Never thought I'd post on here but males on female hospital wards. Wtf

I was put on a men's ward as there was no space elsewhere. Luckily, there were only 2 men present. 1 was a prisoner chained to the bed with a guard next to him and the second was an older gent who kept shouting at me about the prisoner chained to the bed, he was convinced that he was whispering.
Though if you count the guard it was 3 men.

They behave in some of the least ethical ways I have ever seen. They try to break and smear the person. They falsify records and lie under oath.

And that's when they're responsible for somebody dying, not a "mere" (in their view) sexual assault.

I guess the argument involves recognising that trans women are very likely to be assaulted. I do accept that, but think there aren’t many cases where it’s happened on a hospital ward.
Most wards are mixed with sex specific bays, so it’s not much of a divide anyway.
Psychiatric hospitals are very different and a real problem because there are more likely to be very vulnerable women, for longer periods of time.

My rights and the rest of women's rights are not yours to give away @Rosesareredd

Hospitals are legally required to protect their most vulnerable patients, not sink to the low of only catering to the "I'm alright Jack" patients with no such needs or vulnerabilities.

I hope that when incidents occur (sadly we all know it happens) the assaulted women will sue the hospital and make it very public. I'm not a fan of compensation culture but the NHS would surely take notice of legal action, and it might lead to them - mostly male managers I would guess - NOT dismissing women's justified concerns about this topic.

It must have been awful, as you say, even going to the loo would be traumatic for some women as they’re self conscious anyway, never mind on a ward full of men.

A significant proportion of the female population are survivors of sexual assault. Of those, many will be living with PTSD.

Doesn't take a genius to work out the serious damage caused to those women's health to be dumped on a male ward.

And also why people living with mental illness have a shorter life expectancy due to being unable to access the physical healthcare they need.

Despite the NHS having legal obligations to protect those women from the harm of being put in such a position. NHS doesn't give a shit about its legal duties around consent, why would it care about the public sector equality duty in Equality Act or its overriding duty of care to vulnerable patients.

Buy hey who cares? NHS doesn't give a shit about legal obligations and will fight legal cases all the way even when their conduct was quite clearly unlawful and despicable.

NHS is toxic and destroys lives.

I’m amazed how little awareness there is that lots of wards are mixed sex. That’s what we should all be furious about. Not much point singling out trans women in this instance (although I also don’t want them on my ward) when there are men there anyway.

We have let it creep in in small ways...female booktubers delighted that a book by a transwoman is on the shortlist for the Women Prize for Fiction and upset it didn't win and large forms declaring that everyone should declare their preferred pro-nouns.

Women cheerfully declaring themselves Trans Allies and happily referring to themselves as Cis women.

Where did people think it would lead? Here, that's where and in my gloomy opinion much worse is to come.

From your experience I can understand why you’d feel that way. However, as a female, I wouldn’t be worried about being on a ward with males.

The vast majority of wards are mixed sex. Most people only make this discovery when at their most vulnerable.

You might be lucky enough that all the men's beds are grouped at one end and there may be separate sex toilets, but you'll still have men in your line of sight able to see you in bed and walking past you. With easy access to you when you are sleeping.

Some assessment wards incl surgical ive seen women alone with male patients in beds either side and opposite them. Whilst lying there vulnerable, in pain and groggy. No staff in those bays other than for occasional obs. No safeguarding.

One woman left her bed and sat on the corridor floor sobbing.

If you are "lucky" enough to be in an all female bay, there is nothing to stop male patients wandering in at all hours of the day and night - and they do. In one day 2 male patients wandered into the same female bay and fortunately were challenged by staff (which was pure luck because most of the time there were no staff there to have challenged anyone walking in to rape a sleeping patient.) "I was looking for the toilets" - the clearly marked toilets that they had to walk past in order to leave their bay.

Safeguarding women in NHS hospitals doesn't happen. Hence recent cases of female stroke patients being raped by staff.

And that's just the ones we know about because one woman died, leading to an independent professional discovering her injuries. Otherwise it would have continued.

The cases of abuse that we hear about in NHS hospitals are the tip of the iceberg. People would do well to remember that when they're attempting to silence valid challenge and criticism with their blind hero worship.

It must have been awful, as you say, even going to the loo would be traumatic for some women as they’re self conscious anyway, never mind on a ward full of men.

