Male hospital staff

[ToadRage]

I don't really know how i feel about this or if I'm just being a bit precious. I had an appointment for a transvaginal ultrasound a couple of weeks ago. I was a bit shocked to find the sonographer was a man. A female nurse was present and she did all the talking, he barely said a word to me. I have had ultrasounds before but they have always been done by women. He was professional and nothing out of the ordinary happened but I felt a bit awkward as I haven't had a man down there except my husband in 20+ years, not even a male doctor. Am I wrong in thinking I should have been told it was going to be done by a man, maybe given the option to request a woman or AIBU?

I think you’re suffering from a lack of clarity in your thinking.

Please be clear: how does a man treating a woman pose any health risks? Which specific health risks are they?

As far as I’m aware, the sex of a practitioner undertaking any medical procedure has no impact on health outcomes (frankly, it’d be peculiar if a particular sex taking the exact same steps using the exact same instruments as another sex would result in a different outcome… think about it).

The first issue I see is that many women will avoid healthcare that involves intimate treatment if they can't be assured they'll be treated by a female HCP. Which isn't good.

No, women have campaigned for equality in employment and pay for women as women were paid less and had worse employment conditions than men.

We have gone from being chattels of our husbands, not allowed to own property, have custody of our children or vote, slowly and painfully over more than a century to (nearly) have equal pay, not be sacked for getting married or pregnant (although the pregnant sackings it still happen), not be passed over for jobs or promotion because we are women etc.

It’s interesting that you are so exercised about and call it ‘archaic’ to cause a small restriction on the vast range of jobs available to men in order to ensure that women have medical care that works for them, doesn’t cause them to self exclude or put them at risk of trauma or in a small number of cases (although not small enough) sexual assault.

I really hope you are a man that is holding this misogynist view.

Self excluding from screening or treatment because of trauma, religion etc is a pretty high health risk. 🙄

Oh and if you look at the slightly wider health picture, women are 32% more likely to die when treated by a male surgeon.

But hey, equality.

And while we’re on ‘Equality’ as you are especially bothered about it, only 17% of NHS surgeons are women. Despite the vastly increased risk of death to female patients with male surgeons.

You’re not actually interested in equality. You are arguing for men’s rights. I just hope you come to see that one day.

The 32% Risk Increase: A major population-based study of over 1.3 million patients published in JAMA Surgeryfound that women treated by male surgeons were 32% more likely to die post-operation compared to women treated by female surgeons.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37647075/

Do you feel this way about Obstetricians and Gynaecologists too? Ime they are more frequently men than sonographers and nurses. They seem to get less ire for being male too - I think there is a gendered bias that nursing and AHP roles are 'women's work'

I don’ know the numbers for male obstetricians or gynaecologists but at least 3 out of 200 male midwives being convicted as sex offenders is unacceptable in my book.

So I think the NHS should exercise far greater caution with these men and look to encourage far more women into those areas. See also my post above about the woeful health outcomes for women with male surgeons.

Ironically, some women are put off from going into high level healthcare (like surgery etc) by the high rates of sexual assault and abuse by the senior male staff.

And the more women that wave it away and justify it, like on this thread, the more it will continue.

The study's authors say there is a pattern of female trainees being abused by senior male surgeons, and this is happening now, in NHS hospitals.

BBC News has spoken to women who were sexually assaulted in the operating theatre while surgery took place.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-66775015?app-referrer=deep-link

What would you have happen then ? Because if women cancel things like mammogram and other intimate health care exams because they don’t want men carrying out these procedures, then waiting lists are going to lengthen and women will inevitably die as a result.

We already have one story upthread from a poster who was actively being investigated for cancer and on a two week referral path, actually cancelling the appointment and opting to wait for a female practitioner - because she was convinced the examination would be more painful if carried out by a male doctor. To my mind, having experienced first hand the reality of a cancer diagnosis, that’s madness.

The answer is not to prevent men from entering these clinical areas, it’s to educate and reassure women and reiterate that wherever possible they have a choice. But with the caveat and clear explanation that that choice cannot always be fulfilled because of operational needs, and that where cancer is suspected, any delay could affect outcomes and prognosis.

And how would that work, considering sometimes the women aren't in safe hands?

Also, how would that work given that for many women it's not about 'safety', it's about trauma caused by men, or religion?

