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.

Jesus Christ. Midwife here and no way will I be saying all this tripe.
I've just gotten to grip with referring to contractions as surges.

Guineapigbridge

Transwomen can't give birth or breastfeed. It's biology. There, I said it.

There's absolutely nothing wrong or incorrect in saying that.

And that's because transwomen are male. Males cannot give birth.

Contractions are surges now??

@NiceGerbil

Hmmm

I had a look at the document.

So far they have mentioned that women are often marginalised in healthcare

And while they say this

'We also recognise that there is currently biological essentialism and transphobia present
within elements of mainstream birth narratives and discourse'

They also say this

'Please note that these language changes do not apply when discussing or caring for
individuals in a one-on-one capacity where language and documentation should reflect
the gender identity of the individual. When caring for cis women it is good practice to
use terminology that is meaningful and appropriate to the individual; this may include
terms such as woman, mother or breastfeeding.'

I really wish people would be a bit more circumspect with this stuff. It's not nearly as bad as OP makes out. They say they take an additive approach- so pregnant women and people. Type thing.

Let's not get people riled up over half a story.

When the NHS main website says 8 out of 10 people under 40 get pregnant in a year of having unprotected sex, then there's really no need to do this. There enough ludicrous stuff out there not to worry!

Do you not see a problem with phrases like "when caring for cis. women"?

This guidance is surprisingly all right - its saying, refer to people how they want to be referred as.

It's a damn sight better than cervical smear campaigns aimed at "anyone with a cervix" - woman not mentioned. This was the Irish cervical check service.

Or "birthing parents" mother not mentioned. SANDS charity- supporters of bereaved parents.

So many of these horrible examples

Breasts and chest are teleological different things. I have breasts but I also have a chest. If a woman went to a doctor with a chest infection the doctor would diagnose a chest infection, not a breast infection which is something completely different. Men can get breast cancer. Chest pain and breast pain are two different things. It’s not two different words for the same thing,

So chest-feeding is a mis-description. Babies aren’t fed from the chest but from breasts, which are attached to the chest.

Yes I can and I've been talking about this topic on the FWR board for about 6 years.

I'm horrified by the institutional capture, the fucking with stats, the suppression of women's voices on social media. The idea seemingly supported by a lot of women, normal nice women, that woman is a costume. An identity. Not a physical reality. That males should play sport against females and if they lose its because they're not trying hard enough. Rapists in women's prisons. The failure to understand why girls may want to opt out of womanhood when puberty hits, as so many always did, but in the age of online porn and extremely gendered looks on Instagram etc why that may be more than ever. School toilets changing. I mean so much stuff.

I mean I could go on and on and on.

This though- pregnant women and other pregnant people? And the midwife calling a transman a pregnant person? I can't get worked up about it.

Completely different things...what a weird autocorrect there.

I would rather not have men on postnatal wards 24/7, than upset a tiny number of possibly very vulnerable pregnant women who may be in all sorts of states, by saying they must be called she etc.

The breasts thing is I'm sure due to the hyprrsexualised male view of female breasts. Men are obsessed by them.

With trans people it seems to be the thing trans women most want and gender questioning girls most want rid of. There's reasons for that and none of them good. I think this wording hooks into a massive societal issue around breasts and what they are 'for'.

The thing that many trans women want, and teen girls are keen to hide.

Men have breast tissue. The term chest feeding is much deeper and more worrying to me than eg pregnant women and other people who are pregnant.

What an absolute nonsense

No one feeds with their chest, there’s no such thing as chest milk and there’s no such thing as cis women. Please stop with all the pathetic excusing this type of shit.

@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.

Breastfeeding is the only term covered in the Equality Act 2010

Of course it is good that is important that woman/people that have female biology feel comfortable when they’re giving birth. And most midwives (also called birthing workers in the document) would accommodate their language to the woman/person with female biology preferences.

However, quoting from the document (no women's association nor variations of sex development associations mentioned on the contributors list, All LGBT, queer, trans) The BMA says 'As such they recommend that the term “pregnant people” can be used instead of “expectant mothers”.'

The MANA (the one the BSUH are following) says: " we are committed to promoting the additive use of gender-neutral language in traditionally woman-centric movements (birth and reproductive justice) because doing so disrupts those systems and supports gender liberation." So there is an agenda that goes beyond making a few transmen happy.

For those at the back that claim it has no impact on women or anybody else not so keen in being known as ‘birthing parent’. The easy solution is for mothers to be kind and to make the others feel more comfortable?

Move over woman!

@NiceGerbil

I would rather not have men on postnatal wards 24/7, than upset a tiny number of possibly very vulnerable pregnant women who may be in all sorts of states, by saying they must be called she etc.

Exactly! Because they can never comprehend that theor demand for"equality" removes even more support of women in a vulnerable situation who have gone through childbirth, which derives from their genetic ability to do so.

