Why are so many obs/gynae doctors male??

[dontlaugh]

Bearing in mind medical students are now roughly 50/50 in college and the numbers of qualifying GPs are majority female. i often wondered about this and am now brave enough to post here.
Discuss!

But it isn't a different discussion. It goes towards explaining why there are fewer women in training in surgical specialities and why men training to be surgeons are less involved in family life.

I have decided to take time out to have a family, completely, partly because of the fact that because I trained abroad, it is harder for me to enter into the system at the same level I was at at home and, for me, having small children and the training schedule is not compatible. But also because the nature of the work I have done in this country has been as jenny describes 3-6 monthly 'contracts' with trusts who then work very hard not to pay.

It is a more complex issue involving societal structures and biology not just the demographic of students completing medical school.

Beside the arguments put forward here about long and inconvenient working hours, which are all relevant, does anyone know of any deeper philosophical reasons why there seems to be such a high proportion of men in this field?

'I said anyone could join the club if they were prepared to put in the hours - male or female. Not that women can do it if they work as hard as men, but anyone can do it if they work hard enough.'

Iteotowski -- It is not a matter of working hard enough, though. (It patently isn't, if there are more lazy male registrars than female yet males are over-represented in the profession..) Putting in the hours is where it becomes very difficult for the women. Not working hard. Nobody is saying women are not prepared to work hard, but you are failing to understand that it is the hours that make a huge difference for women. There is a difference between working hard and being free to put in the hours, and you completely confound these two things.

You would simply not know unless a male reg told you if he had children or family responsibilities, because most men getting ahead (by putting in the hours) in any very demanding profession (thinking law or finance here too) are able to do so because the details of family life are in someone else's hands. Very few women otoh have a secretary or wife figure at home handling things. Putting in the hours is where it becomes very difficult for the women. Not working hard.

This interesting study on medical students at the University of South Carolina posits gender-related values associated with interpretation of how work and life are related.

As far as OB/GYN (or Pediatric practice) counting as primary care -- this study was done in the US where the majority of prenatal care is delivered by OB/GYNs and children attend a pediatrician as opposed to GP, as opposed to the UK, where it's midwife care and GP care afterwards.

It is interesting to note that the men and women were statistically similar in terms of marital status or parental status, yet women tended to want to work shorter hours after qualifying than the men, and prioritised spending what leisure time they had with family and friends, whereas men tended to heavily prioritise sport, whether married or not, and whether parents or not. [from the study -- 'The value the female students place on time with family and friends is consistent with statements female physicians usually make, indicating they make significant career decisions, including specialty choice, based on family considerations ']

Men also tended to opt for the more interventionist areas of medicine, i.e. surgical specialties, where high adrenaline environments prevail, where relationship with a patient is more likely to consist of a review of data, x-rays, previous history, and perhaps where you get the chance to play superhero every day, saving a life by removing a tumour or appendix or whatever, whereas women were opting for medical roles that where more likely to feature one on one nurturing/teaching/encouragement/coaching through a process. It is interesting that more men than women are attracted to the more problem solving OB/GYN profession in the UK, where the OB is the 7th Cavalry of the profession.

As far as deeper values go I'm not sure -- men maybe like to have the prototypical male role of instant problem solving, with a scalpel? Whereas maybe women prefer to get immersed in process and communication? (Anecdotal perhaps, but a lot of women complain that when they complain about something going on in their lives their H's put on their Mr Fixit hat and annoy the women solving their ishoos instead of just listening and tut tutting and making a cuppa for them, which is what the women really want.)

iteo If you're in a numbered post it may be. I'm still in the realm of LAT jobs and piecing together my career (which still happens a lot in surgical specialties (I'm ortho not O&G) so very tricky. Any gaps in service are a big deal and fixed term contracts leave little room to argue if your term runs out while you would be away. Add in trusts "trying it on" and it's certainly not easy yet.

the difference in hours, particularly out-of-hours and on-call work between hospital doctors and GPs make a huge difference in determining how family friendly that work will be. I know of several doctors (male as well as female) who chose to move into GP from hospital based specialties because they felt that they would not be able to be the kind of parents thay wanted to be and sustain that level of working life.

Equally I know a female ex-GP with three kids who has moved back to Paeds - brave choice but again it's about the support you get from home. Most women are the supporters of a career not the supported, sadly.

I was wondering if MMC will have a role in shaping what specialties junior doctors choose? I haven't heard anything about it for a while, but remember a lot of coomentary when it was rolling out a couple of years ago about how dreadful it was - in terms of unpredictability and uncertainty (as well as being an additional unwelcome source of stress).

It wasn't designed to disadvantage women, but it might have that effect owing to its adverse impact on settling in one location. It might make GP training look more attractive, if you don't want to keep moving.

Does anyone have an up to date read out on this?

I am in the same boat as jennie both in specialty and my lack of training number. Whilst my bosses are supportive in principal about me having a small child, they are not happy at all with the inevitable clock watching that I have to do when I am due to pick my ds up from the CM. Couple that with a four hour daily commute and job insecurity and it is a fairly unattractive choice. It's not one I could have made without my dh being fantastic and supportive.

I have yet to work in a department with a female consultant orthopaedic surgeon. We are slowly increasing numbers but it is a slow process given the nature (and length) of training.

