:26:27]
Sarah: What I didn’t know is that about three days after that, she went with her dad onto Gender GP online and she would have known about that appointment. She didn’t tell me anything about it and her dad didn’t tell me anything and that would have been planned for weeks.

[00:26:43]
Polly Curtis: Sarah had been separated from her children’s father for a while by that point, and their estrangement made it even more complicated.

[00:26:51]
Sarah: So they hadn’t done blood tests, they hadn’t done anything, except for the fact that she just got onto this Gender GP appointment on teams and spoke to a counsellor who, after an hour, told her she had gender dysphoria and that she could have testosterone.

[00:27:08]
Polly Curtis: That private prescription for testosterone followed, and although Sarah only found out about it later, by April last year, her child has started regularly applying the hormone gel. Sarah doesn’t support this treatment route and it’s led to a breakdown in her relationship with her child.

[00:27:25]
Sarah: I feel really bereft. Every morning I think about her and I wonder what she’s doing with her day and where she is and what she’s going to be doing and what colour her hair is, because she was forever changing it to different colours and how she’s feeling mentally. And then that turns into frustration because I can’t do anything to help her. And unquestionably, she’s suffering. And that frustration then rolls into anger towards Gender GP for what they’ve done to her and how they’ve manipulated. I can’t even go there. I’m just completely enraged. They’ve been instrumental in me losing my child, losing my young woman, and physically and mentally, they’ve damaged her.

[00:28:16]
Polly Curtis: It’s clear that Helen Webberley is proud of the work of Gender GP, but to me, the service she describes is hormones on demand, not by any form of assessment, when the reality is that for some young people, they will develop differently in the future. To not have any system to help them think through how they are feeling, that feels wrong.

[00:28:39]
Helen Webberley: People always ask me, well, how many do you turn away? And I’m like it’s not like that. They can’t get to you quick enough. They’ve done all their soul searching, they’ve done all the questioning, they’ve done all their fighting at home. They’re so ready for the next step.

[00:28:55]
Polly Curtis: Even if they’re teenagers, when so much can change?

[00:28:58]
Helen Webberley: They don’t change, though. The only thing that changes is their desperation and desire to be confirmed and affirmed in their identity that’s the thing that changes their identity doesn’t change.

[00:29:10]
Polly Curtis: Helen Webberley is so sure that the young people she sees have gender dysphoria, a diagnosis that means extreme unease because the gender they identify with doesn’t match their biological sex. But everything I’ve learned tells me it’s such a hard call to make. How can you be so confident, particularly when the treatment involves hormones which cause irreversible changes to growing bodies? For Helen Weberly, whatever the arguments, it’s a risk worth taking.

[00:29:40]
Helen Webberley: Maybe for some of them it was wrong. Maybe they went back and lived in their birth gender, maybe they weren’t transgender at all. But what we mustn’t do is make every single transgender person in the world suffer, just so that we cis people are not protecting ourselves thinking, oh, my goodness, what if we made a mistake.

[00:29:58]
Polly Curtis: On one of them? In her mind, Helen Webberley is not providing an alternative to the NHS. Gender GP is the service for this patient group.

[00:30:09]
Helen Webberley: I mean, we’ve been doing their work, basically. Gender GP has been doing the work of that the NHS Tavistock Clinic should have done. And actually…

[00:30:16]
Polly Curtis: It’s also been treating the patients that GIDS felt shouldn’t be treated.

[00:30:21]
Helen Webberley: Yes, well, they have been treating the patients that GIDS should have treated and they’ve been treating the people that GIDS, that are waiting for GIDS to decide on whether they will treat or not.

[00:30:33]
Polly Curtis: She insists that her service is safe, despite the lack of evidence of the long term impact of the drugs, or whether young people who medically transition might come to regret it later.

[00:30:45]
Helen Webberley: The narrative is that there’s no research, there’s plenty of research out there to show that gender affirming care in young people is the right thing to do, that social transition gives young children a better opportunity at school. This research is all there.

[00:31:01]
Polly Curtis: But there are no long term studies to follow people up. It’s still too new. So I think what I’m struggling with is how you can be so sure that this is right for the vast majority of your patients. You can hear my frustration here, but this debate about evidence is frustrating and misleading too. When Helen Webberley says there’s plenty of research, there are small scale studies, but none that look at the long term impact on young people simply because they haven’t been around long enough to do that research.

[00:31:33]
Helen Webberley: What we do know is if you say no, that child gets worse, it gets more distressed and more distressed and more distressed. And then when you see them at 13, the knives have started coming out and the cuts have started coming out and they stopped going to school and they haven’t got any friends anymore because they’ve left their social groups and the family is being torn apart by this distressed child. Or you look at the ones that you say, yes, I’m going to believe you and I’m going. To give you an injection which stops your puberty to give us some time. And those kids carry on going to school and they do well and the family unit survives and the knives don’t come out. That’s what we know.

[00:32:09]
Polly Curtis: I can’t square what Helen Webberley is saying with everything else I’ve learned about this story, which is that not all children who struggle with their gender identity are trans, but some are. I don’t dispute that that is true for some young people, but I’ve met young people who it’s not true for that things happened in other ways and they did desist or they did decide that there were actually other bigger issues in their life that needed tackling first to let them understand themselves. And I can’t understand why you’re only seeing those patients who do persist, and I can’t understand why you’re only seeing one type of young person.

