monkers
Legendary Member
At least he is a professional, an expert working hands on in the field. By comparison who are you, other than a woman with a fetishistic obsession with other people's genitals?
Gender again. Sorry!
- Thread starter theclaud
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
At least he is a professional, an expert working hands on in the field. By comparison who are you, other than a woman with a fetishistic obsession with other people's genitals?
AuroraSaab
Squire
Lol.
monkers
Legendary Member
N here
Hello Aurora.
Well I have to say that I believe you perceive argument as sport, and that you perceive that you are rather good at it.
(Adopts pompous voice) I'm afraid that I might have to burst your bubble. You see James Bellringer made no claim about suicide rates or any assertion. He didn't even offer a personal view or estimate. He said ''we think about one in five''. And that's it.
In other words, it is nothing more than a best guess from the group of people involved in providing care to that group of patients in the UK.
As Mr Bellringer (the appropriate title for a consultant surgeon rather than Dr Bellringer as I have noted being used) points out, he is one of four surgeons in the UK, and their work is supported by other team members.
Those who will have taken their lives before surgery may not be at the stage of referral to a surgeon let alone known to a surgeon. Mr Bellringer, the other surgeons and their teams will need to rely on the accessible data from the feeding services. This being the case, this is likely to be closest that we have as evidence. To suggest that Mr Bellringer and those close to these services can not have a feel for the numbers is frankly ridiculous.
As with your similar arguments concerning coroner's reports, what you are demanding from Monkers is tantamount to ask her for the results of interviewing dead people to ascertain precisely why they did what they did.
Sometimes we have to accept that best evidence is heard in the words of the best experts close to those services. Mr Bellringer has nothing to gain financially by inventing figures. He already has a waiting list that will carry him to his planned retirement age.
Note: Legally speaking evidence is weighed and not merely sifted into two piles.
Hello Aurora.
Well I have to say that I believe you perceive argument as sport, and that you perceive that you are rather good at it.
(Adopts pompous voice) I'm afraid that I might have to burst your bubble. You see James Bellringer made no claim about suicide rates or any assertion. He didn't even offer a personal view or estimate. He said ''we think about one in five''. And that's it.
In other words, it is nothing more than a best guess from the group of people involved in providing care to that group of patients in the UK.
As Mr Bellringer (the appropriate title for a consultant surgeon rather than Dr Bellringer as I have noted being used) points out, he is one of four surgeons in the UK, and their work is supported by other team members.
Those who will have taken their lives before surgery may not be at the stage of referral to a surgeon let alone known to a surgeon. Mr Bellringer, the other surgeons and their teams will need to rely on the accessible data from the feeding services. This being the case, this is likely to be closest that we have as evidence. To suggest that Mr Bellringer and those close to these services can not have a feel for the numbers is frankly ridiculous.
As with your similar arguments concerning coroner's reports, what you are demanding from Monkers is tantamount to ask her for the results of interviewing dead people to ascertain precisely why they did what they did.
Sometimes we have to accept that best evidence is heard in the words of the best experts close to those services. Mr Bellringer has nothing to gain financially by inventing figures. He already has a waiting list that will carry him to his planned retirement age.
Note: Legally speaking evidence is weighed and not merely sifted into two piles.
Last edited:
monkers
Legendary Member
N here
I'm not going to make the error of speaking for others, but I'm happy to help to fill in a point from my own personal experiences.
It relates to when I was a child. Just to remind, or maybe first time reading for some, I jumped from a third floor window when a child to escape my violent father. I happened to land in the wet cement of a neighbours drive. None of this was planned as a suicide attempt on this occasion (I'd made previous attempts by drowning). Of course I had to tell my story to one professional. I was repeatedly asked, 'are you going to attempt taking your own life in the next seven days''. I had to keep repeating, ''I didn't plan it this time, but I didn't care if I lived or died, and I still don't''. The report that followed read, ''no ideation of suicide was expressed''.
