To think that a hospital should have a female gynecologist?

[crazyspaniel]

My local hospital only has male gynecologists. If I want to see a female practitioner I have to travel 40 miles. In the end I went to my local hospital and found the whole experience somewhat traumatic - the fact that the doctors were male was part of the reason for finding it so horrible and humiliating.

Is it really so hard to hire a female gynecologist? I get that consultants are often of a generation when not many women went into medicine (and particularly surgery), but there are now more women than men becoming doctors and one of the doctors in the room was SHO level (or whatever they call them now), so not of that generation. I really think this is one area of medicine where there should be female quotas and where each hospital should have at least one female practitioner.

Job advertised by women's aid at the moment says this:

"This post is exempt under Section 7 (2) (d) of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and therefore we will be considering female applicants only."

SEXIST ILLEGAL BASTARDS it makes my blood boil.

complainant or accuser, southern. Get it right.

Well sardine really those women should just get over themselves don't you think? I mean a male councelor will have the same exact training as a femals and if it brings on a bit of post traumatic stress disorder that is her problem and we really musn't be sexist.

You can legally advertise a role as being open to applicants of one sex only if there is a 'genuine occupational requirement' to do so. Many jobs are legally advertised as being for men or women only.

Rape crisis centres do not 'get away' with anything! They closely follow the law.

The Government's guidance on this is here (with links to the Equality Act):

www.bis.gov.uk/policies/higher-education/access-to-professions/prg/legal-issues/genuine-occupational-requirements

For those who don't want to read the links, the Government says:

'It may be lawful for you as an employer to treat people differently when recruiting. In very limited circumstances, if you can show that someone with a particular protected characteristic (on grounds of age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, race, religion/belief, sex or sexual orientation) is central to a particular job, then you can insist that only someone who has that particular protected characteristic is suitable for the job. This would be a genuine ?occupational requirement? (GOR). There is no definitive list of situations where a GOR will exist. It is therefore always best to take legal advice before advertising the job if you believe that there is a GOR.'

It says, with regard to sex discrimination exemption:

'The Equality Act 2010, Part 1, Schedule 9 provides that direct discrimination on the basis of sex is not unlawful where there is a GOR. A GOR may exist for various reasons:

if "the essential nature of the job would be materially different" if carried out by someone not of the required sex (eg an actor playing the role of the opposite sex)

where it is necessary to preserve decency or privacy (eg a shop assistant providing a bra-fitting service or a prison officer carrying out body searches)

if the employee is required to live in accommodation that is not equipped for people of that sex and it is not reasonable for the employer to make the necessary adjustments

if the job can most effectively be performed by a person of a particular sex'

Andrew despite the fact that you claim to mean no offence, you certainly are coming out with some corkers.

No Sardine because that's family.

But I would want the law to act fairly. I wouldn't want to see a man railroaded.

If it was your brother or father or son who was accused and denied it, you'd think he was a rapist anyway, right?

If a woman had said she was raped she was a rape victim. End of. When my brother father or son gets involved is when the courts decide if he is the one guilty of the rape.

This rape complainant thing is just silly. The Victim support service deals with victims of many crimes before the accused has been to court.

Asides from which, many rape victims never go to the police, but will still contact rape crisis centres, so they are not complainants or accusers because they are not making a specific accusation against anyone.

It is the job of a rape support worker to have any particular attitude to the accused as they have no involvement with the accused are are not part of the criminal justice system.

Sorry, that should have said, it is not the job...

Usually there is no question that there has been intercourse with X, a man, only whether he raped her. If your brother or father or son says "Yes, we had sex, but she consented" - is he a rapist come what may in your eyes?

MillyR nobody has every suggested that the law you quote applies to gynaes, and it does not apply to training for any work, so if more men choose to train as gynaes than women there will be more male gynaes than female.

Sardine FMEs are not even gynaes, they are usually GPs, so there can be no possible question of discriminating against men being allowed in appointing them. Their work covers a far wider field than examining rape complainants.

And finally, no, I don't say there is no rape without a conviction. I say that the law has to presume innocence until conviction. Do you disagree?

It can apply to training where required, particularly where that training is within a paid role.