[00:32:53]
Helen Webberley: I don’t know why I’m not seeing the others.

[00:32:55]
Polly Curtis: How do you know you’re getting it right?

[00:33:00]
Helen Webberley: Because the stories that the history, as you call it in medicine, that we take at that information gathering stage and then the follow ups, they are of people who have successfully gone through this process.

[00:33:17]
Polly Curtis: The best answer I got from the Tavistock, which remember is now very much discredited, was that what they were looking for is that young people are consistent and persistent over a long period of time about their gender identity.

Everything I’m learning about Gender GP is that there is no time to even assess this because the young people move to medical treatment so rapidly.

In July 2022, the then Health Secretary, Sajid Javid, said that the Tavistock’s Gender Identity Development Service would shut by spring this year (2023), but it hasn’t proved easy to do. A new national service is on its way, but it’s been a struggle to find hospitals willing to take on the NHS’s most controversial clinic and the staff to work there. The only people with any real clinical experience are those currently working at the Tavistock Centre. Many see them as tainted. The staff don’t exist at the moment, was what one person involved in the new services told me.

It’s taken months to even settle on a new service specification. Those are the rules the new service will operate under. That specification was finally published this month. It’s likely to lead to a reduction in the number of young people who are prescribed puberty blockers, because to do so, they will have to be part of a new clinical trial, which is expected to have a narrower definition of who should qualify for it.

The first new clinic, the Southern Hub, led by Great Ormond Street Hospital in London, is expected to take its first patients in the autumn. The Northern Hub, led by Alderhay Children’s Hospital in Liverpool, will launch next year. Clinical leads with paediatric rather than gender backgrounds have been appointed.

No new young people are being seen on the NHS at the moment, but 250 are being added to the waiting list every month. The waiting list currently stands at around 8000. People involved in setting up the new service say it could take five years to clear the backlog. Their modelling suggests that they’d need 600 staff to service the patient group properly. That’s the size of a small hospital. The hubs are expected to start with around 50 each. The only way to make it manageable those close to the new services have told me, is to manage the waiting list differently and to make sure that young people with other diagnoses are getting treatment for those first, be it mental health problems or autism, which are common among the patient group.

But all of that means young people are not and will not get the treatment they want, when they want it. Helen Webberley tells me Gender GP is scaling its operation for even more referrals. But you don’t even need an online private GP like Helen Webberley’s service. You can also buy testosterone online without any medical advice at all. For Faith — and again, that’s not her real name, we’re using an actor to voice her words — her child’s transition took the family by surprise.

[00:36:48]
Faith: Really. The whole thing came out of the blue. When she was 13, her behaviour changed very dramatically and at first we didn’t know why. She started to cut her hair and then she asked for school trousers and all of that was okay, that’s fine. We didn’t have and don’t have any issue with her being gender nonconforming at all. What was actually happening was that she was getting her friends to call her Matthew behind our backs.

[00:37:22]
Polly Curtis: Faith only learnt of this when a teacher rang to ask her about the name change. But it was already having a big impact on her child’s life at school.

[00:37:30]
Faith: All the friends that had previously been not very interested in her and even some who had been a bit mean girl, they were all of a sudden all over her. Everybody was like, oh, Matthew, Matthew, Matthew. Everybody wanted a piece of her. And I do remember seeing that and thinking, oh my God, they’re loving it, these girls that I really couldn’t give her the time of day before they’re all over her.

[00:37:58]
Polly Curtis: One day, Faith is in her child’s bedroom and finds a small bottle marked up with a label saying Beard Oil.

[00:38:04]
Faith: And I thought, well, that is strange. What would you want beard oil for? And then I did think, oh my God, I hope it’s not testosterone.

[00:38:16]
Polly Curtis: She sent a photo to her online support group.

[00:38:19]
Faith: They said, don’t believe it. Don’t believe what the label says because apparently there are things called stealth labels.

[00:38:28]
Polly Curtis: Apparently, if you buy testosterone online, there’s a drop down menu that gives you a choice of these fake stealth labels, so if anyone finds it, it won’t arouse suspicion. Then Faith found the needles.

[00:38:41]
Faith: When you find syringes, it just makes your blood run cold, because, you know, the idea that they’re going to be injecting something, it crosses a certain barrier, a threshold, really, of what you would be prepared to do to your body. Her father, she’s very close to her father, and her father, he snapped the needles in front of her with his handshaking. And we begged her to never do anything like this and that she still felt like this when she was older, that if she must do it, if this, then she should do it through the NHS, but never, never on the black market like this. And she said she wouldn’t. But then a few months later, we found more.

[00:39:26]
Polly Curtis: Faith’s child had been nowhere near the NHS or the private sector. They hadn’t even been online themselves. The testosterone was from a drug dealer.

[00:39:36]
Faith: What happens is this is one of the normal kind of drugs that you might expect. So ketamine, weed and all the rest. There’s also a huge range of prescription drugs as well. And of course, you can get other prescription drugs. I don’t know how they get them, but they do. Then testosterone and Oestrogen are just part of that. So it’s so easy. So easy.