This is how the system often works. Where resources are stretched, as they so often are in mental health services, unless the patient uses the clear language of ''I am going to kill myself within the next seven days'' (for example), it is written down as 'no ideation of suicide'.
I was lucky, because despite the system, I happened to end up in the right place. That is not to say, I did not have ongoing struggles, I very much did.
I'll anticipate the question. ''Would you have become one of the one in five''? There is no doubt; yes - or one of the four point two, or five point eight or whatever the actual real number is, and that's why the absolute correct number just doesn't matter.
I'm not going to make the error of speaking for others, but I'm happy to help to fill in a point from my own personal experiences.
It relates to when I was a child. Just to remind, or maybe first time reading for some, I jumped from a third floor window when a child to escape my violent father. I happened to land in the wet cement of a neighbours drive. None of this was planned as a suicide attempt on this occasion (I'd made previous attempts by drowning). Of course I had to tell my story to one professional. I was repeatedly asked, 'are you going to attempt taking your own life in the next seven days''. I had to keep repeating, ''I didn't plan it this time, but I didn't care if I lived or died, and I still don't''. The report that followed read, ''no ideation of suicide was expressed''.
This is how the system often works. Where resources are stretched, as they so often are in mental health services, unless the patient uses the clear language of ''I am going to kill myself within the next seven days'' (for example), it is written down as 'no ideation of suicide'.
I was lucky, because despite the system, I happened to end up in the right place. That is not to say, I did not have ongoing struggles, I very much did.
I'll anticipate the question. ''Would you have become one of the one in five''? There is no doubt; yes - or one of the four point two, or five point eight or whatever the actual real number is, and that's why the absolute correct number just doesn't matter.
Last edited:
monkers
Legendary Member
N again
For anyone who is interested in the working week of a 'hot shot' lawyer. A meeting in London on Monday morning to offer advice on a case. A dash to Strasbourg in the afternoon.
Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday just a lot of dry reading of new cases being brought that were allocated to my specialism. The result of which there were two piles. One pile of no hopers that now aren't going anywhere, and another pile for further consideration. I am the guardian of other people's time.
This morning was spent in my house in Strasbourg finishing off the case from the Monday meeting. It first came across my desk as a claim seeking effective remedy against the state. I judged it a no hoper. The claimant then pursued it as civil case rather than criminal case in the UK, so it was resurrected (though still a no hoper in my personal view though no longer in my purview). Following the Monday meeting, with me giving my view, the claimant's team have been persuaded that the case has little prospect. Between Monday and this morning, I've been alerted that the claimant is being countersued. Hence I'm back to London on Monday. It's actually a very interesting case involving a rape allegation, but at this point I must say no more.
Favourite no hoper story of the week? I can speak to this one. In the UK a parent had attempted legal action against a school. A year 9 boy was drawing a picture of a car rather than a human eye in a science class. When challenged he told the teacher loudly, ''it's an Aston Martin DB7 Miss; Jeremy Clarkson says it's not just a car, it's pornography''. The parent complained, ''the teacher did not prevent the boy from saying something about a car, and the rest was to do with pornography''. The school refused to consider sacking the teacher on this demand.
For anyone who is interested in the working week of a 'hot shot' lawyer. A meeting in London on Monday morning to offer advice on a case. A dash to Strasbourg in the afternoon.
Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday just a lot of dry reading of new cases being brought that were allocated to my specialism. The result of which there were two piles. One pile of no hopers that now aren't going anywhere, and another pile for further consideration. I am the guardian of other people's time.
This morning was spent in my house in Strasbourg finishing off the case from the Monday meeting. It first came across my desk as a claim seeking effective remedy against the state. I judged it a no hoper. The claimant then pursued it as civil case rather than criminal case in the UK, so it was resurrected (though still a no hoper in my personal view though no longer in my purview). Following the Monday meeting, with me giving my view, the claimant's team have been persuaded that the case has little prospect. Between Monday and this morning, I've been alerted that the claimant is being countersued. Hence I'm back to London on Monday. It's actually a very interesting case involving a rape allegation, but at this point I must say no more.
