'Working with Stonewall is no longer compatible with NHS values' | Comment | Health Service Journal

The HSJ is indeed well read and well regarded.

I do find it extraordinary that most policies on single sex wards in the NHS have just thrown in a whole huge paragraph saying that anyone who identifies as a woman, even if they have a great big beard called John, can go into the women’s ward. This is without any proper consultation on the consequences. Sleeping overnight, changing, undressing, recovering or being ill are hugely vulnerable things for most people to go through. A man who say, is a serial sex offender could just say he’d like to go into the women’s ward and he will be able to. None of this has been thought through.

There are mixed wards and spaces but they have more protection and privacy in place - so hospitals often already have this option for those who’d like a third space.

Also, single sex wards are not just a preference. I think that this is where things have gone so wrong. If they were just a preference, with no real need on safety, privacy and dignity - then there wouldn’t be a problem. However when hospitals did bring in more mixed wards over the last half of the century - problems did arise and patients became distressed. Sexual harassment was higher in mixed wards also (there is evidence for this)

The NHS is built on medicine which is ‘first do no harm’. I think that there needs to be a professional review and at the very least a roll back and revert to policies on biological sex - then all relevant parties and evidence can be discussed properly until a solution can be found.

"However, it is not possible to guarantee to any patient that they will only be treated by a clinician assigned to a specific gender at birth and, as an organisation that prides itself on our commitment to diversity and inclusion, nor would we wish to do so."

That is pretty disgusting IMHO and may even be a potential breach of medical ethics. The patient's needs should always come first.

"is based on four common, basic prima facie moral commitments - respect for autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice - plus concern for their scope of application. It offers a common, basic moral analytical framework and a common, basic moral language. Although they do not provide ordered rules, these principles can help doctors and other health care workers to make decisions when reflecting on moral issues that arise at work."

www.bmj.com/content/309/6948/184

Fantastic article, spot on.

If however you say "I asked for a female HCP but got a TW" you'll be in trouble. You aren't supposed to mention it, but you can site a vague reason.

Obviously not everyone has read the complete rulebook of gender woo.

Even after "apologising" that hospital says this:
However, it is not possible to guarantee to any patient that they will only be treated by a clinician assigned to a specific gender at birth and, as an organisation that prides itself on our commitment to diversity and inclusion, nor would we wish to do so.

Great article.

I can't work out how to post the minutes from the meeting Baroness Nicholson was part a couple of weeks ago, but it describes details of all of the above.

The mammographer signed one letter confirming she was female and another letter was placed in Dimyon’s medical records. But two weeks ago she saw her letters highlighted by the trust as examples of “unacceptable” and “highly discriminatory” communications in guidelines to support trans patients and staff.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3763519-A-woman-who-asked-for-her-NHS-breast-screening-to-be-carried-out-by-a-female-born-clinician-was-pilloried-as-a-transphobe-by-a-hospital-trust

www.brightonandhovenews.org/2019/12/09/hospital-apologises-to-rape-victim-for-branding-her-request-for-same-sex-breast-screening-medic-as-transphobic/

Are patients allowed to ask for another nurse / doctor or chaperone on the grounds that they feel uncomfortable with the one they were allocated regardless of the HCP's sex or gender?

This is a fantastic article.

Would anyone be too for some FOI requests to NHS trusts for:

• their policy on admitting trans patients
• any equality impact assessments they have carried out to understand the effect of their policies on people with other protected characteristics
• any guidance for staff around managing risk to vulnerable patients e.g. trans man on a mental health ward with male sex offenders; trans woman with a forensic history of assaulting women on a ward with vulnerable women

My workplace are now in Stonewall's pocket, too.

We work with many, many vulnerable people especially women and children.

I see the men in the comments are turning out in force to protect the rights of those whom they preferred to be centred in All The Things.

I expect them to be joined by plenty of women who are also desperate to centre etc.

Fabulous!

"My concerns are three-fold. First, and most importantly, Stonewall’s influence is undermining our ability to keep our patients safe. Secondly, it stifles free speech and creates a culture of fear amongst some staff. Thirdly, it gives misleading and potentially unlawful advice, opening up NHS organisations to litigation and reputational damage.

bang

bang

bang

three shots on target

I know it was posted up thread but that pararaph is so damned good, I may have to mermorize it

Really good article. Very clear in articulating dangerous policy.

www.hsj.co.uk/comment/the-bedpan-gps-are-scared--i-dont-blame-them/7024816.article

The comments underneath are the most interesting part, and a reminder that many women of FWR work in the health service :)

I wonder if there will be competition to sign up Kate Grimes to Sex Matters or any of the other groups, if she's willing?

Did Mermaids ever set up those 45 support groups they got all that lottery money for?

I wonder when the commenters will deign to reflect on why they want to know the identity of the anon people. What would they do if they identified them?

I've noticed the comments under the article from NHS people involved with Stonewall

Thanks for sharing.

Has anyone else noticed the link on that page to an article about Susie Green from April 2019?

It's worth reading

I hope all the points in this article are fed back to the women's health consultation which ends on Sunday

I have to comment twice on that article because she has absolutely nailed it. Wow. Thank you so much Kate Grimes.