[00:39:56]
Polly Curtis: James Barclay recalls similar cases in his clinic. It poses huge ethical dilemmas for the NHS.

[00:40:05]
James Barclay: I think with the online things, I think it’s just not safe for me anyway. It’s not really up to negotiation, actually. This is not safe. You need to stop. What steps do we need to do to do that?

[00:40:16]
Polly Curtis: Do you ever, at that point, say, okay, we’ll do the referral now, so that at least you’re transferred into an NHS trusted service and having all the monitoring and the wraparound healthcare alongside it.

[00:40:31]
James Barclay: The endocrinology team, and absolutely would agree with them, would not accept a referral like that without an assessment. So this is the sort of dilemma you’re working with, where you want to bring them into a much safer context, but their referral wouldn’t be accepted without proper sort of psychosocial assessment by good clinicians. And I suppose there’s a bit of, as an aside, really, is this sort of a queue jumping as well. Because word will get out very quickly.

[00:41:00]
Polly Curtis: As well in the end. Faith thinks her child was on testosterone for three or four months, but now says there are signs that her gender dysphoria might not persist after all, her child stopped wearing a breast binder. And then last summer…

[00:41:17]
Faith: The scene was very calm and it was really funny and beautiful and it was just me and her. And this is after years of her being very prickly, me reaching out to her all the time and being rejected. Sorry.

[00:41:33]
Polly Curtis: That’s okay.

[00:41:35]
Faith: So just the fact she had agreed to come paddleboarding with me was very special. And when we were far out and all of a sudden she said to me, do you mind if I take my top off? And I said, of course not. And then she took her top off, enjoying this sun on her skin. Sorry. And I was so pleased for her. Sorry. I thought, My God, she’s comfortable enough with her breasts that she can enjoy the sun on them. You know, that’s huge. It’s just huge. And it was so lovely to behold. She was young and perfect and the most importantly, at ease with herself, happy with her natural body. And that was beautiful thing.

[00:42:35]
Polly Curtis: With the new NHS service in limbo, the Tavistock’s reputation in tatters and the verdict still very much out on its replacement, the private sector will inevitably step in to fill that void even more. I keep thinking about what it must be like to be a parent faced with a child in distress and questioning their gender and trying to navigate some help and support for them at this moment in time. Who do you trust?

[00:43:05]
Faith: All the institutions. I don’t trust any of them now. None of them. It’s like the Wild West in my head now. I’m on my own, firing guns left, right and centre. And my husband, we are firing guns and we’ve got our child in the middle and we’re just trying to protect her.

[00:43:28]
Polly Curtis: I asked James Barclay what the uninitiated parent facing this right now should do to help their child.

[00:43:35]
James Barclay: I’d probably be talking to my doctor. I’d probably be sort of wanting perhaps to see if I could access any sort of counselling, perhaps through school or college. I would try and keep it proportional. I would very much emphasise the talking about things. You might want to do a bit of detective work about what’s on offer out there in terms of local counselings or LGBT support. The vast majority of people don’t go down a medical pathway. The vast majority of people just want to explore stuff and make sense of who they are and how their gender experience fits with who they are going forward would. So I’d be very much wanting to kind of almost keep people out of a service like mine, if at all possible.

[00:44:19]
Polly Curtis: His answer basically confirms that there is a void left behind in this whole saga. But I know I wouldn’t trust online services operating on the edge.

[00:44:30]
Helen Webberley: I’m not that savvy on the whole business side, but I know, but I’m not. I’m a doctor. At the end of the day, I’m a doctor peddling in business.

[00:44:40]
Polly Curtis: I would want to trust the NHS, but there’s nothing to trust at the moment. And when the services open, they will be operating with the same pressures that the Tavistock faced. Too little evidence in a heightened atmosphere that every step will be scrutinised by parents, by patients, the press and politicians who all hold strong and conflicting views on what it should do. The delicate work of rebuilding trust will face challenges at every turn. The almost impossible question of how to care for young people with gender dysphoria. When there’s no consensus on what it is or how to treat it mustn’t be left to dr webley, the Dark Web or drug dealers willing to offer medication on demand.

Thanks for listening. To access more of our journalism and invites to exclusive events, join Tortoise as a member, just go to tortoisemedia.com Slow Down to listen to the entire series. Search for the Tavistock inside the Gender Clinic wherever you get your podcasts.

This episode was written and reported by me, Polly Curtis, and by Katie Gunning, who was also the producer. The sound designer was Tom Birchell. The editor is Jasper Corbett.
 
Previous post was close to the length limit due to the transcript, so please excuse this horrendous triple post.

Jack's in Paris (with his brother, I think) for TwitchCon.
jack-green-twitchcon.png F0dx0IBWwAATmi9.jpeg
@JackiePieCrusts, tweet 1677434533589680128 (archive)
That hairline, ouch. I see now why he wears it down all the time.

