NHS ‘gaslighting patients’ on female only wards

I think it’s part of a backlash against the few paltry advances feminism had made.

(I say paltry because while we have “equality” in law, culturally nothing has really changed, as evidenced by the way women’s rights and needs have been so completely ignored and indeed criminalised under this brave new ideology.)

Way to put us back in our place.

I suppose it's the result of a combination of-

• Patriarchy
• Society being way more individualistic now
• The resentment felt by large numbers of men. Loads and loads of men. From minor and probably they don't even realise. To utter rage often combined with a deep feeling of being hard done by, unfairly maligned, this is about women and girls being massively advantaged etc.

Sadly I think the most likely answer at the moment is all the changes pushed for are got.

Women and girls back to square one.

And start all over again. This time with no words to use for us as a group and in secret.

I hope I'm wrong.

It makes you wonder where this will end. What next?

'WHAT ABOUT THE WOMEN’S FEELINGS??'

They don't and have never really mattered. Except to each other. And then loads of women and girls don't feel like that.

Look at the way loads of big societal issues are generally back in the women's section. Look at the way anything seen as women's issues means people glazing over, switching off totally, or immediately feeling hostile and defensive irrespective of the subject.

The gains we make are hard fought, take a long time to get, are always subject to massive criticism by loads of people, and can be taken away in an instant without qualms.

All so a narcissistic transwoman’s feelings aren’t hurt.
Indeed if the transwoman is an autogynephile, then being on this ward amongst vulnerable women could well be part of his erotic desire.
How on earth can nurses safeguard in these circumstances? They can’t run DB checks wile they’re nursing.

WHAT ABOUT THE WOMEN’S FEELINGS??

And this has been seen when NHS pages for info. Have had wording altered in a way that means the whole page is incorrect and incomprehensible.

And worse. When large numbers of people pointed this out. They changed it slightly in a way that still meant the info was incorrect and hard to try and grasp..

How and why is there this. Immediate unthinking acquiescence? And even when things pointed out. Usually there is hopeless action. Or none.

Why is there this. Sort of. Acceptance that following the approach insisted on is the only priority, a total must do?

Oh I was thinking about this and other policies like prisons etc.

And I realised the totally obvious.

The reason the policies are the way they are. Women and girls not given seemingly any consideration at all.

And all the times that things have been changed when the policies were read by other groups and it was pointed out that there was no consideration of women and girls re equalities impact assessment (I think it's called) even though sex is on the standard pro forma. Risk assessment. Basic common sense. Recent example. Secondary went bogs all mixed sex. Loads of parents said what about (list of issues for mostly girls but there are issues for boys too). School said oh yeah right and changed it so single sex was available.

What I realised it's that NONE OF THESE ORGS ETC. Have been involved in any meaningful way in forming or writing these policies.

Bottom line- only thing that makes sense is that they have been contacted and advised that for inclusion and to avoid discrimination etc. They need to adopt a policy look here is what you should write.

And then the really weird and worrying part. They just implement what they were given with no thinking about it. And not just implement. Pay to change things etc. With no apparent engagement of brain. Again I suspect there's an element of 'advised' exactly what to do and they just do it.

Where they tried to accommodate the TW prisoners considered too dangerous to go in the female estate by putting a separate wing in a women's prison and have some controlled, supervised contact.

Can you imagine? A horribly violent sexist being paraded in front of women, flanked by security guards.

And all the women knowing that this is to demonstrate a law that means men can be given access to them as part of their sentence.

The thing that really shocked me, notwithstanding that the Downview unit was bad enough and led to women being sexually assaulted even though they were only mixing, was when Dr Kate Coleman said that they had originally had the bright idea that they could also accommodate all the women considered dangerous in there with these extremely violent males.

This story?

This is being reported in the Daily Mail on line - over 1,000 comments.
People cannot understand how we have reached this point.

Surely the money and time invested in making crappy rainbow badges would be better used to investigate this issue?

Yes. There is plenty of research or training that would be a better use of the feckless funds for luxury beliefs.

In addition to your suggestions, the money would be well spent on developing NHS policies to make sure stuff like this doesn't happen. Badges and encouraging HCPs to be Stasi allies won't fix this, as with so many problems that are familiar to women, this is something that discussion with relevant stakeholders, proper training and cultural support would improve for everyone .

twitter.com/Finn_Mackay/status/1424061707484270597

From a slightly different perspective. Perhaps Sajid Javid could take a look at this in terms of value for money and competence of management.

grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/the-nhs-has-fallen

TheNHS Rainbow Badge Schemeis a Stonewall-devised taxpayer-funded initiative in which ‘NHS staff who have pledged to provide support and signposting to LGBT+ people’ are rewarded with a badge to wear.

