Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think this is outdated and actually discriminatory?

71 replies

RevoltingPeasant · 03/07/2011 21:10

I registered with a new GP on Friday, and as part of the form, you have to fill in your marital status. The options are:

-single
-married
-divorced
-widowed

...That's it. I co-habit (in bureaucratspeak, anyway!) and I'd hazard a guess that a fair number of other people do, too. But there is no way to record this. And, even worse, there is no box for 'civil partnership'.

I'd have thought that they want to record this info to see whether you live with anyone (in case you need help) and to determine next-of-kin rights in an emergency. So leaving cohabitees out is a bad idea, but leaving civil partners out is surely a big problem.

AIBU?

OP posts:
Bonsoir · 04/07/2011 00:35

YANBU. I have to fill forms out regularly here in France about my daughter and get asked whether parents are married, separated or divorced. There is rarely a cohabiting option, let alone a civil partnership option.

I know some parents who manage to tick the "married" box for one of them and the "divorced" for the other. Because they are or have been married to people other than one another!

youwhatnow · 04/07/2011 00:35

Is "Christian name" not commonly used now in applications etc? Genuine question, I've been out of the job scene for a couple of years now! What is it called now, "given name"? Are people offended by "Christian name"?

VirgoGrr · 04/07/2011 00:58

youwhatnow, it's not that people are 'offended' by 'Christian Name', its just a bit silly addressing that to people who are clearly not Christian. 'First Name' is a better catch-all.

youwhatnow · 04/07/2011 01:22

Completely agree, "first name" is much better. Just never thought about it when asked in questionnaires etc. Which is probably part of the point, maybe lots of things are just accepted out of habit/tradition etc and need someone to mention them for more logical change to happen

youwhatnow · 04/07/2011 01:26

Thinking about it now though I do feel that sometimes people get very angry about things that simply need attention brought to them in some way rather than a very aggressive approach in order for change to occur-not commenting at all on anything anyone has said, just laid-back musings really!

DoMeDon · 04/07/2011 08:27

Mavis- you posted after me and i certainly didn't want to undermine you pain and loss. It is a marital staus - it doesn't reflect people's personal story. Sorry for your loss.

Revolting- the 3 couples I know in CP's refer to themselves as married. I do get that it is a bit old-fashioned but again it is just a marital status on a nosey info collecting form.

Adagoo · 04/07/2011 08:35

I am shocked about that link threefeethigh it cant be legal.

TrilllianAstra · 04/07/2011 09:07

There should be a box to tick for civil partnership, as that is a legal status. Co-habiting is a not a legal status, so if they are asking for marital status then there is no need for a box.

It really depends on why they are asking and what they intend the information to be used for. Perhaps they really want to ask about relationship status instead.

Malcontentinthemiddle · 04/07/2011 09:09

YANBU, and I would have written underneath 'live with partner' or something along those lines.
You're not single, you're not married, you're not divorced and you're not widowed.

OrangeHat · 04/07/2011 09:19

YANBU it is out of date. And it is correct that civil partnerships are not legally marriages - there was a whole big hoo-ha about it when it was happening with religious types getting upset. So it is an important differentiation, and plenty of gay people are still upset that they are not allowed to marry, and quite rightly too IMO.

Anyway, it's a GP surgery, so a small business where they do their own stuff. They probably haven't updated their forms for 20 years, and haven't even thought about it. If you point out that there are options missing they will probably change it.

ada07 · 04/07/2011 09:35

I agree that it's outdated and potentially discriminatory particularly with respect to civil partnerships. I think that it's different for co-habiting as it doesn't have a legal status eg for DWP benefits, discrimination legislation etc?

However, it shouldn't be confused with next of kin which usually asks for the relationship to the patient.

There's also a cost to changing NHS forms/headed notepaper etc which already runs at about £14 million/year!!

I'd just make my own box and tick that.

ada07 · 04/07/2011 09:36

x posts with lots of posters.