Is that 'discriminatory' against sweet old grannies?

Obviously not. Everyone is treated the same. No group is singled out.

Here's a novel idea, because it might be quite difficult for hospital staff to know, how about we keep biological males, the people who commit the vast majority of sexual crimes, away from biological females, the people most likely to be their victims.

Really doesn't sound complicated does it? So how have we ended up here?

Anne Harper-Wright
'Sex, Gender & the NHS'
October 16th 2018

(extract)
"When the law added the legal concept of ‘gender’ to the measure of who is male and who is female, it created an almighty conflict with sex. Sex or gender can be paramount, but both cannot be balanced equally. Because there an irresolvable clash between the two concepts, and one must win. Are you ‘of the female sex’? Or ‘of the female gender’? It’s essentially a question of ‘who do you share common characteristics with, what are those characteristics, and how important is that commonality to you?’ (continues)

The birth of Legal Gender; the death of Legal Sex. The Gender Recognition Act.
In 2004, a piece of legislation called the Gender Recognition Act quietly became law. The primary purpose of the act was ostensibly to allow approximately 5000 mostly biologically male transsexuals, via a tightly controlled and medically certificated approval process, to be treated as if they were female so that they could marry another man. In the era when same sex marriage was prohibited, there was a greater appetite for creating an apparent ‘heterosexual’ marriage from a same sex relationship, than there was to legalise same sex marriage. A ‘legal fiction’ was approved. Birth certificates were altered. Biologically male became legally female. ‘Gender’ became legally recognised, and, it was agreed, gender trumps sex.
The Act in essence changed the definition of male and female from a biological definition to a psychological one.
This set in motion the re-categorisation of an entire society into two psychological gender groups instead of by the sexes.
Gender gradually REPLACED sex. For all of us. People started to be sorted by purported ‘psychology’, not biology.

The votes for the Gender Recognition bill were split down party lines. A Labour Government whip resulted in 289 labour votes for the bill. Most conservative MPs however, voted against the passing of this bill that enabled the concept of ‘gender’ to supersede sex. A conservative MP, Andrew Lansley, however, rebelled and voted aye.

Andrew Lansley was in no doubt of the distinction between sex and gender. He voted for gender to legally outrank and overwrite sex.
Six years later in 2010 Andrew Lansley rose to the role of Health Secretary within the coalition government. (continues)

In 2005, shortly after the Gender Recognition Act was made law, an NHS exercise was commenced to standardise patient information and data within the various IT systems across the NHS. Within this exercise a suite of documentation was created, dedicated to designing a system architecture that could attempt to cope with the challenges specific to using BOTH sex AND gender as data.
Because the consequences of an NHS mix up between sex and gender was recognised as dire. And this risk was noted in several NHS documents, produced by the Microsoft Health Common User Interface team" (continues)

In 2010, to great fanfare, Health Secretary Andrew Lansley of the Conservative party announced the Coalition Government’s laudable commitment to place all NHS hospital patients in single-sex wards — with any mixed sex breaches made public and financial penalties imposed.

“It should be more than an expectation, it should be a requirement that patients who are admitted should be admitted to single-sex accommodation,” the Health Secretary told BBC Radio 4’s PM programme.
“Patients should be in single-sex accommodation, meaning that all of their period that they are admitted they should be in a bed or a bay which only consists of people of the same sex." (continues)

Categorical statements such as these from Lansley were uttered in the same year that a new Act; the Equality Act 2010, committed to continuing to protect biological SEX based rights, with sex being one of 9 protected characteristics that would be monitored to stop discrimination. ‘Gender reassignment’ was one of the nine protected characteristics, and biological sex was another, protected in its own right. The two characteristics are differentiated and distinct in law.
So when the Government announced the characteristic for NHS ward segregation would be ‘sex’ that was an unambiguous statement relating to a specific protected characteristic. Biological sex is a tangible, physical reality. NHS Wards were promised to be explicitly single sex, not single gender. Bodily dignity and privacy for the biological sexes, not segregation by invisible personality type." (continues)

The truth: “The policy commitment relates to gender, not sex”.
Despite what the public were told, the policy was always explicitly based upon segregating by ‘gender’ and not sex, right from its inception.
NHS documents and records dated from 2010 show that before the policy was implemented, whilst still in its design stages, the specifications always related to gender, not sex. And yet the name of the policy, and all references to it to the general public were explicitly instructed to be sex, not gender. The opposite of the truth.

