Midwives told to stop using terms such as 'breastfeeding' and 'breastmilk'

[MissMoped]

because it’s not gender inclusive language, I believe with particular reference to the transexual debate.

This is at Brighton and Sussex nhs trust btw, good to know NHS money is being spent wisely btw, poring over the “incorrect” use of language.

The word “mother” apparently should not be used on its own; instead “mother or birthing parent” (um, isn’t that a mother?).

Breast milk and breastfeeding is to be replace by “breast/chest milk” or “milk from the feeding parent”. “Woman” should be replaced with “woman or person”.

Gobsmacked.

So a busy midwife is being compelled to ignore the language she has used for a lifetime and ignore her instincts to say what she sees in front of her under threat of disciplinary action!! Do you know how stressful some will find that?

Not just ignore language she has used for a lifetime but exchange it for a term which is medically inaccurate and nonsensensical.

A lot of things I can tolerate. This really undermines my experience of being a woman, pregnancy and breastfeeding.

Without disciplinary action it would be hard to achieve the goals of queer theory and gender ideology.

The majority cannot be persuaded by rational, reasonable arguments because there are none.

Most of us remain unconvinced the sex is an irrelevant, dated, social construct invented by European imperialists and imposed on the world. I

Authoritarian means are essential to force us to at least pretend that we believe it, we must forced to submit our rights and to deny our own perceptions.

I believe an individual is entitled to talk about themselves in any way they wish, even if the language they use is medically incorrect. They may risk their words being misunderstood but, provided they are aware of that risk, I think it's up to them.

I am not sure they have a right to expect a medical professional to adopt the same incorrect language, especially when there is an implicit suggestion of disciplinary action if they do not.

And I do not think they have any right whatsoever to expect public information to use incorrect language.

And I do not think they have any right whatsoever to expect public information to use incorrect language

Unfortunately with social media it becomes hard to keep things "contained"

Once publically announced, it will result in sometimes hundreds of twitter or fave book messages telling them how amazing it all is, or piling on telling them how disgusted they ( by they I mean all the hundreds of twitter followers unconnected to anyone it affects or the staff ) are for not continuing their usage of inclusive language.

This will either result in important information being lost as they delete the post or scare the hell out of anyone who wishes to ask a question and therefore discouraging potential patients to seek help.

It categorically will not just be a quietly occasionally used policy. But something that now be expected with every
public communication the hospital makes

So if I wanted my medical professionals to use the word "cunt" to refer to my genitals, they would have to do this? Or would they refuse as it is offensive language? Cunt is a perfectly legitimate term, and the only word that refers to both the vagina and vulva.
I'm fairly certain they won't go that far to accommodate the language their service users want, and I doubt they'd use it in their literature, but "birthers" is in some ways more offensive that "cunt", as it dehumanises an entire sex.

So if I wanted my medical professionals to use the word "cunt" to refer to my genitals, they would have to do this? Or would they refuse as it is offensive language? Cunt is a perfectly legitimate term, and the only word that refers to both the vagina and vulva.

If you had a language disorder that meant you could only understand the word cunt, yes they should use that word.

If it was felt that this was just a poorly disguised attempt to abuse staff, it would be necessary to weigh their duty to treat you against their duty to protect staff.

What they wouldn't do is use 'cunt' in general communication.

Still not understanding why they have singled out breast as it is common to both sexes? Why are they not writing policies for urology specialists to stop using penis add prostate as these are exclusionary terms? Is it only female bits which are triggering and hence " verboten"?

What if I didn't have a language disorder but said I find the words "vulva" and "vagina" triggering? Would they have to accommodate my wishes even if they felt uncomfortable using the word "cunt" instead?

Because that's what's happening with the Breast/chest debacle.

What if I didn't have a language disorder but said I find the words "vulva" and "vagina" triggering? Would they have to accommodate my wishes even if they felt uncomfortable using the word "cunt" instead?

Actual Law: I think that you would have to weigh up the different rights of the people involved.

Stonelaw: How dare you suggest there is a conflict?