Original poster
RevoltingPeasant · 04/07/2011 10:09

ada Yes, this is why I probably won't say anything - I don't like wasting NHS resources at the best of times! I am not really angry about this, just rather surprised, that's all, and wondered what others thought.

Orange and malcontent - thanks!! I thought that was just me that could see the irony of specifically excluding gay people from 'marriage'... and then saying huffily, 'Why don't you just tick the married box?'

Actually, the only gay couples I know well in legalised (??) relationships are married, because they were married in Canada, where it is actually 'marriage'. All my British gay friends are just living in sin like me Grin

In fact, I might just put 'living in sin' next time!!

OP posts:
OrangeHat · 04/07/2011 10:12

It's not NHS cost directly - GPs are small businesses and run as such. It will come out of the stationary budget that that particular surgery has allocated. If they decide to change it then most likely they will use up the ones they have left first.

It's not like asking a hospital to change a whole load of branded stuff. Does the form even have NHS logo on it - our GP forms are old photocopied typed things with no logos on at all.

I think it would be worth mentioning it?

MrsDePoint · 04/07/2011 15:42

malcontentinthemiddle - if you are cohabiting with a partner your marital status is single.

revolting peasant it's only ironic if the same person says both things.

Malcontentinthemiddle · 04/07/2011 15:48

Yes, I suppose I would say that instead of the question stating it's about 'marital status' it could be 'relationship' or something. I don't see why it's only relevant if its to do with marriage.

threefeethighandrising · 04/07/2011 22:01

Adagoo i'm sure the form I linked to must be illegal, but on what grounds? If they're giving it to everyone (it's their standard form which all must fill in) then can it be said to be discriminatory?

Surely asking people (of either sex) if they're married is also not on, in an interview section!

(Sorry for the hijack!).

ThisIsANiceCage · 04/07/2011 22:05

I remember that awful form, threefeet, from when you posted it on an Employment thread. I was ShockShockShock then.

I also think it's illegal (on Disability Discrimination Act grounds alone), but don't know enough to be sure.

BelleDameSansMerci · 04/07/2011 22:06

Could you have added your own box? I've done that but I am an arsey cow.

I know that's not the point you're making and, in your situation, I would be irritated too.

plainwhitet · 04/07/2011 22:07

bonsoir bonsoir, I was surprised there was no "separated" option, which is a legally recognised state, isn't it? I would not tick any box in the OP's situation, as I do not feel married any more; am not divorced; no longer or not yet single; and happily not widowed either.

Goodynuff · 04/07/2011 23:17

Here in Canada we usually have a box that say married/common law, because in most provinces and territories after a year of living together it becomes common law, for taxes, benefits and gov't stuff.
And the forms say first name, middle initial, last name Grin

FabbyChic · 04/07/2011 23:18

All forms are the same though there should be a co-habit option on everything.

MrsDePoint · 04/07/2011 23:43

FabbyChic why should this be an option? Co-habiting is not a marital status. For most purposes that would need a form, no-one cares if someone has a boyfriend. If you want your relationship to be recognised as anything more than just a boyfriend/girlfriend, get married. Simple.

NotJustKangaskhan · 04/07/2011 23:44

It is outdated, but as OrangeHat says changing stationary is a cost for that practice. If you and enough other people point it out to them though, they may change it sooner.

What I found irritating about registering with my most recent GP was the long extra 'woman's only' form that was completely about contraceptives when my husband wasn't asked anything about it. Surely both sexes should be asked about such things? (It was more irritating when the nurse got snippy with me for putting 'NONE' and seemed almost offended that I was pregnant when registering).

NotaDisneyMum · 04/07/2011 23:51

Can you tick more than one box or do you stop being divorced if you remarry?

I cohabit, and accept that there is no legal status associated with it - although when it comes to means-tested benefits, suddenly the income of my partner is taken into consideration......

I can't be nominated as a beneficiary for DP 'death in service' benefits, but I'm not entitled to legal aid in family court because DP earns too much - Mmm, seems a bit one-sided to me Wink