What's your solution?

Surely it’s pretty clear what needs to happen? The NHS needs to stop pushing its ridiculous schemes to recruit more men into these roles and redirect their energies towards women. If there is a shortage of women they need to look at the barriers to women like childcare, discrimination and risk of sexual assault from their male colleagues.

The answer is not to prevent men from entering these clinical areas, it’s to educate and reassure women that they are in safe hands.

That’s not true though if you look at the stats on sex offending of male staff and the fact that women are 32% more likely to die with a male surgeon. Why say that?

because she was convinced the examination would be more painful if carried out by a male doctor

She didn’t say that. She said she could not tolerate a man. That’s very different.

Then what is needed is a campaign of education so that more women do come forward and are not put off by the prospect of a trained medic who just happens to be male, carrying out the examination. The answer is not to prevent men from entering these clinical areas - that in itself is preventing women from the best of care because you would be automatically barring them from access to talented practitioners simply because they are male.

Exactly this. My breast surgeon was a man, and throughout the whole harrowing experience of a breast cancer diagnosis and treatment, l never once felt as though l wasn’t being listened to, or that I wasn’t in the best possible hands. I wonder how many women here would delay treatment after a cancer diagnosis if they were assigned a male surgeon. When it actually comes down to it and the reality of cancer hits, the sex of the clinician comes very far down the list behind experience, expertise and track record.

I don't think you're unreasonable to prefer a woman but, realistically NHS staffing and rotas mean, that unless it's an all female staff, there's always the likelihood of a man carrying out some activities.

You could make a request but I genuinely don't know if it would make a difference.

What are you going to educate them with? "Statistically, they are more likely to sexually assault you, or result in negative surgical outcomes." Hm. Not persuasive.

And how exactly are you going to educate women out of trauma, or religion?

Why can't we just have all the women who don't care see the male HCPs, and all the women who do care can see female HCPs? With an emphasis on recruiting more women than men, to ensure faster care for all women.

No I don’t want to prioritise men. I want them to be treated equally.

She said that she found previous examinations very painful and opted to wait for a female practitioner because she would not be able to tolerate a man. How is that different ? Cancer doesn’t wait for you to delay for the sex of clinician you want. It spreads and once you know it’s there, the priority is to get it out and treated. If you think you’ll have any priorities above that when you receive a diagnosis, then you’re deluded. Where women have been traumatised or have religious concerns, then yes, there should be a choice, but that doesn’t detract from the fact that there will be a delay in treatment because the NHS can’t just conjure up suitable female surgeons on demand. That’s something each individual will have to factor into their decision. What’s more important, your choice of surgeon, or a poorer outcome which will shorten your life ?

Statistically doesn’t mean inevitably. And the reality is that the NHS can’t just produce surgeons of either sex on demand. So what’s more important - that you’re given your choice of surgeon, or that you’re given the best possible chance of a favourable outcome after the diagnosis of a life threatening condition ? And I did caveat what I said with the proviso that those having suffered trauma or having religious concerns should be offered a choice wherever possible. With the emphasis on possible, and the clear explanation that any delay while a suitable surgeon is assigned may affect the outcome, and is the responsibility of the patient.

Several posters quoting the Equality Act here, but it’s my understanding that an exemption wouldn’t apply in this area, so emphasising the recruitment of women in this area would be just as discriminatory as putting the emphasis on the recruitment of men. Equality means just that. Equality.

Single sex exceptions wouldn’t apply in this area. There’s nothing illegal about recruiting male clinicians into these areas of women’s’ health - the only consideration is whether they are qualified to do the job.

From the Equality Act itself. Single-sex exceptions to the Equality Act 2010 do not generally apply to the recruitment of male clinicians into women’s healthcare. Excluding male doctors or nurses from these roles typically constitutes unlawful sex discrimination under UK law, as clinical competency takes precedence over gender in general service delivery. In my view this is as it should be. Equality works both ways.

It's not just about surgeons, though. It's also about nurses, and doctors in other specialisms. I imagine most women are more distressed at the thought of men doing exams or procedures that involve the genitals than they are of surgeries that don't involve the genitals.

I'm also not sure what you're saying here? Or what you want?

Is it that you think women shouldn't be allowed to opt for a female HCP, unless they can prove they have been raped or sexually assaulted, or are religious? What do you think the NHS will be able to do to 'educate' women, when statistically their risks are higher with men? What if the education campaign doesn't work (because why would it)?