To return to a side issue which for reasons unbeknownst to me is bugging me, plastic surgeons have a lot of commitments out of hours. Plastics consultants (NHS) get called in at all hours for their complex patients and surgery can often be prolonged unexpectantly. It is one of the reasons why I got put off it as a specialty very early. This of course does not hold true for private plastic surgeons but for your NHS consultants, it really underplays what they do.

Springbok I think that MTAS and the MMC debacle of 2007 and beyond really did more to hamper women getting ahead in hospital medicine than had been improved in the previous 10 years. I'm sure you also know plenty of couples who work 200 miles apart, with the DC's at nursery somewhere inbetween. Not just surgical specialties, but they were less feminine to begin with, so it's more visible again there.

WTF are men doing in the gynecological profession? I would really like to know the answer to this question.
If you read opinions of many gynecologists historically their opinions are sick, I mean most of them have been ill in the head, and the way they regard women is stomach-churning

I believe it's always important to take history into account, when discussing the present

You wouldn't ommit the historical backdrop of slavery when you were discussing how black people got to America.

I've written an article on this subject.

When I was googling images to write the article I was so disturbed by what I saw, namely the instruments of torture used on women by men posing as "doctors", that I felt physically ill.

When you see it all in historical context, gynecology cannot be seen as anything other than pure woman-hatred. Pure misogyny.

Oh Sakura that made me feel sick. I'm off to my first ante-natal/gynae appointment in 2 hrs.... :( I'm so excited about seeing the baby on screen though, its not all medical

Very interesting article sakura. It did make me think though how medicine in general is often used to control women, but I suppose Ob/Gyn and Psychiatry are particularly guilty.

Pam most individual Ob/Gyn are lovely, dedicated doctors and wouldn't dream of abusing their position. It is really lovely to see your baby on screen too (you're not in the UK then are you?). It is the whole field of Obstetrics and gynae including the medicalisation of childbirth that is at fault.

Thanks TheRealMBJ I'm in Ireland, how did you know? Do the women in the UK not see the baby on screen? I had no idea about childbirth/pregnancy until I found out I was pregnant (2 months ago) since then I've been really interested in how they are viewed by the medical profession, thats why this thread caught my attention.

We get 2 scans offered as routine on the NHS. At 12 weeks and 20 weeks and unless you really want consultant care or are high-risk antenatal care is the preserve of the midwives.

The hospital I'm booked into is a small country hospital who scans at every appointment, I'm a public patient, but I'm sure care varies in bigger hospitals. You do see the consultant at every appointment too. I'm sure that will be cut in the Decemeber budget too

"I mean most of them have been ill in the head"

Really?

Gynecology is women-hating misogyny?

Yeah, that's a pefectly rational statement and I'm sure will put many women facing 'down there' issues completely at ease.

There will have been all manner of horrendous tales of ill-treatment within the history of gnyecology, but to extend this to damn the whole field, profession and every man working within it for all enternity is... Oh, words fail me.

Ah hadn't caught up with this until now. Yes indeed. You have to watch out for those gynaecologists, evil little shits they are getting perverse pleasure in a woman's distress.

Just like paediatricians are really paedophiles and all GPs are Harold Shipman in disguise...

thanks Lenin yes the comments were fascinating weren't they. Those women really know their stuff.

Great. So we had actual women in the medical profession talking about their actual experiences as women (rather then stuff they've read on a blog and all their fwends agree with) in a male dominated field...

but sod that, let's all have some conspiracy theory laden guff, with terms for mental illness being thrown about as insults. That's really respectful of women's lived experiences isn't it?

In simple terms: Dubious history of gynaecology (and most medicine, tbh) / = All gynaecologists ever being evil.

Unless you have similar objections to women being urologists, which do treat women, but the vast majority of their patients are men.

Edith I would consider men who excise the clitorises of little girls as young as three, in order to cure masturbation, "ill in the head" yes. Without a doubt. Especially when they go on to write lengthy books about the procedure they invented without a hint of shame.

You might be right, though, Edith. Perhaps being "ill in the head" is relative and in the eyes of the beholder.
What looks to me like someone who is "ill in the head" comitting sexual torture on a young child, could quite easily be masturbation fodder for the next person, or nothing worth even commenting on for someone else.
All relative, i suppose. All depends on the individual person's perception of whether this or that gynecologist was mentally ill, or not.

don'T be so silly, Gothe. Where on earth did I say "all gynecologists are evil"?

Don't misquote me. IT's so lame.

What I actually said was:

"WTF are men doing in the gynecological profession?"

And i still don't have the answer. WTF are men doing there ??? In the room, I mean.

What has repeating your words got to do with anyone's walking ability?

Lots of people have spoken upthread of why men have gone into gynecology, but because that doesn't fit in with your worldview you've chosen to ignore it in favour of a bit of self promotion.

And again doing evil things does not mean someone is mentally ill. There are plenty of people with mental health problems who would not harm anyone else. It's a nasty stereotype you're pushing there, one that has harmed women (and men) throughout the ages, so please rethink your terminology.

Well,I thought they were there as trained people with knowledge to try to help the woman involved.Can't see how the gender of my gynaecologist was relevant in any way to his ability to talk to me about my unexplained bleeding,run various tests and then,thank goodness,reassure me that all was well.
Unless medical and other professionals can only advise on problems they have experienced first hand?
I agree that terrible things have happened in the past,and that some less than ideal practices are probably still going on.But that is true over a wide range of human experience (in that many groups were treated appalingly by modern standards in the past)