Rape victims will choose gender of their examiner (Scotland)

You would have to ask Jeane Freeman directly what she meant. She has obfuscated the issue by

(a) not correcting the Convenor when the Convenor said "gender" ;
(b) dissembling about what she did actually say;
(c ) ignoring what the existing and prospective legislation says.

She needs to be put on the spot- is "gender" in the following merely a synonym for "sex"? Or does it have the meaning used in other legislation such as the Gender Recognition Act?

an opportunity to request that any such medical examination be carried out by a registered medical practitioner of a gender specified by the person

A man may prefer to be examined by a woman and I imagine that most if not all medical examiners really do not mind examining either sex. These things are both fine. I am interested though in the concept of insisting that a woman must examine a man even if she does’t want to because it is required by her job. I don’t think this legislation does that (I haven’t looked at it and am totally unfamiliar with it and it’s origins), but for me there is something to think about there, so I am thinking.

Could a woman who has been raped, refusing a trans woman as an examiner, be guilty of discrimination/ hate crime?

Agree if they're changing sex to gender in the law then they might as well just do away with the law.

Having this law when they know it is utterly meaningless is incredibly sly. It looks like protections are there, but they aren't.

I'm also confused about this can a man choose thing.

A man who has been raped by a man might well prefer to be examined by a woman.

The various protocols around this have always said patients can choose for particular things, it's not just for women. Why would it be?

But she didn't say " choose the sex...."

The legislation refers to "gender" not sex.

Actually what I said was ‘choose the sex...” I’m not responsible for how a journalist reports

When I'm reviewing academic, clinical papers - I constantly go through and ask if they mean sex when they write gender. For clinical research in my typical field it's unusual enough to have researchers state the numbers of both sexes even when it's relevant, it's vanishingly rare that gender is specifically on-topic. (I did have one recently where I mentioned that both sex and gender were potentially pertinent which may have baffled the authors.)

Of course what a victim, male or female, is entitled to ask for under existing legislation and prospective legislation is

an opportunity to request that any such medical examination be carried out by a registered medical practitioner of a gender specified by the person

"Gender" is not defined in the 2014 Act so despite Freeman's protestations it is not clear what a victim is actually entitled to ask for.

Gender is a meaningless term. It has no relation to the sex of the person involved.

Gender is fluid, as they say.

Also confused by why a male victim of sexual assault shouldn't be equally able to choose the sex of the examiner they are more comfortable with.

I've had male friends say they find it harder to accept nursing care from males than females, they don't feel sexually vulnerable with females in the way they do with males, although there are some issues they would feel more comfortable discussing with a male hcp.
A TW may prefer a female examiner, or may not. It needs to be the personal choice of whatever the person feels safest and most comfortable with, since the primary aim is meeting their need.

I don't think this is in any way at all similar to the cases you may be thinking of, where a male under arrest at a police station or in a prison who has identified as a woman and insists on being searched by female officers even though it is apparent to all in the room that the male is exploiting the protection of the law to enjoy a sexual experience/act of sexual intimidation and power over those females that everyone in the room knows they cannot protect themselves from.

but I am interested to know whether a man could insist on a woman doing it?

I'm intrigued by the slightly judgemental tone of saying "insist". Why shouldn't a traumatised man or boy who has been the victim of a sexual assault by a man ask for a woman to carry out the examination?

I have seen posters on MN, not many but a few, say they prefer to be examined by a male practitioner due to sexual assault by women.

So it will be possible for a male victim to require that he is examined by a woman?

A male victim will be able to require the examination is carried out by a person of the gender specified by him. That is literally what the 2014 Act says and what the Bill says.

To be clear the 2014 Act already says "gender".

The 2014 Act will be amended to make clear that what it says about examinations where a complaint about an offence is being made will also apply to self- referral examinations under the Bill.

So it will be possible for a male victim to require that he is examined by a woman?

I can't see anything in the Bill giving the right to ask for a specific sex to carry out the examination

Correction I missed a bit. The Bill will amend section 9 of The Victims and Witnesses (Scotland) Act 2014 to allow a person

an opportunity to request that any such medical examination be carried out by a registered medical practitioner of a gender specified by the person

Thelnebriati

I don't think 'gender' was an error; I think she is saying that under self ID 'gender' will replace sex

Well who knows? She clearly made no mention of "sex" despite castigating a journalist for misreporting her.

There is no "new law"

The Forensic Medical Services (Victims of Sexual Offences) (Scotland) Bill is going through Holyrood.