As for 'offered a choice' - all women have the choice to turn down a male HCP. No one is holding women down and forcing them to get a smear from a male HCP (I hope). The issue is whether or not them saying 'no' to a male HCP results in them being seen by a female one, or whether it results in them being untreated. Which do you think is a better outcome?

It isn’t just about surgeons. The quote from the Equality Act 2010 makes it clear that in all areas of clinic service, qualification is the deciding factor, not sex. And for that reason single sex exceptions don’t apply. What people are advocating for here is illegal and if it was applied to women practitioners in the health service there would be uproar.

I think women should always be allowed to opt for a female HCP if that’s what they want. But the opinion here seems to be that that is the paramount concern. It’s not. The clinical outcome is the paramount concern and when we’re talking about cancer, any delay can affect outcome and prognosis. So that should be factored in to the patients’ decision to delay and opt for the HCP they want - clearly explained and the responsibility for any adverse consequence should be the patients’.

It’s a matter of choice and personal responsibility, but there are some here advocating for the exclusion of all males in the area of women’s’ health. Since you asked for my opinion I think that’s discriminatory and hugely hypocritical. It’s also unrealistic, and the likelihood is that the consequence would be lengthened waiting lists and women dying waiting for appropriate treatment. Which do you think is a better outcome ?

You seem to have a very limited view of ‘equality’.

You want ‘equality’ of employment for men, I want equality in healthcare for women. Equality law is about balancing conflicting rights and needs. Actual equality is not about blindly treating everyone exactly the same as we have different needs and barriers.

The detriment of an increased risk of women dying is clearly worse then the detriment to some men not getting access to ALL the jobs. it’s rather crazy that you don’t seem to agree.

Trouble is, we don’t have equality in employment between men and women. Far from it - only 17% of NHS surgeons - you know, the prestigious, high paying roles in the NHS? This is largely due to historical misogyny (women not being allowed to study medicine, women as recently as the 70s being sacked for getting married etc) and more recently to barriers like high rates of sexual assault from colleagues and sexist attitudes.

in your pursuit of equality, would you support a big NHS recruitment campaign to raise the number of female surgeons from 17% to 50%?

It could also have the added benefit of reducing the 32% higher chance of dying that women have with a male surgeon.

I think the thing with colonoscopy is they are behind you which I think makes you feel even more vulnerable, well it did me.

Educating women to accept intimate examinations from men even if they are uncomfortable with it. I can’t believe I’m actually reading that!

Sorry to hear that you've dealt with cancer, but you can surely see why some women don't want to stand topless in front of a man. If they have to wait longer for an appointment to be seen by a woman that is their prerogative. Personally, I'd just take the appointment but I don't like when it's a man, I'd always prefer a woman.

So how has the NHS gotten away with only women being employed to do mammogram screenings for so long, then, if it's illegal?

And we're not necessarily talking about cancer. The issue could be anything.

For instance, a pp upthread had investigations regarding her bladder, and had a male HCP sit and stare at her very blatantly while she had to urinate, when the female HCPs gave her privacy. He made her feel very uncomfortable, and honestly, it sounds sexually motivated if the female HCPs didn't do it.

I've had a TVU to look for causes of abdominal pain. I've also had smear tests, midwives, and two surgeries. Aside from the surgeons, I've always been able to have female HCPs. I don't know who the surgeon was for my appendicitis and was unconscious during (obviously), but my surgeon for my c section was male, which I found very traumatic even though I went through with it, and I think the trauma contributed to the PND I struggled with.

So it's not always cancer, and it's not always super urgent, and sometimes the HCP being male can actually impact negatively on the patient by unintentionally retraumatising them.

I think a better outcome would be to encourage and prioritise female HCPs, particularly going into areas of female intimate care, so that plenty are female. Studies show that women make better surgeons in general, btw. A 70/30 split in specialisms that deal with female issues seems like a good ratio - the best men all get through and can deal with patients who don't care about sex, but there are plenty of good female HCPs to deal with patients who do.

I'll worry about men complaining about equality in female healthcare roles when they start being equal to women in other areas - such as equal rates of sexual offending. When they offend at equal rates to women, then they can be equal in female healthcare. Fair dos.