Political badges should be banned from NHS uniforms

[Ihatetomatoes]

New report says political badges such as Pro Palestine shouldn't be worn on NHS uniforms. It's led to increased antisemitism and fear amongst Jewish patients.

Also NHS uniforms not to be worn on protests.

This report makes a number of suggestions and in my opinion must be implemented. All political badges off NHS uniforms. No NHS uniforms on protests such as pro Palestine. It contributes to racism and fear.

The NHS should treat all patients equally and individuals political opinions shouldn't be pinned on their uniforms.

I do not think I’d be targeted for deliberate subpar care if you mean me. I think being confronted with a triggering badge means I will experience subpar care because of how I feel, not because there’s some sort of conspiracy against me. If my son doesn’t trust his GP and hides in a corner, then what I experience will indeed be subpar, not because anyone actually did anything, just because of my children’s lived experiences of that flag.

They aren't able to do their job though. If its a truly held belief then banning a hijab would result in those women just not working for the health service. In theory it could be a plain NHS version of a hijab as long as it provides the same level of cover.

I agree that there needs to be a balance as another poster suggested. Health workers shouldn't be required to deny their protected characteristics, answer intrusive questions, or be discriminated againat by patients, but that's not what's being asked of them.

It is true, patients can request a change of clinician for any reason. They may wait a while for an alternative doctor..I already explained very clearly upthread that if you're don't want to see a clinician for any reason you're entitled to ask for another but you shouldn't be abusive or rude or argue with the clinician about the characteristics you don't like about them. Whole we shouldn't face abusive and discrimination we do all the bloody time! Patients still need treatment and get treated. For as arrogant and selfish as some people on this thread think we are, we regularly care for people respectfully as they abuse us because the hospital isn't going to kick the patient out that needs medical care. If a racist wants to wait for a white nurse.to come on shift they're welcome to wait for example, do you think the hospital actually removes people?

Was it not you then but nother poster who's aid they had fears they would be deliberately singled out and compromised?

Of course but it's a personal belief, which is why legally it's already been explained it's hard to ban one belief without banning another.

Well this is a public forum. I didn’t call anyone personally a twat or arrogant.

This is not a situation that demands nuance - it’s somewhat of a binary issue.

Not sure when the opinion that healthcare providers should appear neutral became so controversial but it goes some way to explaining why seeking medical help is such an awful experience.

There is no requirement for LGBTQ people or anyone else to wear a supporting lanyard or badge
There is a requirement for some religions to wear specific attire

theres a very big difference

Well this is just Identity Politics, in itself a “statement”.

What if someone’s identity is - I believe the term is - a “furry” ? Can they work as a healthcare person dressed as a cat or whatever?

But the belief is that they must wear a certain piece of clothing, whereas someone with pro-Palestinian beliefs does not believe they need to wear a pin. They do so to show off their beliefs.

Even as a public forum it's basic courtesy to not quote and respond to someone who asked quite clearly for you to not engage with them personally anymor. You didn't need to address me personally as a twat to be meaning me or people like me

MNHQ don’t allow restricting people’s right to comment

It doesn't matter what the belief is though, it's the fact they're expressing that personal belief at work. As you say they don't have to wear it, and it could be interpretated as bringing their whole selves to work. I'm not saying it's totally impossible I'm just curious how it would be worded to ban them. If you worded it as you say of "you can wear items you believe you need to wear" whether we agree or not what if someone does say they feel they need to wear a pin?

Maybe. I feel like the Jewish spokesperson on this thread but perhaps I missed another one.

There are many examples of people being treated differently based on race or gender or any number of other things. I don’t think it’s impossible someone would help me less as a Jewish woman if they were indeed a bigot. I don’t think all people wearing a Palestinian badge are bigots but some are, and until I know someone well I have no way to know which sort this specific person is. And there’s no way for me to know that when in a vulnerable position.

I am very, very sure that a person of colour finding a doctor in a white power badge leaning over them would find it hard to trust them. Or an immigrant waking up to someone festooned with English flags. Again - either of these doctors might be dedicated and fabulous doctors who will treat them well, but the initial signal isn’t going to encourage that belief.