Since he's at TwitchCon, let's check in on his viewing figures. Jack has 60 Twitch followers but has stopped making his streams available afterwards (in fact, a stream that was listed earlier today, with I think about 70 views, is now missing), so these are just his "highlight" videos, with an average of fewer than 10 views each:
jack-green-twitch-numbers.png
I don't point this out particularly to mock Jack, more that I think it says something about his psychology. Jack has been told one impossible thing almost his entirely life: you can become female. He hasn't given that up, nor has he given up his belief that he can be famous. I'd suggest this is what happens when you don't allow your children to grow up.

Edit: Some bottomless cope about the LGBA ruling from GenderGP. I imagine Susie Green wrote this.
gender-gp-lgba-cope.png
@GenderGP, tweet 1677280319152574465 (archive)
Gender GP dijo:
Our statement on the Mermaids' case against the LGBA

As many of you may know, @Mermaids Gender, working with @GoodLawProject lost their case against the LGBA yesterday.

In solidarity with the trans community, we are hugely disappointed at this ruling 1

We want to acknowledge the work that Mermaids and all the other organisations involved put into this case on behalf of our community, and there were some key takeaways that we want to highlight:

The case was lost on the issue of standing by Mermaids, which is not a surprise.

Mermaids and the @GoodLawProject acknowledged this might be an issue from the very beginning. However, this loss is not validation of the LGBAs charity status. Far from it.

Comments were made by the judges that lead us to believe that if standing had been proven that the case may have been strong enough to strip the LGBA of their status. One caveat let them off.

This is unfortunate, but the concerns and proven issues with the LGBA are now public and recorded in official records which is helpful for the future.

These issues included a lack of *charitable activity' from the LGBA, as well as self-admitted 'errors of judgement'.

The judges agreed that narratives shared by the LGBA were 'beyond the boundaries of civilised debate' and the commission shared those concerns.

We would question why they were given charitable status in the first place, if the commission had those concerns.

This case has blown holes in the reputation of the LGBA and proven, on record, that their methods are hate-mongering and gravely concerning.

Their purpose - that they exist to denigrate trans people and nothing else has been proven in court, and we believe this to be extremely positive.

Not all is lost, and this has gone to show who the LGBA really are.

So many narratives are constantly shared around 'the right side of history', well... let this case stand up for that. Always remember, hate never wins
No-one should trust these people even to tell you what time it is. They have locked themselves into their own upside-down reality.
 
Última edición:
Archive

As the controversial Mermaids body is investigated by the Charity Commission... did raising her own trans child turn former CEO Susie Green into a zealot who put other youngsters' health at risk?​

By JILL FOSTER

PUBLISHED: 23:44 BST, 7 July 2023 | UPDATED: 23:48 BST, 7 July 2023

When charity worker Zoe Mason realised she wanted to make a real difference to children struggling with gender dysphoria — the feeling they had been born the wrong sex — there was only one organisation she wanted to join.

Mason had been impressed at how a small support group in Leeds set up in the mid-1990s for a handful of parents, had blossomed into a successful charity called Mermaids, the charity that hit the headlines this week after it failed in an attempt to strip gay-rights pressure group the LGB Alliance of its charitable status.

With funding from the Department of Education, Children In Need and the National Lottery, supplemented by private donations and income from training courses, Mermaids saw its income soar from £80,000 in 2016 to over £1.8 million by 2021.

The 30-year-old from London duly applied for a job with the organisation in 2019 and, to her delight, was taken on. Her hiring coincided with a boom in the number of people seeking the help of the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) run by the Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust.

The London-based clinic saw more than 5,000 referrals in 2021/22, up from just 250 ten years earlier. Some of those were children and young people who, it now transpires, were directly referred by the controversial former CEO of Mermaids, Susie Green.
This first came to light in May, when it emerged that Green, a mother-of-four who has no known formal medical training, had been referring children to GIDS even when the children's own GPs had repeatedly refused to do so.

Green, it seems, had a direct line to Dr Polly Carmichael, director of the Tavistock clinic, which is to be closed and replaced by two regional hubs early next year after the independent Cass Review found it was not fit for purpose.

The review found that, in addition to offering hormone treatments to children with little knowledge of the long-term side-effects, the clinic was failing to keep proper records.

This was certainly true of its dealings with Green. When the allegations about her referrals first emerged, the clinic claimed that it did not have copies of emails or minutes of meetings with the Mermaids founder, and it was only after the information regulator threatened court action that the Tavistock released more than 300 pages of them.

By then, Zoe Mason had been aware of Green's links to the Tavistock for some time. Despite enjoying her first few months working at Mermaids, she told the Mail that she — and several other members of the 30-plus staff — felt betrayed when rumours started that Susie was referring children to GIDS.

'Some staff were very angry because it made us look dishonest,' she says. 'It went against everything we were saying as a charity. We had volunteers on our phonelines saying, 'It's not for us to tell you what route to take' and there were words on the Mermaids website saying, "We don't get involved in medical pathways" and that's honestly what we all believed.'

Green's apparent eagerness to send children down a medical pathway stemmed, many believe, from her own personal experience. In a YouTube video from 2017 — which has since been deleted — she reveals that the moment her toddler son could express himself he was gravitating towards 'things that were stereotypically female'. She was happy that his favourite outfits were a tutu and a Snow White costume, and concluded that he was 'very sensitive, quite effeminate and probably gay'.

