Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Hospital refuses to operate after woman requests all-female care

917 replies

Imnobody4 · 19/10/2022 17:06

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11316141/Hospital-bans-sex-assault-victim-op-female-care-request.html

I feel quite sick at this.

She was stunned then to receive an email from the hospital's chief executive Maxine Estop Green telling her the operation was off.

She told her the hospital 'did not share her beliefs' and she should make alternative arrangements for her surgery.

The message added the hospital was committed to protecting staff from what it described as 'unacceptable distress'.

Emma urged them to reconsider, adding in a further message she thought they had misunderstood her requests, which she said were entirely within the law.

The hospital said it would offer a private room but would NOT facilitate her requests for single-sex care after her operation.

It also mentioned her comment about pronouns and said it had a responsibility to protect staff from 'discrimination and harassment'.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
14
MrGHardy · 20/10/2022 16:25

How is this not a lawsuit happening though?

Ereshkigalangcleg · 20/10/2022 16:13

Perfectly put, Furry.

FurryDandelionSeekingMissile · 20/10/2022 16:01

karalimed · 20/10/2022 11:26

She literally says "my patient records showed that I refused to use pronouns".

What do you think a pronoun is? Please tell me how anyone can speak English without using pronouns. She is making a nonsense statement.

Congratulations — you obviously paid attention in your primary school English lessons. I, too, learnt about the parts of speech and the definition of "pronoun" when parsing a sentence, at about that age.

I have also been lucky enough to have the privilege of being able to continue English lessons into secondary school, and at these more advanced levels you learn of a difficult concept called "context". It means that a word can actually mean different things depending on when and how you use them!

For example, "hands" are those wiggly things on the end of your arms, but in the context of the phrase "all hands on deck", the word actually means whole people! (This particular type of figure of speech, where a part is used to represent the whole, or vice versa, is known as synecdoche.)

Someone might say "I don't use drugs" and, in nearly all circumstances, through a careful consideration of the context, most people would take that to mean "I don't use illegal recreational drugs", rather than retorting with "Aha, but I saw you take paracetamol with a hot caffeinated drink yesterday, and I know you're on sertraline!"

Similarly, someone might say "I don't have/use/do pronouns" to express disagreement with others requiring them to state their pronouns or to use particular pronouns for others, and only the very obtuse or facetious would ignore the contextual clues and say, "Aha, but you started that very sentence with a pronoun!"

Madcats · 20/10/2022 15:57

That poor lady.

There is a petition here:
citizengo.org/en-gb/ot/209315-princess-grace-total-disgrace

Apologies if somebody has already provided the link.

RadicalFern · 20/10/2022 15:19

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

beastlyslumber · 20/10/2022 15:19

The people(?) on this thread defending the hospital are blowing my mind.

They clearly stated that they were cancelling her operation because they didn't like her beliefs. You can't really look at that in any other way than blatant discrimination.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 20/10/2022 15:03

I worked in a role as a young woman in 1999/2000 where we had certain clients who wouldn't deal with women ever, and they were fully pandered to.

ZeldaFighter · 20/10/2022 14:11

Just to put this out there, my customer service training in 1996 covered what to do if a customer refused to deal with you because you were a woman or person of colour. We were asked to reassure the customer of our ability and competence. If the customer asked to speak to the "man in charge", they could redial the helpline and hope to get a man or they could speak to a team leader, who could be of either sex. Never were we allowed to deny service, unless actual abusive or hateful (racist) language was used.

Surely the hospital should have worked with her to establish how best to help her. Cancelling is punishment and potentially murderous.

As for the staff member opening the door, that seems a premeditated display of dominance and aggression. What are the chances??? And if it was an innocent accident why no apology ???

(Looking back, this training is appalling for people of colour but I can only apologise that we were all white and didn't realise this at the time.)

nilsmousehammer · 20/10/2022 14:09

Ah MN. The joys of women competitively suffering. 😆

Come on. Who had the heating right off in twenty under zero, in full and total lockdown Done Right, making a chicken serve 3000 for nine meals and gratefully gronda-ing at their MiL eating the children while talking to these berets on sticks?