The deliberate use of the word SEX to name the policy, whilst using GENDER to facilitate it, was a Department of Health mandate from Andrew Lansley." (continues)
medium.com/@anneharperwright/sex-gender-the-nhs-1e8f4e6363a6

to assume criminal intent as a first point of risk is discriminatory.

NO. the naughty corner makes way for gaslighting like this.

Not assumption Trampolean. the title is "Patient safety fears as NHS allows trans sex offenders in female-only wards".they are convicted sex offenders. Did you even read the article? where's your empathy for the females assaulted in mixed sex wards? Any feelings for the heartbreaking stories on this thread alone?

I'm grateful that trans men and trans women are now speaking up about this nightmare. most people with empathy, including many LGBT don't agree with it. All human beings have a right to respect and dignity.

Here's the thread on the same topic, started in the naughty corner.
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4313090-Telegraph-Patient-safety-fears-as-NHS-allows-trans-sex-offenders-in-female-only-wards

Agree - it is horrifying!

Do you know how hospitals work?

I was taken into hospital last year and placed on an all male ward. Adding me made the ward mixed

That was that

7 blokes and me in 1 room, and me shuffling to the loo in my gown that is open at the back, with my bare bottom on show

THAT is the much revered and much loved NHS (yes, staff are great, the system isn’t)

Saying you don’t want to be next to a trans person would be a pointless wish anyway, as you may be sharing a room with 7 men anyway

Such fun

Here's a novel idea, because it might be quite difficult for hospital staff to know, how about we keep biological males, the people who commit the vast majority of sexual crimes, away from biological females, the people most likely to be their victims.

Really doesn't sound complicated does it? So how have we ended up here?

The health service has always prioritised the needs of males. Even now that it has been widely acknowledged that this is the case, they continue to pursue the most extreme forms of male prioritisation, putting not only the needs, but the wants and feelings of males (including sex offenders) over the safety, recovery and dignity of women.

January 2019 Telegraph article
'NHS trans row as men get access to women's wards if they identify as female'
By
Camilla Tominey, ASSOCIATE EDITOR and Joani Walsh

(extract)
"Hospitals routinely allow male patients to share female wards if they self-identify as women, an investigation by The Telegraph has found.

Despite official guidance intended to eliminate mixed sex wards, none of the NHS trusts in England require a patient to have begun transition for them to be treated as their preferred sex, according to responses to more than 100 Freedom of Information requests.

One trust even advises staff to consult with the transgender patient if a female victim of sexual assault objects to sharing facilities with someone who may be biologically and legally male.

The NHS is unable to track how many transgender people are accommodated on wards for the opposite sex because data systems record them as their “preferred” sex.

The Department of Health’s “elimination of mixed sex wards” guidance upon which individual trusts must base their policies says that “men and women should not have to share sleeping accommodation or toilet/bathroom facilities”. But the document adds, “except where it is in the overall best interests of the patient or reflects their patient choice”.

As a result, a physically intact male has the right to choose to be treated on a ward for women that is simultaneously declared to be single sex." (continues)

The Telegraph has been contacted by a nurse at a city hospital with a report of a patient identifying as a transgender woman who appeared to become sexually aroused on a female ward, causing distress to a group of elderly patients.

The incident raises concerns about the lack of “equality impact assessments” (EIAs) that should be undertaken by law to determine the effect on all groups that may be affected by transgender policy changes. EIAs seen by The Telegraph appear to have taken into account the impact only on transgender patients rather than on others who should also be considered because of their sex, age or religion." (continues)

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/01/10/nhs-trans-row-men-get-access-womens-wards-identify-female/
archived version archive.fo/Q23HE

thread
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3475792-Telegraph-article-NHS-trans-row-as-men-get-access-to-womens-wards-if-they-identify-as-female

So tired of it now. That anyone suggests to assume potential offender makes women transphobic...

Really highlights that they actually have no idea what it is to be a woman, doesn't it. Seems that make privilege certainly doesn't disappear after transition.

A male-bodied sex offender in the bed next to you when you're immobile and in pain is definitely not a question that should concern women in the slightest. It's simply a question of trans rights.

Really doesn't sound complicated does it? So how have we ended up here?

Perhaps like Layla Moran they can see into souls.