Faith school where women are banned from wearing trousers becomes state funded

I have posted earlier about being told I couldn't be discharged as the doctor who said I could be discharged had gone off shift and had forgotten to sign the form. This was a Saturday and the Sister said I'd be staying in till Monday. Total madness. I said I was going anyway and magically a doctor was found who could sign the paper and I could leave. I was leaving anyway but it was interesting to observe.

No I'm saying that people typically tick what is most representative of them.

So you are imposing your interpretation of how to describe your own identity onto someone else.

Then most Others have always ticked Other. We don't default to white because we don't feel white.

I think by accommodating someone's religious belief that God doesnt want you to perform labour between Friday and Saturday (as an example), we are supporting beliefs that aren't founded in Science. While we do this, I think we have no basis to not go with what anyone else believes or values. We should either equally believe all unscientific stuff and accommodate it, or we never base our clinical care around the personal beliefs of service users.

Remember, men do not touch Jewish women in labour if they practice Niddah. In a non-Jewish family, if a man refused to pass his labouring wife a glass of water because he considers her unclean, we'd have questions about her safety at home. We adjust that for religious beliefs and go with the fact that as soon as her waters have broken or she is contracting regularly, she is unclean so her husband won't touch her, and we must be aware that the only physical support or touch she will get from anyone in labour is from us.

And if there’s no space on the form for ‘Jewish’, so that they have to pick between ‘white’ and ‘other’?

That kind of does make your interpretation (their identity doesn’t exist as a separate category) trump theirs.

Its not about being discharged at all. It is about there being a queue of people needing discharge and one set of people jumping to the top of it for religious reasons when the people higher on the list could have been fit for discharge for a much longer period.

We dont equally consider the "deeply held religious beliefs" of all regions sects though, and nor should we. People have banned Muslims from wearing one of their versions of modest clothing in some countries and it is regularly debated here.

I'd 100% ban 3 year olds in tights for modesty before I'd ban an adult wearing a burkha.

What about when you start your shift and there are 10 people who were fit for discharge from the day before but for several reasons, they didn't get discharged?

They can be discharged today though, a whole day late. Unfortunately it is Friday and so we have to prioritise the people who want to get home early for religious reasons before we start on the backlog from the day before.

This is what I mean about others waiting.

Sometimes, their paediatrician might have said "I'll check back in the afternoon and then maybe baby can go home". Afternoon means anytime from 12pm until what? 6pm? But at 1pm, mum wants to rush doctor back to assess and discharge baby if it all seems to be going well. That doctor has babies on labour ward, a+e and NICU to attend to. There are babies that are due for assessment and possible discharge before that other baby, but often, that baby will be assessed by 2pm because the right things are asid by the right people to the right staff members.

I class people as white when they identify that way. I don't tell them that my interpretation of their identities trumps theirs.

That’s probably because you’ve never seen a really bad experience where you’re left wondering whether the nurse’s inability to process the paperwork or weigh the baby (for eight solid hours) is due to clinical necessity, can’t be arsed or flat out racism. Or the case I mentioned up above where the late discharge meant the care package had fallen through. I wonder if that nurse told herself that half an hour didn’t matter?

Most nurses are very good. Some are not. Some procedures work well. Others need improvement.

But the point of this thread is that Judaism is a very diverse community that includes some very marginalised groups. Per capita, it experiences a very high level of racism, especially when people are ‘visibly Jewish’.

Which is why, in those ‘visibly Jewish’ situations , I get worried when people object to a primary school dress code because it’s offensive to them, or give every possible reason why they shouldn’t have to consider a patient’s deeply held religious beliefs.

We’ve got an entire school where the kids are in danger of racial abuse if they go out on a school trip - where the school quite likely got state status because Barnet was worried what would happen to those kids in a non-religious school - and people are angsty about the possibility of a non-Jewish parent being asked to wear a skirt.

Well that escalated quickly.