However, the boy's father, Tim, did not approve of their young son's behaviour. It created tensions within the marriage and the couple went to counselling.

The result was that the little boy's 'girly toys' such as Polly Pocket and My Little Pony were put away and he was made aware they were 'not appropriate'. Heartbreakingly, in Green's words 'a suddenly confident, happy little boy became quiet, withdrawn, very clingy and tearful'.

But what happened next perhaps explains Green's dogmatic approach to trans issues in later life. She returned the toys to her son and, by the age of four, he had announced to his mother that 'God had made a mistake' and he was supposed to be a girl.

Aged seven, he was referred to the Tavistock clinic and diagnosed with gender dysphoria.

By the time he was 12, he was living as 'Jackie' and his warring parents had separated.
Green flew him to America to be given puberty blockers by a U.S. doctor and, on his 16th birthday — by which time he had made several suicide attempts — the teenager was taken to Thailand for 'gender-affirming surgery'. (The country has since made the procedure illegal for under-18s.)

As Green explains in another video, this meant using 'the skin from the penis to create a vagina. And she [Jackie] hadn't developed through full puberty [due to blockers] so, not to put too fine a point on it, there wasn't much to work with'.

Speaking about the experience afterwards, Jackie said: 'My mum's gone through all of this with me and I know people judge her and think she's done the wrong thing. But I just couldn't wait for it to happen. She and my dad have been brilliant. When they came to terms with the situation they helped me so much. I owe them my life.'

While Green agrees that this drastic treatment saved her eldest child's life, the story has — understandably — opened her up to criticism.

Stephanie Davies-Arai of Transgender Trend, an organisation advocating for evidence-based care of gender dysphoric children, says: 'Susie Green's experience in her own family was upsetting but not that uncommon — dad can't accept an effeminate son, family falls apart — but her solution was an excessive reaction to family troubles, to say the least.

'Green may have started out thinking this was the best for her child, given the information she had at the time. But she continues to advise parents to adopt her approach, despite all we have known for years about the harms of child transition.'

Davies-Arai laments how, under Green, Mermaids went from a parents' support group giving sensible advice — such as that most children will grow out of their desire to be a different gender — to an aggressively political campaign for trans rights.

'In terms of beliefs around treating children with gender dysphoria, she has taken a helpful support group for parents and created a monster.'

Gay rights campaigners are also concerned that Mermaids under Green's leadership was complicit in a form of gay conversion therapy. Dennis Kavanagh, lawyer and director of the Gay Men's Network, points to a 2012 survey of Tavistock patients which found that 90 per cent were same-sex attracted.

He says: 'The concern is that Mermaids are medicalising homosexuality, taking vulnerable, different children and putting them on a path to sterility.'

When this allegation — along with others — was put to Green, she responded by posting a 2,000-word riposte on her blog. In it she insisted: 'Who you are attracted to is different from your sense of self . . . Many young people I have engaged with over the years are trans and gay or bisexual after transition.'

A former acquaintance of Green disagrees that the woman she first got to know in 2013 is actively trying to harm children.

'She was simply a mum trying to help other parents — mostly single mums — who felt their child was 'in the wrong body',' she says. 'I could see why parents were drawn to her. She was charismatic, a strong no-nonsense woman who offered support and advice to parents who had nowhere else to turn.'

While Green — a former IT worker — improved the finances and the profile of Mermaids, she was also running the charity when there were several alleged breaches of safeguarding.

One newspaper investigation reported Mermaids was sending out breast-flattening devices (known as binders) to girls against their parents' wishes.

It also discovered non-medically trained staff were allegedly advising that puberty blockers were completely reversible, when evidence suggests otherwise. As a result, Mermaids finds itself under investigation by the Charity Commission for 'red flags' in its dealings with children.

Nick Scott, 45, father of a teenager with gender dysphoria, was an active member of the Mermaids parents forum from 2020 to 2021 and saw two sides to the charismatic CEO. 'Susie was valued and trusted by Mermaids parents, to whom she offered caring encouragement, wanting them to know that things could get better for their families,' he says.

But she could be 'tone deaf' too. In 2018, ITV aired Butterflies, a drama starring Anna Friel as a mother of a boy who wants to become a girl. Susie Green worked closely with the producers to portray the story, inspired by her own experience, as authentically as possible, but her efforts didn't go down well among all the Mermaids parents, says Nick.

'Quite a few parents commented that Butterflies was sensational and not realistic, both in suggesting that kids faced intolerance in their own families more than they did and how quickly the children were medicalised.

'Overall, I thought she was that most dangerous thing, a person utterly certain of their own rightness,' he said.

This tendency to absolutism is something that Zoe Mason also observed. 'Susie is certain she knows what's best for young people and will fight for them even when there are other people who might disagree,' says Zoe, who ended up working with Green for 18 months.
'But the thing with Susie was that, if you questioned her too much, you wouldn't be working for the charity six months later.'