Favourite no hoper story of the week? I can speak to this one. In the UK a parent had attempted legal action against a school. A year 9 boy was drawing a picture of a car rather than a human eye in a science class. When challenged he told the teacher loudly, ''it's an Aston Martin DB7 Miss; Jeremy Clarkson says it's not just a car, it's pornography''. The parent complained, ''the teacher did not prevent the boy from saying something about a car, and the rest was to do with pornography''. The school refused to consider sacking the teacher on this demand.
dutchguylivingintheuk
Über Member
And if we then change to topic a little bit and let's say Farage says something like ''we think all those illegal boat immigrants come here to steal rape and murder'' i think you damn well known you have a whole other reading of the word ''think'' in relation to the words the person speaks. If someone is an expert in a field and he says something like this with ''we think'' the ''think in this case means absolutly nothing all media is gonna copy the one in five, and he dam nwell knowns it, the ''we think'' it just an cop-out/exit clause in this context.
Sadly authorities do fail a lot,(i think mainly because they are not properly funded.) but it seems to me the police should have arrested your voilent parent and social services should have stepped in(which they might have but your response doesn't elaborate) i do think no idealation is a bit of a strange one, of a child says ''i don't care either way'' that should be an clear indication in my view.
Well to be honest if's seen that with a lot of English services particularly in relation to healthcare, where as in comparison dutch services rely much more on what a medical professional feel sees and hears, it seems to the anchored on the textbook to much.(and no i'm not at all saying dutch services are the best in the world or something, it's just an general personal observation)
Well good to hear you landed in a good place, however on the top you refer to a violent parent, what does suicide due to the actions of a violent parent has to do with being trans?
Why would something like that get to court anyway? both the demand to sack the teacher as this whole situation, seems a bit weird to fight out in court, rather education about words, their meaning and context would have been more usefull.
monkers
Legendary Member
Thanks. Because I would not cower to him and desist from saying ''I am not a boy''. He would accuse me of provoking him into anger, though he was always the one to initiate. Any time I defied him in this, I was beaten, and on a number of occasions hospitalised. I once had to call for an ambulance myself. My mother would tell the ambulance crew that I was a clumsy child who liked to play on the stairs.
In my case the suicidal ideations came from very low self-esteem. I was continually told I was a freak, worthless, and that they wished I'd never been born.
I'm speaking for myself, however you must understand that I know that my experiences are far from unique.
monkers
Legendary Member
On the surface, this does look random.
All I'm going to say is that in the legal system, evidence is weighed. The opinion of experts such as Mr Bellringer, and he is the most expert in his field in the UK, is looked upon more favourably upon than a non expert with an opinion that is popular or valued by its ability to sell newspapers. The words chosen by Mr Bellringer are typical of any expert in this position. Front line experts, as opposed to theorists are valued for their opinion. Remember please that the trans experience has a long steady history. The gender critical position has a short history, and not a straight line. To make the suggestion that Mr Bellringer is not saying what he truly believes will take a considerably stronger force than your opinion to take any effect.
monkers
Legendary Member
Happy to agree.
monkers
Legendary Member
I agree it's a strange one. Being as I don't have to put my name to this comment, I will say I suspect they have been given bad advice before it got to us. They have been supported by a group who a recent history of involving themselves in these cases.
From my point of view it was straightforward. The teacher can not prevent a child from blurting out things that others feel inappropriate. Weirdly (and I jest) the gagging or muzzling of children is frowned upon in the modern age.
The word 'pornography' is not in itself pornography.
Pornography, and not the promotion of it, is taught in schools. In the case of this school, lessons had been sensitively delivered in year 8. Following these lessons, the pupils had been required to sign their own copy of the school policy to say they understood school policy in relation to bringing pornography to school by any media, attempting to access pornography via the school IT system etc.
As somebody who sees a lot of similar complaints, the words ''the rest was to do with'' is picked up quickly by me in the first scan as a lie detector test. It is frequently used to disguise largely disproportionate exaggeration.
One duty of schools is teach their learners how to be safe. Long may they continue.