Each time I've stayed in hospital, I've found the discharge process incredibly frustrating. It involves a lot of waiting around to a) find out if you're actually going to be discharged on that day (even after hints the day before that it was possible) and b) getting the confirmation that it is happening (and paperwork is now being done for meds etc).

However, I've never once assumed that the nurses and doctors were doing it when they could "get round to it" or that I should be grateful that they took the time. Every nurse and doctor will be acutely aware of the pressure to free up the beds. They will also undoubtedly be doing their best to accommodate patients' wishes. The reality is that they will need to prioritise clinical care and patient safety over everything else.

Sounds like more excuses, to basically explain that any particular patient will be discharged when you get round to it and should be jolly grateful that you took the time.

If they can be discharged in the morning they should be. I firmly object to someone blocking a bed for 24 hours because the nurses were too busy dealing with a patient emergency to do paperwork for another patient who was only declared fit at 3pm after a doctor finished surgery, to be discharged by 3:30pm but got it done by 4pm instead.

I think you’re making excuses, tbh. Oh, we can’t possibly do the paperwork in the morning. Oh, we can’t possibly keep them in overnight. Oh, if we give a patient any input on discharge we’ll be denying someone else treatment.

As an earlier poster said - this is a system/procedure problem. Which you have no interest whatsoever in solving.

You think other patients should be denied treatment instead?

Yes. Given that apparently, discharging them is so completely unimportant that you can’t possibly look at the discharge forms until late afternoon.

You mean keep them in hospital another 24 hours with no clinical need when another patient could have the bed?

So now explain why - if discharge is going to be so very late - the patient can’t be discharged the following day when Shabbat is over.

Or it could be that during the day various treatments are taking place so patients need to be prepared/checked/monitored as they leave and return, results checked, staff notified, professional caring services contacted for onward referral, therapists spoken to. All the stuff that just takes place during the normal ‘working hours’. So it may not be until when those tasks tail off in late afternoon that discharge paperwork can be looked at.

They've got to discharge them at some point right though so it's not necessarily taking more time?

Like I said earlier it seems to be a systems, process and management problem. And a resentment/culture issue.

There might even be advantages to discharging some patients earlier - freeing up beds etc.

I suspect the process relates to an outdated assumption to get patients ready for "Dad" to pick up after work.

But that's not right for all patients...

It is extremely unlikely that a nurse will be sitting around mid afternoon in winter on a Friday doing nothing rather than discharging a patient who is ready to be discharged. So the question is what should they prioritise that over?

Though an atheist, in a pluralist society our National Health Service should make an effort to accommodate different religions or strongly held values.

Remembering that all religions are funding it and it's supposed to be patient-centred care. I also don't like the state deciding what is and isn't worthy of consideration (with a few exceptions like racism.)

So yes I do think hospitals should try to discharge these mums before sunset on friday, as part of patient centred care. Especially if there's a large community that is important for in that area.

Like someone else pointed out there are also indirect impacts of i.e. more mums choose home births even if more dangerous.

It's a digression but a really interesting discussion.

Yes. But there's nothing to stop anyone campaigning for this to be allowed in law on an "exceptional" basis. Similar to how, as I learned on a different thread about schools this week, there is already a carve-out in the Equality Act which allows schools to remain single-sex but admit a small number of children of the opposite sex. I would hope that any such hypothetical campaign to leverage this existing carve-out as a precedent that could be used beyond school admissions would fail... and that during the course of it doing so that public awareness of autogynophilia would increase.

Everything that I listed above would have a knock-on effect of some kind on those without the protected characteristic if it were to become law.

To use the one from this thread, imagine a school was legally allowed to tell mums that they can't wear trousers when visiting. This would open the doors to all sorts of issues, including potentially majority Muslim/Jewish councils passing a by-law that mandated head coverings for women when out in public within parts of or all of the local area.

Thankfully, we mostly have enough sane politicians that would not support laws that mandate adherence to others' beliefs.

trans-identifying males to use women's changing rooms to protect their mental health

It is impossible for men to use women’s spaces - they stop being women’s spaces as soon as they use them,