To not be sure if a 17 year old boy can be in the right headspace to train as a midwife?

[Boysclothes]

I know a few male midwives, all older guys who are nurse converted and are all great. No problem with it at all.

However a friends son wants to be in a caring profession and she has asked me to have a chat with him about becoming a midwife, direct entry so training from next September. She knows a bit about it and thinks the autonomy/quicker progression/pay etc makes it more desirable than being a nurse.

So, I'm just musing here as I know the admissions tutors will make the decision they see fit, but I'm not sure if a just turned 18 year old lad could cope with or make sense of midwifery. It's just so very female isn't it? And if he hasn't got much experience of women, it just seems a bit... I dunno.... Inappropriate, possibly?

I'm going to tell him about the realities of the job but what are your thoughts?

I think good on him. I wouldn't have minded, when pregnant. If it's what he wants go for it.

WoWoOwl - Your attitude if enacted would mean that a lot of people wouldn't get the care they need.

My FIL wouldn't have had the prostrate examination from the male Dr he wanted to see. My friend with cancer, would never have had the intimate tests she needed to diagnose the cancer. My elderly grandmother would never have had the help she needed with her incontinence. My friend who was frequently raped as a child would never had had the community psychiatric nurse visiting her at home and checking she wasn't at risk of killing herself.

Most of us are happy to accept care from whatever sex of Dr most of the time. A lt of people do want someone of the same sex for specific types of care.

How is this different to sexism against women in the workplace? It's sexism pure and simple. I think this young man should go for it if it is really what he wants to do, but with an awareness of the prejudice he will face, because if men don't ever go into midwifery because of the perceived prejudice nothing will ever change.

I wouldn't have a problem with a male midwife, I had male obstetricians in my labours, one a student/house officer/quite early in his career and to be honest I didn't give a fig that he was male. I was more concerned that he couldn't put the cannula in my arm but that was due to lack of experience, not gender.

But all students have to start somewhere so I have never refused to have students in on consultations for antenatal or any other medical issue.

Would the OP or any of the PPs who support the OP have a problem if the young man in question wanted to be an obstetrician, or is it just that he wants to be a midwife? Obstetricians see a fair amount of fanjo too.

I agree with DiaDuit that he should be able to train for this if that is genuinely his career choice, but I do think that he (and any other male in the same role) need to accept that not all women will feel comfortable with a male midwife, and I think that should be respected. Just like not all men would be happy with a female doctor to discuss certain medical issues, and that should also be respected.

I gave birth without a support partner, and only had the hospital supplied midwife for the first eight hours of my labour. It was just her and I alone in the room, and I really don't think I would have felt comfortable with a 17-20 year old boy in that same situation. When things progressed (and I ended up with a cast of thousands in my room) I didn't care that many of the medical staff were male, but for those first eight hours I needed the kindly older female midwife to make me feel comfortable.

Do people on this thread realise that in order to qualify as a doctor you have to deliver a certain number of babies (IIRC it's five?). So there are plenty of wet-behind-the-ears young men delivering babies out there. At least this one actually wants to do this.

Sorry, wet-behind-the-ears probably v wrong metaphor to choose in this context.

I can see why some people would dislike being treated by a male midwife - nothing sexist about that, there are circumstances in which some men would dislike intimate treatment from a female doctor, for e.g., and those kind of needs are recognised in the equalities legislation.

But stopping him training would be discriminatory. If he fulfils the course requirements and the tutors feel he's suitable, then good luck to him. If it's just his Mum directing him, he's unlikely to succeed, however.

I have a friend who is a primary school teacher. He is young, male and gay. The discrimination he has faced from female colleagues and parents is horrific. I find it so sad that it's deemed ok for women to be so discriminatory.

I would imagine that boys choosing to train as midwives straight after A levels is pretty much unheard of, and although I want to be liberal and non-discriminatory, I can't imagine why midwifery appeals to a teenage boy (male midwives who train later in their careers are different, somehow), I just can't. So I can totally understand why people feel weirded out.

FWIW, someone mentioned upthread about 18 year old male medical students doing obstetric rotations - well actually, medical students don't hit the ward until they start their 3rd year, so that never happens.

I don't think that's true any more, Balloon, is it?

I happened to be at a medical function on my due date. I was feeling fine and it was only a couple of hundred yards from the hospital where I'd give birth. But you should have seen all the middle-aged GPs in the room turn pale as I waddled in... none of them had been at a delivery in a professional capacity since they were students, on average about 20 years ago.

It doesn't actually matter whether some people individually are comfortable with the sex/race/age/religion/hairstyle of their midwife. That actually has nothing to do with whether an 18 year old man is capable of training to become and then becoming an excellent midwife.

