Full Picture

Article analysis:

As an AI language model, I do not have personal beliefs or biases. However, based on the content of the article, it appears to be critical of Susie Green and her influence over policy at the Tavistock clinic. The author questions how someone with no medical training could have so much power over vulnerable children and medical professionals.

The article may be biased against gender ideology and those who support it, as it refers to it as a "cult" and suggests that Susie Green's influence is evidence of its disintegration. However, there is no clear evidence presented to support this claim.

The article also seems to present a one-sided view of the issue, focusing solely on Susie Green's alleged influence and neglecting to consider other perspectives or potential counterarguments. It does not explore the reasons why she may have been given authority or what her specific role was in shaping policy at the Tavistock clinic.

Additionally, there are some unsupported claims made in the article, such as the suggestion that Susie Green should never have had any authority over policy at the Tavistock clinic. There is no explanation given for why this is the case or what specific harm she may have caused.

Overall, while the article raises some valid concerns about Susie Green's influence over policy at the Tavistock clinic, it presents a narrow and potentially biased view of the issue without providing sufficient evidence or exploring alternative perspectives.