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.

@lifeturnsonadime

Daisies she is so brave. The threat made to her by the male member of the SNP was corrective rape.

She has faced so much in the last two weeks but is showing that she will not stand down.

We cannot let our words be changed by stealth.

I am no SNP supporter but full of admiration for her stance on this. Someone has to speak up for women. It is outrageous that our elected representatives are afraid to speak up and I think it might be a case of 'follow the money'

Why can't they just use that kind of language for actual trans men who are giving birth, and ask them how they would like to refer to breastfeeding as (chest feeding or whatever) and call biological females who are giving birth mothers and the physical act of them feeding their child milk from the breast - breastfeeding? Stop the world I want to get off.

@AIMD

“**As I’ve said repeatedly upthread, referring to mothers and partners is alienating for lesbian couples - if you spend time speaking to them about their experiences of maternity care it’s often really sad. You can be a mother and not be the one giving birth. If they feel excluded from the language used and don’t access maternity care because they are concerned about how they’ll be treated or spoken to, that’s terrible - and it happens.”

In the context of maternity care though the person carrying the baby is the mother aren’t they?! I understand that the baby may be raised by two women who both take the role as mother but only one person is actually carrying the baby and receiving the maternity care....the other person is her partner.

Not if the pregnancy was conceived using the “partner’s” egg. She is also a mother. So men who provide sperm get to be fathers, but women who provide eggs don’t get to be called mothers? That’s not right. I know one couple where one has fertility treatment which led to a still birth. Her partner then carried the next pregnancy, but with her partner’s egg. It was extremely challenging for them both, they both had counselling through the maternity service, and they were both mothers.

Why is it becoming an issue now? Because as part of the Better Births programme, trusts have mechanisms in place for seeking the views of service users and using them to inform changes to services and policies. I’m not sure that arguing that lesbian couples have always put up with this so should continue to do so is really on.

But the whole point of maternity services is that they exist for those giving birth. They aren't there to address the complexities of modern family set-ups and they definitely aren't there to confuse and misuse the language around motherhood/birth.

That has been changing for at least the last 6 years. Maternity services have sought to include partners much more, which is why the COVID restrictions have caused so much distress. There are also antenatal classes for expectant parents which include both. There are also classes at times just for those giving birth - it’s not fair to allow lesbian partners to join when male partners can’t because your only option for language is women or mothers, for example.

I think part of my exasperation here is that the reality within the services is completely opposite to what is being portrayed here - the problem is not rampant political correctness, it’s the opposite at the moment. Very little support for anyone who’s not a straight couple, very little understanding from staff. If you actually spoke to the individuals this affects you would see the impact this has.

I also don't see why people would be so concerned over such language that they'd rather put themselves and their baby in danger than have maternity care. I don't want to gainsay experience you might have had @TammySwansonTwo but I find this really hard to believe.

You’re oversimplifying it, and besides many women refuse antenatal care for reasons which seem far more trivial. You’d be amazed by how many pregnant women are reluctant to access maternity care for an enormous spectrum of reasons, which mainly boil down to a lack of trust in HCPs, often due to previous negative experiences. I can see that if you are a trans man you’re likely to have encountered difficulties with HCPs in the past, the prospect of entering maternity care may be extremely challenging. I spoke to one service user who detransitioned before getting pregnant and who just did not trust medical professionals at all. When listening to her experiences it was clear why this was.

Including everyone who may need to access the service in your language, so that it’s clear their circumstances will be respected, would have a huge impact for some.

If the policy was that exclusively gender neutral Ianguage must be used, I would be in full agreement. This is not erasure and I think part of the issue is the number of people on both sides so entrenched in their views that they cannot see that this impacts real people.

That has been changing for at least the last 6 years. Maternity services have sought to include partners much more, which is why the COVID restrictions have caused so much distress

In some cases the policy has caused distress. Many threads here about women who feel fear and discomfort with unmanaged presence of men on maternity wards and where the women (the actual maternity patients) have no more than thin gappy curtains to shield them day and night.

The women giving birth need to remain the primary and central focus, however much men may want a central role and however much #NAMALT

There are also classes at times just for those giving birth - it’s not fair to allow lesbian partners to join when male partners can’t because your only option for language is women or mothers, for example

I don't agree with this. You mention upthread about disadvantaged women - then you know that the very women who would miss out on classes for those giving birth which accept men are those who most need the support.

As with advertising services for "people with a cervix' without using the word "women", its not white, middle class, educated women who suffer. They can smugly congratulate themselves on their fine, liberal inclusivity. Its the large cohort of women who don't know the word and who can't game the system and play linguistic games who are excluded.

This is not erasure and I think part of the issue is the number of people on both sides so entrenched in their views that they cannot see that this impacts real people.

Those people on 'both sides' are also real people! People who find this kind of language disturbing and wrong are real people with real concerns about the impact this persistent drip drip of attacks is having on the language, equality and safety of Women/Girls.

There are also classes at times just for those giving birth - it’s not fair to allow lesbian partners to join when male partners can’t because your only option for language is women or mothers, for example.