I do not know whether it ever applies to gynaecologists. That would be decided on a case by case basis when roles or training places were being offered by NHS trusts.

Whether or not exemptions are in place or not now for gynaecologists is not relevant to a new case where an employer may wish to seek legal advice on the possibility of such an exemption. It would depend on the reasons why and the needs of the client group. If there was a large client group within an NHS trusts care that were not receiving treatment due to a lack of female staff, then that would be a good legal case for arguing for all female recruitment for a specific post or training place.

Asides from which, your argument was that it was not possible under any circumstances to legally discriminate for any job. This is factually incorrect. Jobs are advertised where only male/gay/ disabled etc applicants will be considered for the post.

With regard to rape, in not all cases is it a question of whether or not the person consented. Sometimes the person raped would be considered to be incapable of consent and in those cases the accuser may be a different person to the victim.

Frog you are starting to sound disturbed in my view.
Please leave this thread as you are just making up trouble where there isn't any issue.
There have been some valid points made here and I hope the op like me rings ahead just makes sure next time she sees a woman doc. It can be done with no fuss.
I also am saddened by the 'get over it' insensitive people.

I have given birth twice and both of those times even during the out of body pain moments I still would prefer to have female midwives had I been asked. It has nothing to do with sex, I have had midwives as friends who have been lesbian. I could also understand it if my hubbie would rather see a male doctor about some cock trouble. I have no ' issues ' and am well down with my confident feminist self. I wonder if there are any male breastfeeding councillors and if not why not.

"Andrewofgg Mon 05-Sep-11 18:40:06
No Sardine because that's family. "

What is that in response to please?

How strange, the met police leaflet for the Sapphire Unit talks about Victim Support.

You would think they would be a little more careful with their language really, would't you.

rape crisis page on reporting a rape to the police

" You can request a female doctor, although you may have to wait longer for one to be found."

So they aren't told that the world doesn't stop just because they've been raped (allegedly raped?) and they have to have a male doctor or forget it.

Interesting

Andrew I think you are making this up as you go along.

Sardine Your last three posts:

The one about family was a reply to the one about my female relations.
The one about Victim Support: That is the name of an organisation which may be why they use it. But they are now trained to say complainant in court which is as it should be.
The last: In practice because there are plenty of female FMEs the problem rarely arises. But I note that they don't say they will call a female FME another job.

You know what? Between us, and I don't know who started it, we are at risk of hijacking this thread, which is why I am signing out.

I haven't said anything about your female relations

I find your continued insistence that victims of rape must not be referred to as victims of rape, on a MN talk board of all places, really odd. I am not going to refer to women who go to the police to report rapes as "accusers", thank you very much. What a horrible idea.

SQ, the mother/sister thing was a post by SouthernFriedTofu.

Since this thread has already gone way off tangent ... I reckon a rape complainant is a victim, since s/he has clearly been distressed by some unwelcome penetration. Whether s/he's been raped by the person accused is a matter for due process. I've got to say it's 97% likely they have been raped by that person but, since our justice system tries to be fair, it's reasonable not to call them a rapist if unproven. (Which gets Tofu's hypothetical relations off the hook for now.)

It's not that much of a tangent, given that people on this thread have been asking why the OP doesn't want a man examining her, and feels so uncomfortable with examinations of this type in general.

I think that when women request a female for intimate examinations, the default should be to think that the woman has her reasons for asking. It is not right to make her tell those reasons each and every time, so that the people booking can judge whether she "deserves" the privilege of seeing a woman or not.

And as this thread has shown, some people would not even see it as essential to provide a female examiner for a woman who has been very recently raped. So their reaction to a person asking for any lesser reason (maybe they were raped 10 years ago) would likely not be helpful to that person, and the fact of them having to tell people all the time that this has happened to them is awful as well.

Yes, it is awful. ISWYM.

crazyspaniel... make the 40 mile journey! Believe me male gynaecologist are FAR from immune from impure thoughts! Please do a Google Search for 'Male Gynecologist'.

Mywife, given that this discussion is 10 months old, it's probably a bit late to be scaremongering giving advice to the OP.

What kind of idiot bumps a thread this old?