Nursing conference today calling for 'birthing people to be used '

No, I believe the technical term for that is ‘through the sunroof’

This persons tone is interesting. When I see language like this I interpret it as this:

"I'd be really interested in policing your language and any subtle signs of disagreement even if you say nothing will be noted down as transphobia."

A frontal delivery would be a C-section, surely?

can't even comment on this, it makes me so fucking angry.

'birthing person'. Fuck that. FUCK that.

yes.

Well I’m sat here with a load of doctors and nurses on my break and have just read them that. We are outraged it’s ridiculous.

It is unprecedented that language should be changed across the board on behalf of a minority so small as to be negligible to the detriment of the majority of users of a service, including those from other minorities. There is no rational evidence of need, there is no data to support the changes.

It is simply a power play by those with ambition to become the new elite to suit their own ends.

Exactly Artichokeleaves.

This is all being driven by zealous female “allies”.

I have never heard from nor met any woman who denies her sex in the sphere birth and breastfeeding.

They are the tiniest minority, and they should be taken into account and shown the same respect and compassion due to all but the ideologues put them on a pedestal and seek power through them.

As soon as I see that someone has their pronouns defined in their social media bio (or worse as part of their name) I know they're not going to be nice people and will not have anything of value to say.

My answer every time is the NHS is now referring to people with a uteruses/cervix etc but still fucking men when it comes to prostate cancer. And the chest feeding, men and woman have breasts! Both can get breast cancer, so why isn’t it still breast feeding?

I'd also be interested in exactly how many female people we are talking about, in each unit per year, whose needs are met by this.

Not female people who would like to virtue signal by supporting it; those who actually need it themselves.

I suspect we're talking about a tiny, tiny proportion of patients. Their individual special need can be accommodated on a case by case basis and it is not necessary to totally and unilaterally re design all language and policy when this is not something needed and raised by the massive, massive majority who were and are perfectly happy with language as it was.

Which means that this is not needs driven. This ideology driven. And it's largely coming from a political desire to remove 'sex' as a concept, to separate female from biological function so that male people can own it, and to disadvantage, disempower and subordinate female humans to a male-centric world view.

No thank you. Other people's births are not an arena for activists to enjoy splashing about in.

I agree nepeta, we need separate resources to avoid confusion. We are talking about two distinct groups with distinct needs and a different language. What the majority of us mean when we say mother or woman or breast is completely different from what gender identity believers mean when they use those words. The words have different meanings for each group. The language of gender identity and the language of sex cannot be effectively combined and communicate clearly you both groups it becomes a mess.

Which is offensive in more than one way.

I have had multiple miscarriages. And I hated that I didn’t ‘birth’ those children. If I worked fir that company, I would be speaking to HR about my experiences and how traumatic it was not to have given birth as planned. How dare they rub salt in the wound and be so crass,y offensive as to say ‘birthing parent’ in a situation like that.

Normally, I plan my objections thoughtfully and carefully, but I am so incensed about this subject, I would be marching straight in there.

Frontal delivery - rather ambiguous I agree!

We are surely going to end up with children growing up believing that men can be pregnant & deliver a baby!

All the online health information sources could have a separate starting question about identity which would lead readers to articles of the sex they actually have and to any information which differs for transgender people. I'm certain it could be done as a choice in a menu. That would leave sex-based language in general use but also cater for inclusiveness.

I could understand it more in relation to something like cervical screening, although I still don't like language such as "people with cervixes".

But if you are able to put your belief that you are not a woman to one side for the purposes of growing a baby in your uterus, giving birth to it and potentially breastfeeding, the idea that being referred to as a woman is what is going to unacceptably trigger your dysphoria is utterly ridiculous. Cope.

God forbid the word "woman" should be used in the context of female biology! Don't you know that that is exclusionary of all those male people who identify as women! How dare you say that women have female bodies!

This ridiculous 'she/her' RN might work in gynae and deal with early pregnancy loses. Where I worked we had a cut off at 17 weeks of pregnancy - miscarry before that and women fell within the remit of gynae, staffed with nurses & after that with midwives in the obstetrics depth.

I saw the expression 'frontal delivery' recently which I take to be a synonym for vaginal delivery. Just horrendous, not to mention opaque. It could mean the woman's on her front. I'm ashamed that this is being allowed in my former profession. If I hadn't left already I'd certainly leave now.

I had an ECS and was frequently told by my MIL that I didn't give birth. I guess I'd be the "too posh to push parent"

From the above article

“Desexing the language of female reproduction has been done with a view to being sensitive to individual needs and as beneficial, kind, and inclusive. Yet, this kindness has delivered unintended consequences that have serious implications for women and children. These include: decreasing overall inclusivity; dehumanizing; including people who should be excluded; being imprecise, inaccurate or misleading; and disembodying and undermining breastfeeding. In addition, avoidance of the term “mother” in its sexed sense, risks reducing recognition and the right to protection of the mother-infant dyad.”

The Twitter name says RN not RM so she is presumably a nurse not a midwife and therefore doesn’t work in maternity. However since she has questions someone should send her this.

www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fgwh.2022.818856/full

I recently got into an argument on Facebook about calling breastfeeding chestfeeding. My point was that there is an expectation that medical providers will refer to the body's functions and parts by their true names and not by euphemisms.
There are unfortunate instances of women giving birth who are in a state of psychosis or they are developmentally delayed or God forbid children who have never learned sex Ed. Would a medical professional pretend that they are not in fact pregnant or that their body contains a uterus and said uterus contains a fetus which must somehow be expelled from the body?
Can you think of any circumstances under which a caregiver would refuse to reiterate to their patient what is actually happening to them and pretend that it is some other process entirely?

And it worries me greatly that it was a midwife, of all people, who posted this.

She must have come across lots of desperately heartbroken and devastated women in the throes or aftermath of losing a baby. How the fuck has she managed not to develop empathy for them or consideration for their needs? How can she possibly be emotionally competent to care for vulnerable women during pregnancy and birth?

Agree completely about how offensive, hurtful and insensitive this is to women who have miscarried, suffered a stillbirth or need a termination.

With one in four pregnancies ending in miscarriage, this has the potential to traumatise thousands of women every year, in an attempt to avoid ‘triggering’ the very small proportion of natal women who have a different gender identity and are yet able to overlook this enough to get pregnant, a bodily function that is quintessentially of the female sex.

I have no problem with midwifes asking patients how they wish to be addressed and respecting that. But general communications must be clear, must not erase women and must be sensitive to the emotional needs of the great number of women who sadly lose a baby.

Midwife means 'with woman'. I wonder how long it will be before there are demands to rename them 'midperson' so nobody is triggered?