GPs seem to have swallowed the trans dictionary - does that mean Doctors no longer believe in biological reality?

I'm more bothered by the GP in The New Statesman using the verb 'assigned (at birth)' when they must have done an obstetric placement at some stage and seen how easily sex is observed in almost all neonates.

The New Statesman article above is absolutely ridiculous.
I would seriously doubt the competence of a doctor who thought it could possibly be appropriate to use female reference values for a male patient who had had no hormone treatment because of their genderfeelz.

I'm a (very recently qualified) GP.
I think I have a duty as a doctor to speak out against trans nonsense. The TWAW bollocks is damaging to women, and incredibly damaging to the young people who believe it, and end up irreversibly damaging their bodies. If doctors don't challenge it the public are increasingly going to believe that it is a fact that there exists a medical condition of 'being born in the wrong body'.
I am openly gender critical on twitter in my own name, and my profile states I am a medical doctor.
There is a desperate shortage of GPs, particularly in the area I live.
If the GMC suspend a GP for stating biological facts (and biological facts are 'anti-trans' ) they would make themselves look absolutely ridiculous.

Posie Parker posted on her FB this letter, and says we can share and copy it; I think she means people can send the same letter.

I was pleased to see that the RCGP are engaging with the difficult area of care for those questioning their gender. I agree it is important that GPs should not be initiating hormonal treatment and that you are stating this clearly.
I also agree that language is important. But for everyone. Please could you refrain from using the term ‘cis’ for those who don’t identify as ‘trans’. I am a woman and there is no need for the addition of ‘cis’; those males who identify as women or have had transsexual surgery or receive female hormones are still male, they are not women. Please change the wording on your website.
While I appreciate that GPs will choose to refer those who are sure they want hormones or surgery, it is also vital that GPs are equipped to support the increasing numbers of mainly girls who may present as gender questioning, whether or not they are asking for a referral. I want to know that GPs take biology seriously and would be willing to be clear that biological sex will never change and that there is no evidence for the long term benefits of hormones and surgery. Such honesty is more important in clinical care than ‘affirming’ what someone thinks they are, just to avoid offending them. Please could you provide confirmation that you want GPs to be open about their beliefs and knowledge - not to have to pretend they believe biological sex has been or can be changed.

If you want people to be enlightened then perhaps don't tell them to fuck off

I'm not going to apologise for objecting strongly to the vile suggestion of trying to end a GP's career for using a single word that some of us (including me) dislike, particularly as most GPs - like most members of the public - have no idea that many women find 'cis' objectionable.

Where have I heard that idea before? Where have I heard that professionals should be shamed, dragged through misconduct hearings and lose their jobs for not using the 'correct' terminology? Oh yes, that's right - it was from Fae, McKinnon, Lees, Challenor et al.

As I said above, these are TRA tactics and, if we start adopting them as GC women, we are no better than the TRAs.

Does that include disclosure to other medical professionals? Because surely anyone treating the patient needs to know in order to ensure they get appropriate and effective treatment

Yes. Crazy.

If I inadvertently disclose a trans person's birth sex, even for sound medical reasons, I commit a criminal offence.

Does that include disclosure to other medical professionals? Because surely anyone treating the patient needs to know in order to ensure they get appropriate and effective treatment.

Most GPs are not members of the RCGP. In our practice of 5 GPs only one is. Like the BMA it is often out of touch with ordinary non academic doctors. Only 2 of us are BMA members.

If you want people to be enlightened then perhaps don't tell them to fuck off.

JackyHolyoake That's not correct.

Most of the GRA is civil law, but Section 22 creates an offence for disclosure by anyone who has the knowledge in an official capacity, e.g. an HCP:

It is an offence for a person who has acquired protected information in an official capacity to disclose the information to any other person

See also link is from one of the main medicolegal indemnity associations.

XX I think that's a pretty rude thing to say to placemats

I think it's pretty rude casually to talk about ending a GP's career (which is what a complaint for misconduct can mean) because you object to the word 'cis', or any other word, for that matter. It's the exactly the sort of behaviour we despise in TRAs. Depressing to see our own side adopting the same tactics.

XX I think that's a pretty rude thing to say to placemats. I hope you're not my gp. Or anyone I know's.

XXcstatic

See also: medium.com/@anneharperwright/sex-gender-the-nhs-1e8f4e6363a6

XXcstatic

"If I inadvertently disclose a trans person's birth sex, even for sound medical reasons, I commit a criminal offence. It's a minefield. "

The GRA 2004 is a civil law, not a criminal law, so no crime can be committed in regard to that law.

