Physiotherapy SEEN

[VenusEnvyXX]

I am concerned about the CSP's position statement on transphobia and want to explore whether members think the CSP would benefit from having it's own SEEN.

If you're not familiar with SEENs, they are a balance to the LGBTQIA+ groups, can be formally recognised and eligible for funding on an equal footing as other network groups. They exist in civil service, journalism, police, HR, city, and the NHS one is nearly ready to launch.

I do not agree with Rob Yeldham, and previously, Karen Middleton, when they say that physiotherapy has a transphobia issue. If there is evidence of this I have not seen it.

I have been contacted by a number of CSP staff and members, who share my concerns that this announcement misrepresents the law, defames members and manages to be both unnecessary and unclear.

It seems that people who are diametrically opposed to the view that sex is real and immutable are employed by and in positions of power and influence at our trade union. This is absolutely fine, it is important for a trade union to reflect its membership. I am uncomfortable with the views of activists forming policy without due process and debate. I hope to be wrong, but I suspect that might have happened in the formation of this CSP position statement.

It is difficult to speak up about these issues, people are scared of being accused of transphobia, and rightly so, the personal penalties can be high.

If you would be willing to share your views or insights with me anonymously here then I'd be grateful. Alternatively, (and if you are willing to trust that I am who I say I am!):
email - [email protected]
substack - @venusenvyxx
twitter - @gussiegrips

I am proud to have had a long career in physio and it seems to me that this is little more than a training and communication issue, which, like sex, is not complicated.

bests
Elaine Miller

They really have lost the plot, there’s an article about time off following baby loss in this month’s magazine that talks about the “birthing parent” and “person” who’s had a miscarriage. Seems they are inclusive of everyone except actual women!

https://www.csp.org.uk/frontline/article/new-support-after-pregnancy-or-baby-loss-24-weeks-gestation

That’s it, my trade union is not taking my word away from me. That is the most offensive thing I have seen so far, the absolute fuckers demeaning bereaved mothers like that.

They can fuck right off. how do we tell them? Can we publicise this travesty of a frontline article? I bet all articles now go through the EDI committee for approval

Looks like you can leave a comment on the article to tell them how you feel but I’m too angry about it to be able to “politely” disagree right now!

It’s been written by someone who is a “person” with lived experience of miscarriage.

Depressingly, it links to the Miscarriage Association website, which also uses “inclusive” language.

Aaargh. Is the aim of all this so that those of us who don't "comply" with this bollocks will leave the CSP?

Having just read the viewpoint in Frontline about support after pregnancy and baby loss
The term ‘ birthing parent’ is used.E word woman does not appear anywhere .
NHS England policy includes the phase ‘mother (or parent who was pregnant)’
CSP is captured.

That’s my view.

they can fuck off with that too. I’ll take them to a tribunal first.

Too right-it’s my CSP too and I’m
not leaving just because they’ve been captured.
I think a joint letter sounds like a good idea-I know a couple of other physios irl who I think would probably sign.
I persist in thinking that the CSP is surely full of nice people who have just been misled under the guise of ‘be kind’ and now it’s too awkward to backtrack so they’re doubling down and they just need some sensible women to give them a good talking to so they’ll see the gaping flaws in GI ideology and why it might be a good idea to distance the profession from Stonewall etc….maybe I’m naive but they can’t keep their heads in the sand about this any more can they?!!

Can anyone see a comment on the miscarriage article?

A member shared her post with me but I can't see it under the frontline article.

Surely there's not now some sort of shadow banning at iCSP?

https://www.csp.org.uk/frontline/article/new-support-after-pregnancy-or-baby-loss-24-weeks-gestation

I'm very cross about this article. There is solid evidence that removing sexed language in women's health does harm.

I know that this article is not aimed at patients but it is a tone which causes offence and if it is accepted by members then it will be expected for patients.

I've previously spoken with Frontline about menopause articles which were factually incorrect and similarly offensively worded.

This is not a difficult issue - the CSP exists to represent it's members and it seems to me that the exec are out of step with what members think, know and want.

I've got communication from some members via twitter and email - I'm asking all of you...what would you like the exec to know or ask them to reflect on?

I'm starting with - evidence matters, leadership matters, engagement matters, and I don't see much evidence of any of those three in these unedifying times.

I can’t see it but perhaps she posted her comment on a separate icsp network rather than underneath the article? Is there a network for women’s health?

Meant to add the Gribble article on sexed language in women's health.

I'd not be able to argue with that line up of authors. I'd not dare!

Also, there are some interesting parallels between language and approach between the RCN and the CSP.

https://archive.ph/voiD9

Just as a side line

The last meeting of the CSP EDI committee was 27th Feb, minutes should be drafted.

As CSP members can we request a copy of this/ ask that it available to members on the CSP website?

Next meeting is 18th July.

it is one of 4 strategic committees responsible for CSP governance (therefore assume will need to response to any LBGQIA sub committees?).
Together, council and the committees:

• set strategy and direction in line with our overall purpose
• ensure accountability to our members by monitoring performance and ensuring effective compliance controls are in place
• ensure that we adhere to our Royal Charter, standing orders, regulations and policies.

Word on the street; not all members supported the release of the Transphobia statement ( want to refrain from being political).

There are 2 vacancies of the EDI committee ( one CSP member, one external) and applications are now open until 2nd June. Persons specs are available on their website.

Not for the faint hearted, (not something I could consider presently) , but if there is anyone out there who fits the bill, has amazingly low blood pressure and is willing, it is worth considering?

https://www.csp.org.uk/about-csp/how-were-governed/committees/recruitment

the EDI committee terms of reference below
https://www.csp.org.uk/system/files/documents/2024-01/equity_diversity_and_belonging_committee_terms_of_reference.pdf

Well this is interesting https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13383157/uk-physiotherapy-body-calls-women-birthing-parents.html

the comments are worth reading. I might register and post myself, it won’t be consored like it would be in iCSP.

@RadFiz the comments below are interesting! I really don't think the CSP realise quite how women feel to have their lifelong identity erased in written communications in the name of inclusivity . I really can't remember any campaign or statement in my career that has been so divisive.

we still don’t know who wrote this awful statement and articles do we?

I’m betting it was men and a token brainwashed lib fem female staff member.

This is effing embarrassing.
The question is- will the CSP have any reflection and evaluation following this, or are they going to carry on regardless?
( not holding my breath)

This is an unrelated topic, but again CSP seem incompetent, and living in their own bubble. I think the initial tweet is now deleted but if you follow the poster you can see the thread. @Anklesprainssuck not sure what we do?

Not sure if this is an option,
https://www.csp.org.uk/publications/csp-complaints-procedure

It’s a shame the Mail didn’t also pick up on the fact that the Miscarriage Association also use “inclusive” language. I would expect better from them.

@stealtheatingtunnocks I don’t know about the statement but the article is written by the woman pictured on the page, who appears to just be a member rather than staff.

I read this before I sent in my complaint. My interpretation was that you have to complain informally first before using this procedure. I could be wrong. But that’s what led me to email my complaint to the enquiries team first (still no reply btw), thinking I would still have the option of a formal complaint if they come back with a rubbish response. Given the pathetic statement the CSP gave to the Mail in the article above, I’m not holding out any hope that they will respond properly to my complaint.

It's possible that the article was edited by the CSP