NHS update on recording patient sex and gender identity

Well let's face it trans people do make some bloody silly decisions.Whoever thought getting their healthy boobs or willies cut off, or cutting flesh from their thigh rolling it into a tube and attaching it to their groin, was a sensible thing to do?

Even the transwomen I knew back in the day admitted surgery made no sense. They just wanted it anyway.

And how paternalistic would you have to be to agree to do that to someone else? Leaving aside any financial motivations, you're either playing God and doing something you wouldn't ever want done to yourself, or using someone else's body to validate your own irrational decision. Very paternalistic either way.

If the only objection is that people don’t want their sensitive data recorded, that objection can be ignored when making policy?
Is this a principle you apply generally? For example, would you also say that objections to mandatory recording of someone’s religion, HIV status, sexual orientation or mental health history can be ‘safely discarded’ if the only objection is that the individual doesn’t want that information recorded? Or is this reasoning specific to trans people’s privacy?

It's fascinating to see the "sex is a special category data" demand being played out on this thread.
Tbh, if transactivists want to self harm by concealing their sex, crack on. Self determination and all that.But as their demands always include causing harm to others (in this case by influencing essential healthcare data capture) the rest of us have to speak out. I also feel for all the mentally vulnerable young people who've been caught up in all this and know that society shouldn't stand back and watch the self harm. We've been doing that for too long.

As Alice Sullivan says in her review “The analysis shows that many NHS systems have
appropriated data fields and variables intended for use
as sex markers as gender identity markers. As shown in part 8.2, this loss of data on sex can also be seen
in statutory reporting and monitoring by healthcare
services using administrative data.”

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/67d98b8a4ba412c67701ed92/review-of-data-statistics-research-on-sex-and-gender.pdf

It affects other people too, not just them. They are going to have to stop placing men in women’s wards etc eventually, so they can’t be facilitated to pretend they are the opposite sex, can they? Like it or not your right to swing your arms ends where my nose begins.

The point is simply that trans people can have a legitimate privacy interest in information that identifies them as trans, and that interest doesn’t disappear because you personally can’t imagine wanting that privacy.

True. But in the absence of any better argument than, "They don't wanna," it does mean that their objection is noted, and can be safely discarded when creating policy.

Everyone has a right to a private life without the states interference, but that is not the same as a right to conceal their sex. That conflicts with other people rights, and in this case, the NHS ability to function.

Yes I do know. But health is health. And feeling so much "distress" when other people need to know and say what sex you are in order to give you the right medical treatment, that in itself is not healthy.

There's a difference between being offensive, and being factual but uncomfortable. The trans people that you speak of seem to have decided that any and every reference to their sex profoundly distresses them and so it must be avoided at all costs. That's not a healthy or even a viable way to live. And indulging such distress only deepens it.

I don't like people drawing attention to my aging body but sometimes that's necessary for my own wellbeing. It would be unhealthy for me if I tried to limit medical professionals from doing their jobs effectively because I felt "distress" when they talked openly about my age and its physical effects.

Talk about weaving a tangled web.

It’s an opinion, I didn’t say it wasn’t. The argument has already been made.

You’re entitled to think it’s an unreasonable demand, but that’s a value judgement, not an argument.

Whether or not anyone “can imagine” why trans people want their sex kept private, it’s an unreasonable demand.

A person’s sex isn’t special category data.

I think we’re going round in circles. You’re arguing that you personally can’t imagine why a trans person would want this information kept private, and treating that as evidence that there is no legitimate reason. Those aren’t the same thing.

Being trans isn’t shameful, but that doesn’t mean everyone is comfortable having their trans status disclosed, any more than someone has to be ashamed of a medical condition for it to be private and sensitive, or their ethnicity, or anything else. And nobody is arguing that clinically necessary information shouldn’t be available to clinicians when it is relevant to their care.

The point is simply that trans people can have a legitimate privacy interest in information that identifies them as trans, and that interest doesn’t disappear because you personally can’t imagine wanting that privacy. I think we’ll have to agree to disagree on that.

Exactly. So ridiculous. It’s just dramatic hyperbole.

I also have a rule of thumb for being a responsible and ethical person. For a whole host of reasons, it often needs to be known what sex a person is, mostly for the safety and mental wellbeing of women and girls, and I believe it’s responsible and ethical for people not to lie about it, and for systems to take it into account when necessary.

Well, if you don't know what to say, you might want to wonder if you actually HAVE something to say at all. Maybe you don't have an argument because there is NO argument in the first place?

And no, I don't see ANY reason why a trans person would want to keep the fact that they are trans out of their medical record. I really don't.

As I said: there's nothing shameful about being trans, and no harm comes from saying you're trans. So why would you want it kept out of a record where it is needed so badly that not disclosing it could end up killing you? No, I cannot think of a single reason to do that.

They are like toddlers always craving attention - one minute its 'look at me im trans', and the next, 'my trans status is classified information'.

Eek.

They may not be in a position disclose it.

Some trans people can only focus on themselves and not see that their attempts to conceal their sex impacts on others. The person in the next bed, the HCP interpretating results, public health analysis.

They are like toddlers always craving attention - one minute its 'look at me im trans', and the next, 'my trans status is classified information'.

In an emergency situation, it may be life and death to know the patients sex. Its easy to be cavalier when typing into a forum, but its not just your life. The HCP may make disastrous decision that could lead to death, injury, wasted time and money.

'Trans status' means nothing. It could mean that they intend to transition in the future, it could mean they self prescribe a cocktail of drugs. It doesnt help the medical team alone.

It’s gender reassignment/trans status that is private, and for a trans person this new field will disclose trans status so access needs to be minimised.

If you genuinely can't understand why a trans person might consider their birth sex personal and sensitive information , I don't know what to say. For a start information about a trans person's birth sex immediately discloses that they are trans. Of course a trans person can have a legitimate interest in keeping that private and may reasonably chose to disclose it only where it is clinically necessary.

My colleagues in bone health have to know the biological sex of their patients, as there are certain treatments you can only have if you're a biological female.

No, that's my point actually: trans people are NOT "incredibly vulnerable", so we need to stop treating them with kids' gloves. They can stand up as trans adults without needing to hide it. There's nothing shameful about being trans, and there's nothing secret about one's sex.

What's "paternalistic" about wanting sex accurately recorded for healthcare? It was you upthread claiming that systems for accurately recording sex in the NHS is "not built for the level of privacy needed" The idea that someone's sex must be a private matter suggests a level of vulnerability / inability to function in society that's frankly off the scale.

Edited to add that this crossed with your response to me but addresses the issue.
Someone's sex is not a private matter and those who think their sex should be kept secret need therapeutic support to enable them to function in society and should be nowhere near influencing any policies in the NHS.