Also see the Equality Act 2010 exceptions:

Schedule 3: Services and public functions: exceptions

Section 27: Single-sex services
Parts 5, 6 and 7

See also: Section 28: Gender reassignment

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/schedule/3

I have sent an email to RCGP explaining that "cisgender" is a fictitious term when applied to humans.

I have every sympathy with any pressure that is applied to our GPs and all other medical professionals to be 'politically correct'. They, of all people, know that no human can ever change their sex.

You will also know that the Gender Recognition Act 2004 acknowledges that no human can ever change their sex; that it creates a Legal Fiction.

Those who have studied molecular chemistry will know that "cis" and "trans" relate to the location of molecules in any structure. [It is also sometimes used in relation to location in geography.] Beyond that "cis" and "trans" have no real meaning and certainly do not have any application to humans.

Incidentally, as the word cisgender would only come up in relation to trans issues, I should imagine the majority of women could go a lifetime without ever hearing a doctor use the word in relation to them. I hope the medical profession never reach the point where they stop using woman to mean exactly that.

I suspect they’ve been fed this stuff and indoctrinated/forced to use it, even if they believe it to be nonsense. In addition, the use of cisgendered probably seems harmless. Until I recognised the cynical way cis was being used, I didn’t feel it was a big deal either.

That may not have filtered through, but I’m certain the huge majority of doctors have a sound understanding of biological sex and (I dare say) most probably continue to consider transition as a treatment for a mental health disorder and are waiting for sanity to return.

Funny that you are not addressing my concerns.

I personally think cisgender is hate speech.

It's not up to me to change this. It's up to you as a GP to respond to it.

Which I guess would be with silence.

We should all complain to the RCGP about referring to us all as "cisgender

Or maybe we could do something a little more constructive, and thank the RCGP for coming out against GPs being pressured to prescribe trans hormones/PBs?

Yes, language is important and I hate 'cis", but shooting down someone who is supporting caution in prescribing for one poorly chosen word is a spectacular own goal.

If a GP referred to me as cisgender I would report them for misconduct and harassment

Oh do fuck off. I'm a GP, I am as GC as they come, but I am putting my career on the line every time I say anything even vaguely GC. The Royal College of GPs, the GMC and the GPs' Committee of the BMA have all swallowed the Kool Aid. If I get suspended by the GMC for saying anything perceived as anti-trans, I can lose my job. If I inadvertently disclose a trans person's birth sex, even for sound medical reasons, I commit a criminal offence. It's a minefield.

If a senior GP has courage to speak out against pressuring GPs to prescribe hormones, in the face of all the medical authorities lined up against him, that should be applauded. It probably took enormous effort to get this agreed statement agreed by the RCGP, given their usual uncritically pro-trans stance.

I'd love to know how many times you've risked losing your job & livelihood to speak up against trans ideology, CKoRn. Bloody easy to be brave behind a pseudonym.

Erk!

"In the vast majority of cases, trans patients will present to the GP with the same conditions that cisgender patients do"

If my GP ever refers to me as "cisgender" he may find himself in A&E before he knows what happened! [Wink]

We should all complain to the RCGP about referring to us all as "cisgender"!!!!

RCGP Press office: 020 3188 7633/7574/7575
Out of hours: 0203 188 765
[email protected]

If a GP referred to me as cisgender I'd immediately tell them that I think that word is akin to hate speech.

The guidance re. "bridging prescriptions" etc still appears on the GMC ethical guidance website.

Just to say I have been here for some time, posting under another name...
In the case of this doctor, yes I would. I’ve worked with him and know him both personally and professionally. He is an excellent GP, and a lovely man. I suspect if he knew the way in which some women (myself included) felt about the word c*s he would be very apologetic to have used it. As an aside I’m hoping to have a chat with him about how the local CAMHS service lists Mermaids as a suitable source of info for gender questioning children and their families and I’ll certainly be asking him about where/who is providing the info for the online learning module mentioned.
GPs were issues with guidance some years ago by the GMC that suggested (and contravening advice in all other specialist areas that we practice within our competency as generalists rather than specialists) that we consider prescribing drug treatments for patients while they are awaiting specialist review. There was a lot of consternation a,ongst regular GPs and a lot of concern over what was going on behind the scenes to prompt such advice. I think the RCGP position is really helpful on this occasion.