I am also bewildered at the idea that I can just request someone else. It’s a 12 hour wait at our local hospital sometimes. I can’t actually imagine how long it would be if I demand another doctor based on absolutely nothing but overwhelming fear of what ‘could’ happen. What would that conversation even look like? I’d annoy myself with it, even more so the poor NHS receptionist having to listen to me.

Then it would be down to them to both argue that they would not be able to work without it and that the item itself was a core part of the belief.

Elements of this have been through courts before so the process is established and there is legal precedent the NHS could use but none that would support the wearing of a pin or lanyard, particularly a political one.

Beliefs are not banned though. People can believe what they like.

I think you can make a fairly straightforward line between someone taking a normative action based on belief for themselves - like covering their hair.

And a political statement that is primarily meant to be for other people, like a badge.

So why not wear a badge that shows you care about children living in poverty in the UK, or Africa, or any other country? Why do you only care about the Children in Palestine?

Why not wear a badge that says you oppose Hamas?

Surely who they care about is their own business and that should be left at home not worn on a badge at work that could intimidate others and is irrelevant to their role at work

I'm not sure how legally the NHS could reverse it's stance on LGBT lanyards without it being discriminatory against LGBT staff, considering their values of inclusion and promoting LGBT networks and staff safety.

Suspect the poster was being sarcastic, pointing out that there are lots of things people don't wear badges, doesn't mean we all assume they support Hamas etc.

I think legally it would be hard to word and enforce in a way that doesn't discriminate or stiffle staffs right to expression especially given these things are currently allowed as per organisations policies. I've said I don't think it's impossible but I don't know how it would be worded and neither did the judge who commented.

This is a classic example of whataboutery.
When someone raises concern about Palestinian civilians, the response is not to engage with that concern but to ask, “What about children in the UK?” or “What about Africa?” The implication is that unless someone campaigns equally and publicly for every injustice in the world, they are not entitled to speak about any particular one.
That’s an impossible standard and one we rarely apply elsewhere.
I care about children living in poverty, wherever they are. Wearing a Palestine badge simply reflects concern about a specific humanitarian crisis. It does not mean I don’t care about other issues.
Likewise, opposing the killing of Palestinian civilians does not mean supporting Hamas. I can oppose Hamas, oppose terrorism, and oppose the killing of innocent civilians at the same time.
Too often, discussions about Palestine follow a pattern of deny, deflect, or dehumanise. Rather than engaging with the suffering being highlighted, the conversation is redirected elsewhere or the humanity of those affected is diminished. Acknowledging the suffering of Palestinian civilians should not be controversial, and it certainly does not require me to prove that I care about every other injustice before I am allowed to speak about this one. I will continue to wear my Palestine pin and white poppy as is my right to.

See I disagree with your analogy and am not going to get into it again how a white power badge isn't the same thing, it's a strawman. A more accurate example would be a doctor wearing a BAME pin and a white racist patient,.or maybe not racist but at least someone interpreting being pro one group as anti another. I see what you mean about waiting times which is why I think in practice you would hopefully judge by how someone is treating you not your assumption of them, if you're requiring accident or emergency care especially.

Surely they could just say all uniforms/NHS issued items must be a standard colour/style?

I'm really not aware of all the details but presume a lanyard is only one very small of their efforts to be inclusive and all they (legally) need to do is show is that they aren't discriminating by applying the same rules to everyone?

It what would be the justification for staff networks no longer being allowed to wear a symbol?

Based on the evidence from patients and other staff that it is not conducive to them performing their jobs, which is a well established legal reason.

There seem to be several streams of argument against banning them:

1. I want to wear them so I should be allowed (despite causing fear and harm to patients)
2. I don't agree it causes harm/fear (despite evidence from other posters and the report)
3. It would be practically difficult to do (legal precedent already in place to support)
4. It wouldn't be fair to only ban some symbols, everything personal should be banned (process for exceptions is established in law)
5. It infringes on my personal beliefs (no, you can believe what you want you just can't advertise it at work)