The fact that some people are racist and will refuse a black midwife doesn't mean that there should be questions asked about whether we should allow non-white people to become midwives.

how is this different from sexism in the workplace

It's no different if he is prevented from training.

As a patient you aren't the workplace and you aren't the employer. Your vagina/penis/arsehole/mind = your call if you don't want someone twiddling about with it.

WoWoOwl - Your attitude if enacted would mean that a lot of people wouldn't get the care they need.

No. Their own discrimination would mean that they don't get the care they need. That's their choice.

But I don't believe that the NHS should be legally required to provide care only from a specific chosen sex, and that is a different thing.

For many vulnerable people it's a good job you aren't in charge then.

There's a definite conflation of 2 ideas here:

1. Men should/should not be allowed to train as midwives/husbands
2. Women should have a choice.

Well,Femin and others who are not seeing the point there... the answer is yes to both. Men should be able to train as midwives and yes, women should be able to say no to a male midwife if they so choose... just as every patient, regardless of gender, can ask to see/refuse any medical professional on any grounds.

So.. given that your precious fanjo will not be seen by any spotty male oik... what exactly do you have against men training to be midwives?

BalloonSlayer

Sorry, wet-behind-the-ears probably v wrong metaphor to choose in this context

CalamitouslyWrong

I think you should withdraw the comparison to racism. Women have an absolute right to insist on a female doctor or midwife for intimate personal care, just as men have a right to request a male one.

In my local hospital, there is such a a shortage of Drs & midwives that "declining care" isn't really a practical option.

If you have been waiting for two hours to find out if you are in premature labour & the Dr who eventually arrives is a young male trainee, I suppose declining in favour of a woman IS an option, but it is quite likely that there will be no-one else available for the rest of that shift.

I had a fair amount of internal examinations during my last pregnancy. As it is a training hospital, the first person you see normally looks about 18 (they could well be older but don't look it!) & they then call the registrar if they need advice or back up.

It would never have occurred to me to decline an examination based on a Dr's age or sex. For me, the same would apply for a trainee midwife. Everyone has to start somewhere.

Again, with the place being so short-staffed, I would have been pathetically grateful for anyone to look after me during labour, or on the post-natal word. I wouldn't have cared if it was a work experience student, as long as they had a nice attitude!

There are 2 male midwives where I work. Both young. I think its great

Someone else's rights end at my vulva. What goes into my vagina is very much my choice.

So don't let a male midwife crawl into your vagina then. Or decline internal examinations, or decline an NHS labour all together.

Or you could hope you get lucky and get a female midwife anyway, or that the hospital is able to accommodate your wishes without taking an allocated midwife away from another woman. But if that can't happen, then you should either have to cope with a professional dealing with you even if they are male, or discharge yourself from hospital.

Individual medical schools will have a number of normal deliveries to be carried out (supervised) to "pass" their own Obs module.

In practice, this is becoming more and more theoretical - partly due to more women having instrumental deliveries or sections and partly due to more women exercising their preferences not to have males / students / male students present. There are a lot of male medical students cooling their heels in the corridor outside labour ward / ante-natal clinic! You'd be on very dodgy ground as a med school if you tried to fail someone from a clinical placement because they hadn't met the prescribed number of deliveries if they could demonstrate this was a result of women's choices.

I'm not going to withdraw the comparison to racism because having a right to refuse care based on the gender of the HCP has nothing at all to do with whether people should be allowed to become HCPs in the first place. Completely separate issues. People may have the right to refuse care from HCPs based on their own prejudices or whims or whatever, but it is absolutely discriminatory to say 'you can't become an X because you of your gender/religion/race/any other protected characteristic'. The fact is, many women genuinely don't give a shit what genitalia their midwives possess.

Similarly, the 'I can't imagine why an 18 year old man would be interested in midwifery' argument speaks more to other people's lack of imagination than anything else. I wouldn't want to be a midwife under any circumstances, but other people do.

I remember reading a male midwife complaining that some women refused care for him. He talked about how upset that made him feel. He was totally unsuited to the job, if he to that attitude.

Medical students have to get permission to be involved in your delivery. You can always say 'no'.

To be perfectly clear, having the right to say no to anyone doing anything to you in a medical capacity for whatever reason you fancy is absolutely nothing to do with whether that person should be allowed to be in their job. I'm astounded that people refuse to see the difference.

WooWoo there are good reasons that aren't related to straightforward ignorance or prejudice why a woman (or man, for that matter) might require a male/female HCP. PTSD due to sexual abuse being one such reason that springs to mind.

I understand that. But if PTSD is that severe, then there would be a medical indication for the NHS to provide a female midwife.

Personal preference does just come down to sexism though, and I think that sexism is wrong.

Even if there is a medical indication for providing a female midwife, I still think it's dodgy territory. It would still be racist of me to demand a white HCP if I'd been attacked by a black woman, wouldn't it?