how can you have a smear test when you haven't got a cervix?

Just asked DH who writes software (public sector but not NHS), they have fairly recently changed titles to include Mx. For 'gender' they allow the option of 'don't want to say'. Of course, this is for an area where sex doesn't actually matter. The NHS needs to recognise there's an issue though and I think it's too far down the pseudo vagina wormhole.

"The woman will receive automatic invitations from the call and recall system until the absence of cervix is formally notified to the programme."

This is also true for those who have had a hysterectomy during which the cervix is also removed. The admin works in the same way for all reasons there is no cervix.

Hackmum but the problem is, and I'm happy to be corrected, is that if a TIM says they are a woman, no one, not even a doctor, could say "no we mean what is your birth sex" because that would be transphobic.

According to the bumph with the Scottish GRA consultation , the CHI number which is your Scottish NHS number denotes your sex (odd or even number) When you have a GRC your CHI number is changed, so administratively as far as I can tell there is no way to spot trans identified people. Which means they will be denied all the screening etc normally offered to their sex.

I don't mean "later", I mean by other people in the thread.

In the article, it says: "Public Health England last night said that screening invitations were automatically sent by computer, based on patients’ registered age and sex."

This confirms what was said later. The stuff about political correctness seems to have been invented by the Mail and/or David Davies. I imagine that the vast majority of computer software only has two fields for sex: male and female. They'll have to do quite a bit of work to add different ones to show people's biological sex and the gender they identify as. It'll be like the Millennium bug all over again - incredibly expensive to fix.

On the plus side, lots of work for software developers.

I'm concerned that this whole "woman if you say you are" lie will impact on future studies where the results rely on accurate reporting of sex. Such as there have been campaigns in the past to target men/women to attend smears, prostrate checks and so on. Those, and other studies into specific sex related illnesses will be completely meaningless if this shite continues.

Which will affect us ALL.

There's far too much precious money being wasted on this absurdity.

I'm willing to have a go at finding it
So long as I have a couple of TIM nurses to hold the patient down

I am sure a GP who posted on here many threads ago said that GPs are not allowed to mention natal sex? And that it is stricken from the record? In which case, those who need the tests may not be offered the tests.

I really think so many official forms now need two boxes - one for bio sex which cannot change, and one for gender - to be set as a default 'x' or something, but for those who need to assign themselves a gender (those with dysphoria, the TRAs etc) M or F or A or whatever.

I know the TRAs would say this is not enough, but I really think it is, for all intents and purposes.

People’s sex needs to be accurately recorded for medical treatment. Sex appropriate screenings, medicine dosages, heart attack symptoms etc all vary by sex. Also if you are taking synthetic hormones, it’s probably useful to know that for treatment.
It’s madness.

Rates of cervical cancer will go down though. So that's a good thing

Which amounts to sticking your fingers in your ears and going lalalalla it's all fine.

Sorry that was in response to UnitedKingdom's post.

Healthcare accessibility is an important issue. We know from trans org stats that there are high levels of mental health problems amongst trans people as a group, and there is a higher likelihood of living on the fringes of society due to discrimination around jobs / housing / etc.

It is also well known that in the UK we have high numbers of people who have issues engaging with assistance whether due to low reading age, language issues, learning disabilities, mental health issues, substance abuse issues, the list goes on, and there is no reason to believe that the trans population differs from the general population in these regards. Apart from maybe being more likely to have some issues according to my reading.

The glib "oh they're not stupid it's all fine" when the issue is people not receiving calls to attend screening for diseases / conditions that they might be susceptible to is very callous and dare I say it not very inclusive, which is odd as I assume you are trying to be "pro trans" with this point.

There is also the issue that sex specific things can be triggering for trans people and obviously very much so, this is the reason they are lobbying hard to have words like pregnant woman replaced with pregnant person etc. Your idea that all trans people will be AOK with firstly knowing they need these tests even when they are never called, be proactive and willing to put themselves forward to make the appt, possibly have to explain to receptionists in crowded waiting rooms why someone who looks like a bloke is here for a smear etc etc

OBVIOUSLY this is not good enough and will lead to people not accessing healthcare they should be.

The answer is as mentioned upthread to have a sex at birth marker and something to over-ride the calls if a person has had surgery that makes it no longer an issue.

Bizarrely though I think more extreme TRAs would be against that as they say they have always been the sex they identify with and so any records otherwise need to be expunged even from healthcare but that's a different issue really.

I find your comment very unconcerned about a group containing some very vulnerable people.

I'm sure transwomen will handle the situation just fine without your outrage. A quick call to the GP to be taken off the list is not that hard. Or as PPs have said, GPS themselves will know to take them off the list. As for transmen, they are not stupid and I'm sure can request a check for health reasons if they do wish. Again, no need for your outrage. They can all manage this just fine I'm sure.

www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/607503/Cervical-screening-call-and-recall.pdf

Section 5.10, page 19

I'd imagine it's all automated. A one-byte field on the patient's record that can be set to either M of F, that field checked by loads of different batch programs sending out letters based on that one-byte field. All hard-coded before all this started.

The joy of computers.

It's just a flaw in the system, as a PP has said. I believe some work does go on to try and get trans men to engage with screening, and you can only hope that trans women have the sense to withdraw from screening programs.

What happens to transmen then? They don't get the letters? Most of them still have their cervixes

It sounds to me like it comes down to the computer systems they use more than anything.

Yep. It's probably cheaper just to send all the letters out than it is to add new fields (for what is a relatively small number of patients).

NHS records should have fields for birth sex and/or lived gender.

It sounds to me like it comes down to the computer systems they use more than anything.

If you register as 'female' you are offered x, y and z and if you are registered as 'male' then you are offered what's appropriate to men.

Seems to me that, medically, you should have to register as the sex you were born, to make sure you are offered appropriate screening. Unfortunately we've all drank the Kool Aid and when it comes down to gender/sex we are so scared of not being politically correct we will put lives at risk and spend huge amounts of money screening people who have no chance of getting cervical cancer

Makes perfect sense.

And it’s any wonder why the NHS are on their arse when they waste time and money with unnecessary things like this