Zoe recalls a time when one staff member mentioned that trans women competing against biological women in sport was a thorny issue. 'Susie wasn't angry or disgusted — she's not like that,' says Zoe. 'She likes to debate. But she made it very clear that what this staff member was saying was transphobic, creating a very intense and uncomfortable situation. That person left a few months later.'

On the topic of trans athletes, Green says she didn't have a disagreement with any staff member. Indeed, 'all Mermaids staff and volunteers were aligned on this matter'. Nor were any employee complaints of this nature raised with HR, she claims.

Last November, Green suddenly quit the charity after six years. The chair of trustees, Belinda Bell, said she was 'grateful' to the outgoing CEO and an interim replacement would be appointed. No further details were given but the new role was said to offer an £80,000 salary.

In February it was announced that Green had joined GenderGP, an online prescription service.

Still seemingly determined to help children access hormone treatment privately, Green said: 'I now have the privilege to be part of the medical care of transgender youth. This includes well-established clinical protocols for medical intervention that saves lives.'

These interventions include 'puberty blockers when puberty is underway — whatever age that may be', 'gender-affirming hormones when the young person is ready to start puberty — whatever age that may be' and 'gender-affirming surgery whenever the best time that is for the individual'.

Nick Scott says her new job is fitting. While at Mermaids, Susie Green promoted GenderGP as the experts in helping young people with gender dysphoria, he said.

She encouraged members to write to the General Medical Council in support of Dr Helen Webberley who runs the online clinic — despite Webberley's prosecution in 2018 for failing to register her services for transgender patients with a health regulator.

Nick says: 'The focus in Mermaids shifted over time away from GIDS and towards GenderGP and I believe that really the Mermaids parent forum was a glorified customer forum for GenderGP.'

Green told the Mail that when GenderGP founder Dr Helen Webberley was suspended pending a GMC investigation into her treatment of a particular patient — in which she was cleared of wrongdoing — she 'made the difficult decision' to remove the service from the Mermaids website.

Green has undoubtedly helped youngsters in need, and the opinion of her former acquaintance that 'Susie's heart was in the right place' will be echoed by many.

But Scott is less forgiving. 'In my opinion, Susie has done enormous damage to many families,' he says. 'I've always been uncomfortable with the endless focus on her own child and the language around the surgery. Her child has a right to privacy and a life away from all this, which I think we should all respect — Susie included, frankly.

'She created today's Mermaids and Mermaids has encouraged parents to 'go down the GenderGP route' as they put it, totally needlessly and without a good assessment of that young person's needs.' Scott says (and Green 'entirely disputes') that she created 'needless fear about the urgency' of treatment.

He adds: 'In a way I'm glad she's gone to GenderGP because she's shown her true colours.'

Zoe Mason and Nick Scott's names have been changed to protect their identities.
 
This might be the awaited Mail article
Yeah it has to be. There'll be some (justified) complaints that the fact Susie Green was referring children directly to GIDS was known before the FOI email release in May, but that will hardly make it less shocking to ordinary people.

A few interesting bits in the article.

This mirrors what Helen Joyce says in the video I posted earlier:
'Overall, I thought she was that most dangerous thing, a person utterly certain of their own rightness,' [a parent involed with Mermaids] said.

This tendency to absolutism is something that Zoe Mason also observed. 'Susie is certain she knows what's best for young people and will fight for them even when there are other people who might disagree,' says Zoe, who ended up working with Green for 18 months.

This is funny:
'But the thing with Susie was that, if you questioned her too much, you wouldn't be working for the charity six months later.'

Zoe recalls a time when one staff member mentioned that trans women competing against biological women in sport was a thorny issue. 'Susie wasn't angry or disgusted — she's not like that,' says Zoe. 'She likes to debate. But she made it very clear that what this staff member was saying was transphobic, creating a very intense and uncomfortable situation. That person left a few months later.'

On the topic of trans athletes, Green says she didn't have a disagreement with any staff member. Indeed, 'all Mermaids staff and volunteers were aligned on this matter'. Nor were any employee complaints of this nature raised with HR, she claims.
lol "all Mermaids staff … were aligned on" the matter of trans-identified men in women's sports. I guess that's true if you've sacked all the people who disagree.

Just on this:
Last November, Green suddenly quit the charity after six years. The chair of trustees, Belinda Bell, said she was 'grateful' to the outgoing CEO and an interim replacement would be appointed. No further details were given but the new role was said to offer an £80,000 salary.
It's worth pointing out that Jack said, in his since-deleted video response to Posie Parker, that his mum was fired "for no reason" by Mermaids.
However, he has made a YouTube video in response to the one by Posie Parker / Kellie Jay Keen commenting on Susie Green's Ted talk: Reacting to Nosy Posie Parkers breakdown of TedTalk - Bigorty and BULL at its finest. - YouTube (archive)
 
@The Hoh Rainforest thanks

Back and got chance to read it, honestly unimpressed. But then again that's as a result of seeing it all here first.

Mumsnet discussing the ruling, they occasionally spot some good stuff are mining salt like champions.


Courtesy of them here's someone apparently an editor for Pink News claiming to have had such hate from the LGB Alliance he was forced to close his account. You know, the one he is using to say this.