You're being deliberately obtuse now - of course there are still language 'options' for male partners - the word partner covers both sexes. If the class is only for those giving birth then that's simple those people can be referred to, at the time, in whatever way they request. Why are you making this sound so impossible?

You’d be amazed by how many pregnant women are reluctant to access maternity care for an enormous spectrum of reasons, which mainly boil down to a lack of trust in HCPs, often due to previous negative experiences.

Of course I wouldn't be amazed - what planet do you think I live on?
I had a nightmarish experience with ds which led to a severe depression. Every one of my female friends who've had children have their own tale to tell ranging from an uncaring attitude that made them feel totally vulnerable, to medical negligence. Having distrust or concern about engaging with the maternity services certainly isn't only an issue for LGBT. But it's the only option for most of us and doing without is unfeasible.

This 'additive' language would not be causing a hoo-ha if it wasn't for the fact that

Women and girls are being described as menstruators. Non men. Cervix havers. Vagina owners. And so on and so on.

While men are still called men.

The context is really important here. Women have had enough.

Indeed. This woman has certainly had enough.

There’s a few posts there that either deliberately or accidentally misinterpret what I’ve said. One makes a point that I made already as if I would disagree with it. As for the idea that women suck up their distrust of maternity services because they have no choice, this is far from true. Many do not and feel they do have a choice.

I’ve genuinely tried to engage in a reasonable discussion, something which is massively lacking and that in itself is causing huge problems.

I have tried to explain how things are. You can dislike it but it doesn’t make it any less true. It’s not the place of maternity services or staff to exclude service users from their materials in order to take a stand. Their job is to get women through their pregnancy, birth and postnatal period safely. If additional language helps that aim then it’s right that they do it, and it’s certainly not right that they spend an inordinate amount of time dealing with complaints and arguments about language.

The thing is, you’ll get nowhere claiming that language hurries along the erasure of women when that language includes women. It won’t be taken seriously, and seen as petty and exclusionary. That’s how any complaints on this issue will be perceived. You can take that onboard and find other ways to engage with this, or keep going and keep being disregarded. That’s your choice, I have just tried to provide some insight into the discussions happening internally.

The thing is, you’ll get nowhere claiming that language hurries along the erasure of women when that language includes women

It depends how the language is used and that isn’t :at all clear from the reporting.

Providing specific services to patients who need it is just good care.

Writing chestfeeding/breastfeeding on all literature and communication (similarly to language policy in Wales) would send a deliberate message about language. The message would be that it is expected that many women will feel so dysphoric about their body that they can’t use neutral words to describe it, and that the word ‘breast’ denotes a feminine gender. However, perhaps this isn’t the plan and most people won’t notice any change.

Obviously hospitals are under huge amounts of pressure, but language and words matter.

I don’t fear the erasure if women (not possible), I fear policies that harm women, and I am very clear on why encouraging euphemisms for female body parts and adopting gender identity ideology harms women.

(To me gender identity ideology is the idea that everyone should be classified by gender identity, and that sex is a spectrum and irrelevant)

Using gender neutral language would alienate you. Using existing language and adding gender neutral language should not.

I have realised that this is where we are talking at cross purposes!

‘Chestfeeding’ is not gender neutral. The additive word is gendered masculine, and therefore the existing previously gender neutral word becomes feminine.

In a healthcare and legal setting all words should be viewed as gender neutral because they refer to sex, not gender, but cervix haver and chestfeeder are an enforcement of gender.

The new words are not just additive, they change the meaning of existing words.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/12

Stolen from another thread.
Scroll down to 3 (2)

@TammySwansonTwo yes actually I do accept your point that a female can be mother biologically even if not carrying the baby. I hadn’t thought about women who provide an egg that their partner then carries. I can see how in general discussion referring to both women as mums is inclusive as it’s also biologically accurate I suppose.

There was a time when I'd have happily compromised over adding gender neutral language (e.g. 'women and...' breastfeeding and...'). Bit I wouldn't now, not in communications about pregnancy, childbirth and breastfeeding.
It doesn't alienate me - it's not about my feelings - but it suggests that the writer either does not understand the difference between sex and gender identity or is deliberately obscuring that difference.
Either way, it leaves the way open for the wording to be used against women.
Professional face to face contact is another matter but, after these last few years, I would dig my heels in over any public communication: keep it correct, use sex based terms for sex based functions, add a statement explaining this and that the language refers to sex, not gender.

The woman at the centre of maternity services clearly must be the mother who carries and gives birth to the baby. Her chosen birth partner is there to support her in her process of becoming a mother.

[quote AIMD]@TammySwansonTwo yes actually I do accept your point that a female can be mother biologically even if not carrying the baby. I hadn’t thought about women who provide an egg that their partner then carries. I can see how in general discussion referring to both women as mums is inclusive as it’s also biologically accurate I suppose.[/quote]
Not aimed at you aimd just using your quote

Thing is as well if a pregnant woman and man turn up it will be automatically assumed he is the dad even if it isn’t technically his child, so not calling both women mum is even more jarring

Chestfeeding’ is not gender neutral. The additive word is gendered masculine, and therefore the existing previously gender neutral word becomes feminine

Of course it is!