This may sound like infantilising nonsense, which of course it is, but many, including doctors, find the scheme sinister, particularly the pressure that comes with it to participate. One GP said anidentical scheme in Scotlandwould make more sense if it was run by the Stasi, while Lord Moonie, the Labour peer, called it “a scandalous waste of scarce resources at a time when every penny should be going towards recovery from the Covid-19 epidemic”.

Nonetheless, a few days ago NHS Rainbow Badgerevealedthat NHS England has provided further funding for the scheme, so that another 40 NHS trusts can ‘undertake the NHS Rainbow Badge assessment model’.

Amid tweets about how successful this badge scheme is, a Twitter account asked them if the ‘terf’ responsible for a change in information in a trans programme had been fired.

Incredibly,despite this being stated just a week after Ofcom acknowledged that ‘terf’ is an offensive slur, NHS Rainbow Badge - an NHS account with 14,000 followers - replied: ‘Its an understandable but incorrect assumption that a terf was responsible’.

Meanwhile, on the same day that the NHS Rainbow Badge revealed that it had secured even more public funding,an academic study was publishedon NHS gender identity clinic users between 2017 and 2018. It found that 43.9 per cent of patients did not complete their treatment and concludes that the patients 'may have unmet [mental health] needs' and “detransitioning might be more frequent than previously reported”. Surely the money and time invested in making crappy rainbow badges would be better used to investigate this issue?

Kate’s speech starts around 16.15 and is a a vividly clear and compelling argument, I think it articulates a profoundly important point about where we are now.

And I couldn’t agree more, Artichokeleaves:

There is no compromise possible, there is not one scrap of care or empathy in social contract that will ever be extended for female people and their needs, there is no 'balance'. The only solution is no. None. Not any. Male and female absolute segregation. Now go and lobby for additional spaces to the sex based ones.

On the EIA I have a copy of, in the section 'Expected impact upon other groups' , under the protected characteristic of sex (changed to 'gender') is written:
'Positive: Increased awareness of the wider spectrum of Trans patients within policy'.

I specifically want the harms of farming this out to junior staff or advocates with an agenda to be brought to the surface. I want to know how much the health trusts outsourced their policymaking to SW without ever factchecking it or running it by other people/groups for an alignment of risk and values.

Sorry Embarrassing, I managed to miss the comment you were replying directly to - agree with you re mass purging!

On the EIA I have a copy of, in the section 'Expected impact upon other groups' , under the protected characteristic of sex (changed to 'gender') is written:
'Positive: Increased awareness of the wider spectrum of Trans patients within policy'.

WOW.

Still climbing.

Nobody ever seems to lose their job after a public enquiry anyway so I’m not going to worry about the implications of a totally hypothetical process just now!

Savile, Hillsborough, Rotherham and all the other towns where the grooming gang culture was enabled and allowed to flourish for so long - hardly anyone in authority has faced any serious consequences for any of those situations. It’s the victims who pay the price and live with the consequences, every time.

I keep climbing that bloody mountain. And I never get to the top.

Oh yes. Same here.

I don't want people to lose their jobs. This is not about becoming oppressors.

Is it oppressive to want people in the most senior of senior management positions to be accountable for actions (or inactions) that constitute gross negligence and malpractice, that have such enormously harmful real world consequences for people who are already very vulnerable?

I’m not talking about the individuals who’ve had to implement these policies but surely the buck stops somewhere, and those who completely switched off their critical faculties and allowed Stonewall et al to dictate policy and drive a train right through all standard safeguarding and equality practices should have to answer for it, in this domain as in all the others where this ideology has wreaked such havoc.

But anyway, we’re nowhere near that point atm, so its all in the realms of the hypothetical for now.

Mostly I just want the truth to come out and be acknowledged. I want the gaslighting and lies to stop, along with the very real harm being caused to women and children. But the way things are that feels like a pretty huge ask.

To be crystal clear, I want the truth and reconciliation events so that the people involved can begin to understand how much they've damaged their ability to be responsible for safeguarding or a mandatory report.

This is a cataclysmic breach of the public's understanding of the protective frameworks in health and social care and it needs to be aired in public.

Where they tried to accommodate the TW prisoners considered too dangerous to go in the female estate by putting a separate wing in a women's prison and have some controlled, supervised contact.

Can you imagine? A horribly violent sexist being paraded in front of women, flanked by security guards.

And all the women knowing that this is to demonstrate a law that means men can be given access to them as part of their sentence.

I keep climbing that bloody mountain. And I never get to the top.

I don't want people to lose their jobs. This is not about becoming oppressors.

I would like a truth and reconciliation event as to how this was allowed to take hold in the NHS (all of the commissioners and individual trusts), NICE (relevant because of their quality standards work and guidelines), CQC and other pertinent organisations.