TheClogLady · 20/10/2022 13:58

SelfPortraitWithFoxInSmokingJacket · 20/10/2022 13:46

Can't believe this woman asked for her medical team to consist of two hundred magic unicorns, Terry Wogan and the Queen! Madness.

I know, right?! I was talked through my blood results once by a beret on the end of a stick, and I was grateful.

MY recent blood test results had to be interpreted from chicken scratches in a disused paddock. I’d love the luxury of a talking beret on a stick.

SelfPortraitWithFoxInSmokingJacket · 20/10/2022 13:46

Can't believe this woman asked for her medical team to consist of two hundred magic unicorns, Terry Wogan and the Queen! Madness.

I know, right?! I was talked through my blood results once by a beret on the end of a stick, and I was grateful.

LaughingPriest · 20/10/2022 13:24

Can't believe this woman asked for her medical team to consist of two hundred magic unicorns, Terry Wogan and the Queen! Madness.

FannyCann · 20/10/2022 13:20

TastefulRainbowUnicorn · 20/10/2022 12:28

I would really like to know whether their female Muslim patients are expected to receive “single sex” care from men in wigs.

This is an interesting point as we know that in certain countries with very punitive attitudes to same sex relationships there is a corresponding tolerance of transition. A nearly exclusively male "women's" football team comes to mind.

nilsmousehammer · 20/10/2022 12:59

FixTheBone · 20/10/2022 12:55

I'm going to disagree with the majority here.

Does anyone actually know how many people would be involved in that care episode?

Probably over 100.

How on earth can the hospital guarantee that not a single male will be involved in her care? She could be in hospital for over a week depending on the procedure - what? change all the rotas so there's no male doctors, nurses, porters, radiographers, physios, pharmacists just for one person?

Madness.

RTFT.

TheClogLady · 20/10/2022 12:57

FixTheBone · 20/10/2022 12:55

I'm going to disagree with the majority here.

Does anyone actually know how many people would be involved in that care episode?

Probably over 100.

How on earth can the hospital guarantee that not a single male will be involved in her care? She could be in hospital for over a week depending on the procedure - what? change all the rotas so there's no male doctors, nurses, porters, radiographers, physios, pharmacists just for one person?

Madness.

Lucky that’s not what she requested then, eh?

FixTheBone · 20/10/2022 12:55

I'm going to disagree with the majority here.

Does anyone actually know how many people would be involved in that care episode?

Probably over 100.

How on earth can the hospital guarantee that not a single male will be involved in her care? She could be in hospital for over a week depending on the procedure - what? change all the rotas so there's no male doctors, nurses, porters, radiographers, physios, pharmacists just for one person?

Madness.

FloatOn · 20/10/2022 12:55

This story is absolutely horrifying. I hope she takes them to the cleaners.

I had to have a coil removed that had somehow vanished into my body, it was carried out in a hospital. The female nurse met me in the reception area and advised that it was a male doctor carrying out the procedure and she was happy to rearrange if I felt uncomfortable. This is the way all female health care should be conducted.

nilsmousehammer · 20/10/2022 12:43

other than to reinforce that both the NHS and the private sector are failing women

Which was actually what the Equality Act was for

To ensure that all have equality of access to services and provisions with regard to specific boundaries known to present themselves. As opposed to providing privilege and get inconvenient boundaries out of the way of a tiny percentage of male people.

Is it ok for taxpayers to be denied accessible services on the grounds of their not being able to prioritise and enable a person by enacting beliefs they do not hold? Particularly when this enacting involves intimate access to their body?

These are questions I honestly don't believe I'm having to ask. What the actual fuck has happened to society since the introduction of all this political ideology?