Sometimes i read posts on here and i feel so dense that I hadnt put two and two together 😀

Tammy

Thank you for your posts , I suppose in my ignorance i thought that midwives would call both women mum 💐

The woman at the centre of maternity services clearly must be the mother who carries and gives birth to the baby. Her chosen birth partner is there to support her in her process of becoming a mother

I remember during my hospital stays with dd2 that as I wasn't the patient and I wasn't breast feeding they were under no obligation to even feed me while I was there. Staff really shouldn't be having to concern themselves with validating adults roles in the whole thing. They are there to provide medical care to the patient and as long as they aren't outwardly rude or hostile to visitors and/or partners / support providers then I don't see why they are given second thought tbh. The cards and flowers and parties and recognition as a parent is all at home waiting fir you whenever you want it. The other person's role surely only matters when consent is needed in an emergency when it cabt be obtained from the patient?

There didn't even appear appear be staff to stick a wrist band on dd2 or chuck out visitors or find out if I can actually have lunch , let alone chat to xp to make sure he gets recognised as a dad.

Surely in that situation the woman giving birth is still the mother? Of course the lesbian partner would then have a biological connection to the child and I totally get that they'd want a word to express that, but I would be very uncomfortable about anyone other than the woman giving birth being referred to as the mother. It is a very special word with a specific meaning and I think we dilute that at our peril.

Are trans people actually offended by the term "breastmilk"? Have they asked for the leaflets to be changed? Doubt it. I would imagine that 90% of trans people don't give a sh*t, and changing the nomenclature is a decision made in a boardroom to appease an angry mob that doesn't exist.

Less than 1% of the uk population identifies as trans, and of those, what percentage are really going to be on the receiving end of one of these leaflets? And of those trans people on the receiving end of one of those leaflets, what percentage are going to be offended by the term "breastmilk"?! Seems like a massive waste of NHS money to rewrite and print new leaflets to avoid potentially upsetting half a dozen people!

I'm 10 months into breastfeeding my second DC and I'm a lot more bothered about bleeding nipples, blisters, thrush etc than I am about terminology in a leaflet!

@earsup

I can't keep up with all this stuff...non gender, binary free..breast binding...i reckon its all a fad....they will move onto something else soon after wasting millions on consultants !

The problem is that the concept of gender rather than sex is finding its way into official language, documentation, and laws. That’s why even if the current attention on the issue is just a fad, the repercussions will last long afterwards. When our health organisation is proposing to using inaccurate euphemisms for a subset of patients, removing women centred, accurate terminology, adding additional terminology which is likely to render the woman centred terms extraneous, All to be kind... that’s a problem, because these things are not easily unpicked. In fact they are generally expanded out, where the NHS lead, other organisations will inevitably follow.

@Floisme

Surely in that situation the woman giving birth is still the mother? Of course the lesbian partner would then have a biological connection to the child and I totally get that they'd want a word to express that, but I would be very uncomfortable about anyone other than the woman giving birth being referred to as the mother. It is a very special word with a specific meaning and I think we dilute that at our peril.

Yes in surrogate situations, the woman carrying the baby is the birth mother even if it’s not her egg I think?

That's my understanding - can anyone clarify?

As I said upthread I have real issues with the term chestfeeding - men have breast tissue, can have breast cancer etc, so breast is just as gender neutral as chest, but obviously those with dysphoria may struggle with the word breast. Those proponents of the term would argue that chest is gender neutral term, I would argue that so is breast.

But the view of the service will be promote breastfeeding, if this means an increase in breastfeeding they will do it. They won’t invest in better support, lactation consultant’s or generally put their money where their mouth is, but hey at least they can show they are being inclusive (don’t get me started).

What I can say is that there is no deliberate attempt to “send a message” by this usage. Services are generally responding to increased pressure to come up with a policy that reduces the complaints and concerns of staff.

Writing social media content is a bloody nightmare now. I spend at least as much time carefully wording things to try to avoid saying anything contentious as I do on the actual content. If you don’t, the comments get derailed, everyone ends up arguing and offended and the messaging is lost. It’s massively frustrating.

We are getting into dangerous territory when we consider anyone other than the pregnant/birthing mother has any right to expect anything from maternity services whether or not the other party is married to the mother or provided her with an egg or sperm.

The mother’s chosen birth partner is there only to support her in her process, her journey to motherhood. The mother is the most important person in the room, no one should be there unless she decides that they are helpful in her process. All the power should lie with the mother in her pregnancy, labour, birth and feeding choices. For too many women this will the first time in their lives when they are the absolute centre of any situation.

Writing social media content is a bloody nightmare now. I spend at least as much time carefully wording things to try to avoid saying anything contentious as I do on the actual content. If you don’t, the comments get derailed, everyone ends up arguing and offended and the messaging is lost. It’s massively frustrating

I mentioned this earlier. The fact that this policy was publically announced means that every twitter post now has to be worded in a "neutral way" by that it usually means without the word woman in it or they will be piled on and tweet removed. They can now never mention women no matter how relevant. So what started as an internal policy fir maternity will now become their entire theme