But at least " cunt" accurate" whereas " chest" is a totally different part

Haven't had time to rtft, but the title of this thread is really misleading.
MW have not been told to stop saying breastfeeding. They have been told they can use chestfeeding/birthing parent etc IN ADDITION to their normal language in written materials, (eg If you choose to breastfeed/chestfeed here are some helpful pointers) or they can use these terms in communication with a particular individual if these are the terms preferred by that person.

Then I would read the thread then lock

It is not at all appropriate to use inaccurate medical.language around a patient. Consent is based on patients being fully informed. Consent is meaningless if the information given is knowingly incorrect.

Words have meanings and medical.settings are probably one.of the most important places that everyone is Awre what means what and there's zero room.for confusion

@Lockdownlumpy

Haven't had time to rtft, but the title of this thread is really misleading. MW have not been told to stop saying breastfeeding. They have been told they can use chestfeeding/birthing parent etc IN ADDITION to their normal language in written materials, (eg If you choose to breastfeed/chestfeed here are some helpful pointers) or they can use these terms in communication with a particular individual if these are the terms preferred by that person.

Yes, the error in the thread title has already been discussed. It is probably a response to the fact that this is the way the story was reported. That has not helped matters, but it also does not mean that 'chestfeeding' is a benign term.

Men and women have breasts and 350 men a year get breast cancer.

It is very easy to understand that an individual suffering from gender dysphoria might have negative feelings about breasts and obviously on a one to one basis language should be used that supports them.

However, inclusion of 'chest feeding' in general literature implies that there is something distasteful and disturbing about breasts, and that use of a neutral term like 'breastfeeding' implies a gender identity.

It is no longer a term that can help individuals, but imposition of a sexist belief system.

I prefer that the doctor calls my my brain my womb. Does that mean I need a gynecologist or a neurologist to investigate persistent headaches?

YABU. They are midspouses.

@MerryChristmasToYou

YABU. They are midspouses.

I love it. The Royal College of Nursing and Midspousery .

" YABU. They are midspouses."

Point of privilege please don't use discriminatory language. Some of us are unspoused

Breast feeding and the post partum period is so difficult for so many women.

Chestfeeding/breastfeeding supports the idea that it is normal to feel disconnected from your body (chestfeeder) but that others naturally identify with being a mother (breastfeeder).

It would be so much better to take identity out of the equation.

Is it inclusive enough? Might it not discriminate against those who aren't married?

I work in Maternity. I think some people are really missing the point here.

Maternity services individually are gradually coming under great pressure to change their language to gender neutral. We all know that some activists are able to cause massive issues. Right now the service is under a shocking level of pressure due to COVID. You should see some of the things that have kicked off on social media pages of trusts recently, and not just about language, but all trusts are coming to understand the enormous impact of pissing people off.

This statement says they they reject the blanket use of neutral language but will use additional language where required.

In my experience most midwives are way on the other side of this issue and will roll their eyes and laugh at the idea of chest feeding and birthing parents. That’s not really on either since there are small numbers of service users who have dysphoria, are lesbians and both consider themselves mothers - how do you refer to the woman who is giving birth when her partner donated the egg? It’s complex.

But the refusal to use neutral language outright is a stand, and the risk of midwifery gradually using gender neutral terms only is massively unlikely.

You are BU Tammy, shouldn't it be Parentety?

Tammy I don't think that's being missed. The problem is the attempted change in the first place.

And yes... still the unanswered question: why only for 'women'? If the end goal is total inclusivity why not change 'men' too?

And, re a lesbian couple. A midwife can always ask and use the terminology the couple prefer. Which is what happens at the moment isn't it? Nothing is prescribed, the women involved work it out between themselves.

Or that was the reality 30 years ago when a cousin and her partner had kids!

This statement says they they reject the blanket use of neutral language but will use additional language where required.

That is the key though - when is it required?

On a one to one basis I would assume that it would already be best practice to use patient appropriate language, whatever the circumstances. However, it is suggested (by people who support the policy) that chest feeding will be added to general communication.

It's not a neutral act to add language when existing language already fits the purpose.