I might as well demand the same of males on a prostate cancer ward

@Terranean

Of course it is good that is important that woman/people that have female biology feel comfortable when they’re giving birth. And most midwives (also called birthing workers in the document) would accommodate their language to the woman/person with female biology preferences.

However, quoting from the document (no women's association nor variations of sex development associations mentioned on the contributors list, All LGBT, queer, trans) The BMA says 'As such they recommend that the term “pregnant people” can be used instead of “expectant mothers”.'

The MANA (the one the BSUH are following) says: " we are committed to promoting the additive use of gender-neutral language in traditionally woman-centric movements (birth and reproductive justice) because doing so disrupts those systems and supports gender liberation." So there is an agenda that goes beyond making a few transmen happy.

For those at the back that claim it has no impact on women or anybody else not so keen in being known as ‘birthing parent’. The easy solution is for mothers to be kind and to make the others feel more comfortable?

Move over woman!

Well, people in the 60s and 70s thought additives (in food) wouldn't harm anyone...we soon found out how wrong that was!

This is horrifying. Inaccurate, demeaning and erasing language being used by the NHS... complaining about biological essentialism regarding services that can literally only be used by one biological sex? Is there no hope?
Yes it’s not a surprise Brighton would kick this off but why do I suspect they won’t be the last.

NHS trying to get pregnant page has had the word woman stripped out.

'Pregnancy happens when sperm enters a vagina, travels through the cervix and womb to the fallopian tube and fertilises an egg.

You’re more likely to get pregnant around the time you are ovulating. This is when an egg becomes ready and you are at your most fertile.

If you are under 40 and have regular sex without using contraception, there is an 8 in 10 chance you will get pregnant within 1 year.'

8 in 10? Even if you're in a gay couple? Can the man get pregnant?

It's nonsense.

@KatyClaire

I’m a breastfeeding mother and gender inclusive language is not harmful to me, but may help others. This doesn’t bother me at all.

Totally. Its a non issue

This is good too

'Do

have sex every 2 to 3 days without using contraception – make sure sperm enters the vagina

try to have sex around the time you are ovulating – this is usually 12 to 16 days before your period starts

try to maintain a healthy weight, cut down or stop drinking alcohol and do not smoke – it can help if your partner does this too'

Sooooo. The man could be the one to lose weight etc and the woman can maybe consider it?

Removing the word woman renders it drivel. This is the main page on our national health information site about conceiving a baby.

I mean what a load of old shit.

They are relying on people interpreting what they mean. Understanding that when they say people they mean women.

That is a terrible approach for a health information service that is supposed to be clear to the largest number of people.

@Lifeaintalwaysempty

This is horrifying. Inaccurate, demeaning and erasing language being used by the NHS... complaining about biological essentialism regarding services that can literally only be used by one biological sex? Is there no hope? Yes it’s not a surprise Brighton would kick this off but why do I suspect they won’t be the last.

Thete is hope - we stand against it, overtly, covertly, sharing it, standing agaibst it at work, educating our children, refusing to declare anything on a form that asks us about gender - choosing "other" if a question asks "male/female/other" especially if there is an explanation box - and we explain to them that there can only be two sexes - sex celled people with "xx" and also "xy"...

Its up to us, the females who are the children and grandchildren of the females who fought the first time round and gave us the opportunities in life growing up that we had

@NiceGerbil

NHS trying to get pregnant page has had the word woman stripped out.

'Pregnancy happens when sperm enters a vagina, travels through the cervix and womb to the fallopian tube and fertilises an egg.

You’re more likely to get pregnant around the time you are ovulating. This is when an egg becomes ready and you are at your most fertile.

If you are under 40 and have regular sex without using contraception, there is an 8 in 10 chance you will get pregnant within 1 year.'

8 in 10? Even if you're in a gay couple? Can the man get pregnant?

It's nonsense.

Unless the gay couple has a vagina and access to sperm? Unless it's by artificial insemination, that couple aren't gay. Though Stonewall are trying to change that into sonething more confusing than learning Ancient Green via the medium of Klingon

It's this bit

'If you are under 40 and have regular sex without using contraception, there is an 8 in 10 chance you will get pregnant within 1 year.''

It's drivel. They are banking on people knowing what they mean. Even though removing the word woman throughout has made it nonsensical.

KatyClaire, Californiabakes, so when a self declared woman ends up at a breastfeeding support group and ends up committing a sex offence, and when it traces back to the fact BECAUSE the law says any male can self declare female, can get access to female safe spaces - and what is safer than a vreast feedibg group, never mind potentially denying a place to an actual breastfeeding mother - it won't concern you? Because it concerns me

@NiceGerbil

It's this bit

'If you are under 40 and have regular sex without using contraception, there is an 8 in 10 chance you will get pregnant within 1 year.''

It's drivel. They are banking on people knowing what they mean. Even though removing the word woman throughout has made it nonsensical.

Well, quite! So then the decsription is even more open to interpretation and can be used in a defence of a male sex offender who twisted it to his own calculated ends.