The Bill's aim is allow forensic evidence to be kept for future use if a victim wants to take matters further. Victims can self refer to a health board rather than the police.I can't see anything in the Bill giving the right to ask for a specific sex to carry out the examination.

There is a Memorandum of Understanding which lists in its contents "Sex of Examiner". NHS Lanarkshire commented that "the patient's choice of sex of forensic examiner must be guaranteed by this legislation" Rape Crisis referred to "the right to have a choice of gender"

I don't think 'gender' was an error; I think she is saying that under self ID 'gender' will replace sex.

Does the new law mean that a man can choose a female examiner? I am sure that most medical professionals do not care whether they examine a male or female body, but I am interested to know whether a man could insist on a woman doing it?

She's being very "economical with the truth" isn't she ? I suppose she knows that a few words on Twitter will be far more widely read and taken at face value than a lengthy report of the minutes of a Holyrood Committee which most people would not even know where to find.

Whatever she says to wiggle about with it, the word used is gender. That's what is being written down, that is what will be used in practice, this is what Scotland are putting in law and they need to own it.

Gender is whatever someone says they are. End of.

So a rape victim can ask for a woman examiner, and be presented with someone who identifies themselves as a woman while the rape victim perceives them as male. And the self identified woman of course does not have to conform to any stereotypical appearance expectations, so this may be someone with a beard, fully male presenting.

At which point it's a straight up win/lose as to whose rights matter - the rape victim to insist that facts and her reality are more important, the TW to insist that rejection of their identity is a crime and intolerable even for a female patient in extreme distressing circumstances where this conflict is causing their patient more distress and cannot be said to be in their best interests - or the objective police and medical need that it is in everybody's interests that this exam is done quickly with the minimum distress to the rape victim, the evidence gathered and the rape victim given what treatment they need.

Under the law changes Scotland are about to make there will be no exemptions, the whole point is they are disposing of the exemptions and we already know: the activist lobby strongly state:

Females may never say no, regardless of their personal situation or the distress it causes them

The needs and rights of the TW always take precedence even if this means a medical professional is in the very odd position of insisting a patient meets their needs - which means putting aside the best interests of your patient for your own, which is against all standard ethics

It is better (and in fact a just punishment) that a female lose access to help and service than be allowed to say no to a TW

The female should be warned that their behaviour is unacceptable and against policy, and people behaving in such a way will not be tolerated in this place.

A female's race, faith, culture, beliefs, disabilities and traumas will not be taken into account.

Own it. Put it in the papers, tell the general public you coward, and own what you are doing to females in the name of happiness and rights for males.

Anyone a Times Subscriber. Really want to know are they talking about choosing a "gender" or do they mean sex

Freeman clearly thinks "gender" and "sex" are synonymous. She did not correct the Convenor's use of "gender"

Actually what I said was ‘choose the sex...” I’m not responsible for how a journalist reports

She did not say "choose the sex...". If she thinks she has been misreported she should take it up with the minute taker.

Good point about the journo perhaps having deliberately used the words gender

The "journo" reported what was said. The word used was "gender".

I think Ms Freeman is being disingenuous.

Here is the verbatim report.

Convener:

Thank you, cabinet secretary. As you said, the committee heard directly from survivors of rape and sexual assault. We heard from Sandy Brindley in person, as well as in writing. She put on the record that the single most important issue for survivors is access to a female doctor or examiner. How confident is the Scottish Government that, through the bill and the other changes that you have described, victims of rape and sexual assault will have a real choice about the gender of the examiner?

09:45

Jeane Freeman:

I am confident about that, based on the following. I say first that I agree completely that people should have that choice; it is particularly important in circumstances such as we are discussing

Now, some 61 per cent of sexual offence examiners are women, and 70 per cent of the doctors who have completed NHS Education for Scotland’s essentials in sexual offences forensic examinations foundation training are women. In addition, introduction of the role of nurse sexual offence examiner improves availability of choice, and work to maximise choice across the country will continue

There are clearly some restrictions to that. For example, where a team of sexual offence examiners is predominantly male, those individuals will be on contracts, so we have to find other ways to add to the number in order to offer choice. The task force has that work well in hand. The 61 per cent figure is, however, a significant improvement and illustrates the commitment to ensuring that choice is available

The full report is below. I can't find anything on a quick skim through which supports her version. The reporting of "gender" is correct. The Convenor used the word "gender". Freeman did not correct that.
www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/report.aspx?r=12717

ahumanfemale
Good point about the journo perhaps having deliberately used the words gender. A doctor will not be able to override the law. And that’s giving me a lot of anxiety just thinking about it.