LGB Alliance (and its founders) are the only charity to have instigated Twitter pile-ons on me and many other LGBTQ+ people, resulting in a deluge of hate and abuse to the point of having to shut down my account. They don't speak for me and they don't support LGB people either

Pedo apologist Peter Tatchell crying too. Even gets called out on his behaviour in the replies.

twitter.com/petertatchell/status/1677025056751247362?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

LGB Alliance has negligible support among LGBTs It's goal is to split the LGBT+ community, turn LGBs against trans people & oppose trans inclusion & equality It does very little work to promote LGB rights. It's promised LGB helpline has never happened #Mermaids does great work

Nonce apologist defends charity with nonce apologist trustee

My Guardian letter was edited but it still says sex with children is "IMPOSSIBLE to condone". This means I OPPOSE & CONDEMN it. Read my proposals to help STOP child sex abuse http://petertatchell.net/sex_education/why-arent-schools-educating-kids-against-sex-abuse/… And read what I REALLY said on age of consent http://petertatchell.net/lgbt_rights/age_of_consent/an-age-of-consent-of-14/…
 
Última edición:
I can't imagine the wake of broken parents left along with their children. I see broken troons now, but a parent failing their child on accident is one hell of a burden. I wonder if we'll get reports of suicide from some parents. :(
 
Can't quote the boxed text, but the fact that this person completed medical school - even ostensibly - is shocking to me:
"Helen Webberley: I’m not that savvy on the whole business side. But I said that …
Polly Curtis: You described yourself as a businesswoman.
Helen Webberley: I know, but I’m not. I’m a doctor. At the end of the day, I’m a doctor. Peddling in business."
Holy shit, the level of retard. And this person is tinkering with the endocrine systems of troubled teenagers.
 
Picked out a few bits from the Tortoise transcript I thought were interesting (though not new):

Belief-based medicine:
[00:16:40]
Polly Curtis: So when you talked about that first teenager who came to you and when you first met them, your response was, you’re a boy. Was that an assessment?

[00:16:53]
Helen Webberley: It’s a belief, it’s a confirmation.

[00:16:56]
Polly Curtis: She’s telling me that at Gender GP, diagnoses are made on belief rather than clinical judgement.

Putting a 12-year-old girl ("Patient A") on puberty blockers because she's "the most boy thing I've ever seen":
[00:17:56]
Helen Webberley: And this 12-year-old sitting in front of me was the most boy thing I’ve ever seen, if you like. And he was saying, when can I have my puberty? When can I have my puberty? And GIDS was saying, when you’re 16, not to be 16, definitely not to be 16. And it’s like, I can’t wait that long. So that’s why they came to see me. As soon as I saw him, I’m like, I’ve never seen it more obvious, kid, that needs to start puberty now.

[00:18:18]
Polly Curtis: The most boy thing I’ve ever seen. Is that enough? It feels flimsy to me to diagnose someone in this way. It also assumes rigid gender stereotypes in which girls are girly and boys are boyish.

Damning summary of Gender GP and the Webberleys:
[00:19:03]
Polly Curtis: The trouble came thick and fast. In 2017, Helen Webberley was prevented from practising medicine by the General Medical Counsel, the GMC, over her treatment of Patient A and two others. In 2018, she got a criminal conviction for operating a medical practise without a licence. So Gender GP moved its registered office to Hong Kong to escape UK regulations. It’s now registered in Singapore. In 2022, her husband, Dr Michael Webberley, was struck off by the GMC for what they described as a catalogue of failings over how he treated young people and prescribed puberty blockers and cross sex hormones. The GMC also found he’d failed to adequately assess patients. Then, in March this year, the High Court rejected a previous ruling against Helen Webberley, which had found that she had failed to give proper advice to a patient about the impact of hormonal treatment on their future fertility. In that judgement, Mr Justice Jay was clear that his decision was in no way a verdict or endorsement of the work of Gender GP.

[00:20:20]
Judge Jay (voiced by an actor): The sole focus of this appeal has been the quality of the […] clinical practise in relation to one patient, patient C. This appeal does not raise any wider issues about the wisdom or otherwise of administering puberty blockers to the younger age group who wish to undergo interventions for gender reassignment with full parental agreement.

Giving puberty blockers to kids even GIDS wouldn't prescribe to:
[00:29:58]
Polly Curtis: In her mind, Helen Webberley is not providing an alternative to the NHS. Gender GP is the service for this patient group.

[00:30:09]
Helen Webberley: I mean, we’ve been doing their work, basically. Gender GP has been doing the work of that the NHS Tavistock Clinic should have done. And actually…

[00:30:16]
Polly Curtis: It’s also been treating the patients that GIDS felt shouldn’t be treated.

[00:30:21]
Helen Webberley: Yes, well, they have been treating the patients that GIDS should have treated and they’ve been treating the people that GIDS, that are waiting for GIDS to decide on whether they will treat or not.

Reprehensible (and entirely false) suicide-baiting:
[00:31:33]
Helen Webberley: What we do know is if you say no, that child gets worse, it gets more distressed and more distressed and more distressed. And then when you see them at 13, the knives have started coming out and the cuts have started coming out and they stopped going to school and they haven’t got any friends anymore because they’ve left their social groups and the family is being torn apart by this distressed child. Or you look at the ones that you say, yes, I’m going to believe you and I’m going. To give you an injection which stops your puberty to give us some time. And those kids carry on going to school and they do well and the family unit survives and the knives don’t come out. That’s what we know.