C8H10N4O2 · 20/10/2022 12:31

CaronPoivre · 19/10/2022 17:57

We know the Princess Grace is a very expensive private hospital and not part of the NHS, don't we?

I've had NHS treatment at the Princess Grace in the past, I doubt I'm the only one.

Its also irrelevant to the issue at hand, other than to reinforce that both the NHS and the private sector are failing women and failing to provide single sex treatment even where there is a documented experience of trauma.

TastefulRainbowUnicorn · 20/10/2022 12:28

I would really like to know whether their female Muslim patients are expected to receive “single sex” care from men in wigs.

LaughingPriest · 20/10/2022 12:25

Again - unless they screen all patients' beliefs to match them up to a list of 'allowed' and 'not allowed' ones then they are very clearly being discriminatory.

I should add - although it's obvious - that even having 'allowed' and 'not allowed' beliefs is discriminatory - but to only subject one person to this discriminatory practice is a weird sort of double discrimination!

TheClogLady · 20/10/2022 12:22

Again - unless they screen all patients' beliefs to match them up to a list of 'allowed' and 'not allowed' ones then they are very clearly being discriminatory.

I really want to see the diagram in their employee handbook where they demonstrate how Genderism and all the other major world religions are in alignment but the GC position of ‘sex is immutable and sometimes sex differences matter in healthcare and in law’ is at odds with all the others.

I mean, there is some proper weird shit in religious texts, to use a JKism, does the hospital’s parent company actually believe the stuff about that Mormon fella said about his magical disappearing evidence?
Or are Mormons out too?

And if Mormons are out, does that mean GC feminists are now crypto-Mormons?

it’s all rather stupid.
Beliefs clash and it’s impossible to agree with everyone’s beliefs on everything, which is why we’ve had to legislate protections to prevent one group of believers being persecuted (or simply denied service) by another different group of believers.

Reminds me of the person who posted yesterday saying they wouldn’t want any pro-life woman at their feminist events, and when asked if they stuck by their statement even if it meant automatically excluding Hindu and Sikh women?

Crickets, tumbleweed, etc.

Datun · 20/10/2022 12:21

MoltenLasagne · 20/10/2022 12:15

The hospital had already agreed that the woman would receive post op care from women, it sounds like a standard request for them given their patient profile. It was only after she clarified that women meant biological females that they then cancelled her operation because of her "values".

It's the equivalent of a restaurant agreeing to serve a vegetarian meal, then changing their mind because the customer double checks there's no pork derived products for Halal / Kosher reasons.

Exactly. They couldn't cope with her refusal to unequivocally deny all males access to her unconsenting body.

They wanted to force her to accept a subset of males because those males demand it.

MoltenLasagne · 20/10/2022 12:15

The hospital had already agreed that the woman would receive post op care from women, it sounds like a standard request for them given their patient profile. It was only after she clarified that women meant biological females that they then cancelled her operation because of her "values".

It's the equivalent of a restaurant agreeing to serve a vegetarian meal, then changing their mind because the customer double checks there's no pork derived products for Halal / Kosher reasons.

nilsmousehammer · 20/10/2022 11:44

It's getting hard not to join up the dots on the 'exceptions' thing here in posts arguing that it's justified to refuse this woman care for her beliefs.

We expect all hcps to put their patient's needs and best interests above their own

We expect all hcps to not be using contact with patients to meet their own needs and agenda

We expect all hcps to be trained in equality and aware that their patients will come from a range of cultures, faiths, backgrounds, emotional and health needs such as trauma or DV, and to be able to meet and respond to those needs to enable vulnerable patients or patients from those groups to access care

We expect all charities and organisations working with children to follow a standard of safeguarding which all their employees are trained in and adhere to

Are these blanket statements true? Or is the implication to add in brackets (excepting those who are TQ+) ? Is it being suggested here that being TQ+ presents a need that means this equality of expectation is not reasonable? Do all TQ+ people agree with this? And what are the implications of this?