Gender GP as an even less rigorous GIDS:
[00:33:17]
Polly Curtis: The best answer I got from the Tavistock, which remember is now very much discredited, was that what they were looking for is that young people are consistent and persistent over a long period of time about their gender identity.

Everything I’m learning about Gender GP is that there is no time to even assess this because the young people move to medical treatment so rapidly.
 
So if it came down to standing, why didn't the judges rule on that in the first place, instead of dragging all sides through a long and expensive hearing?

Can't quote the boxed text, but the fact that this person completed medical school - even ostensibly - is shocking to me:
"Helen Webberley: I’m not that savvy on the whole business side. But I said that …
Polly Curtis: You described yourself as a businesswoman.
Helen Webberley: I know, but I’m not. I’m a doctor. At the end of the day, I’m a doctor. Peddling in business."
She's lying. Almost as if she was a troon herself. She had a couple of earlier online hustles, until she struck the tranny goldmine. Here's one mentioned here


And this site discusses a couple more. Note how they all end with the regulators stepping in


Doctors Helen and Michael "Mike" Webberley are married British doctors who specialize in online transgender healthcare, via their GenderGP brand. Both doctors have been repeatedly investigated, prosecuted and subject to criminal and/or professional sanctions for their breaches of legal and professional requirements in relation to their transgender clinic which focuses on children.

Prior to her specialism in online transgender medicine, Helen Webberley was involved with Oxford Online Pharmacy, the trading name of the online arm of Frosts Pharmacy. This service was set up in 2012, and Helen was the only prescribing doctor.[1][2] Oxford Online Pharmacy was found in January 2017 not to be providing "safe, effective and well led services". After her suspension from the Medical Practitioners List for Wales, her contract with Frosts/OOP was withdrawn in April 2017. A second online GP service theonlinesurgery/doctormatt.co.uk for which Helen was the Registered Manager, was temporarily suspended in January 2017, whereupon she resigned from the service.[3] Although Helen attempted to distance herself from both companies, on the basis that she was not named in person in CQC reports, the Health Tribunal found that Helen was "at the heart of both of the services inspected".[2] In 2014 Helen's name appeared as the doctor prescribing to consumers in Maine, USA, under the brand 'Great British Drug Store'.[4]

In 2018 Helen was convicted of criminally running an online medical clinic without a licence, in relation to her websites 'gender gp' and 'my web doctor'.[5] Helen had been refused permission to run her online transgender clinic by the Health Inspectorate of Wales in August 2017,[6] and continued to run the unlicensed clinic until February 2018. She was the first person to be convicted of this offence, the district judge ruling that there was a 'clear refusal to follow the law', fining her £12,000. In addition, Helen, who originally ran the clinic from her home in Abergavenny, Wales, was struck off the Welsh Medical Practitioners List, meaning she could not work as a doctor in Wales. In refusing her appeal against this striking off, the tribunal found that she " does not accept, respect or understand external governance" and that her attitude is one of entrenched resistance to regulation and is highly coloured by her lack of integrity and candour".[2]

Her husband Mike, a former consultant gastroenterologist [7] continued to run the clinic when Helen was suspended by the GMC. After both doctors were suspended, they moved their clinic to Malaga.[8]

In May 2022 Mike was struck off by the GMC for behaviour "fundamentally incompatible with being a doctor",[9] including prescribing hormones to a nine-year-old following a 10-minute conversation with the child over Skype, with inadequate evidence to support Mike's claim that failure to prescribe the hormones would create a "real risk of self-harm and mental issues".

Helen Webberley was suspended from practise by the GMC in May 2017 for the maximum period of 18 months, which was extended for three further periods each of one year.[10] At December 2021 the GMC asked for a further suspension of eight months until a planned April 2022 striking off hearing, but only three months were granted by the court. Therefore, her suspension was lifted in February 2022 subject to conditions that she "must not prescribe, administer or have primary responsibility for any drugs", that she "must be closely supervised in all of her posts by a clinical supervisor" and "keep a log detailing every case where she consults with a transgender patient".[11] At her hearing in April 2022, 36 accusations her were found proven, 83 were not.[12] In June 2022 Helen was suspended from medical practice for two months, for putting three patients at 'unwarranted risk of harm' by failing to follow up on testosterone prescriptions for 12 and 17-year-olds, and for failing to discuss fertility risks with an 11-year-old before prescribing puberty blockers.[13]

The Webberley's GenderGP service is owned by Harland International, a Hong Kong-registered company, and its Malaga-originated private prescriptions are fillable in the UK under UK government guidelines which allow prescriptions from the EEA and Switzerland to be dispensed in the UK.

The two of them have got a bit better at hiding their traces with shell companies over the years, But I remember someone on twitter found some links from the Belize company and them. www.theonlinesurgery.co.uk is still up but doesn't seem to be trading. An old archive has Helen listed on the front page. The current version instead boasts of secure encryption.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo