Mixed sex wards and trans women.

[sarsleypage]

I've opened a new account as the old one was too full of personal bits and someone could've connected the dots.

I am a medical student and we have a diversity lecture coming up, so I had a look at the LGBT slides. A lot of this seems to focus on trans.

I got curious about the requirements for sex-segregated wards, as I know this has been an issue for a while. Women want single-sex wards, both on wards for physical illness and those for mental illness, because they see themselves as vulnerable to abuse from men, especially whilst ill.

Fine. Nobody seems to oppose this, and it's become a requirement in pretty much all hospitals.

And then you see this: uktrans.info/attachments/article/5/trasngender_booklet_low%20res.pdf

"• Trans people should be accommodated according to
their presentation: the way they dress, and the name
and pronouns that they currently use.
• This may not always accord with the physical sex
appearance of the chest or genitalia;
• It does not depend upon their having a gender
recognition certificate (GRC) or legal name change;
• It applies to toilet and bathing facilities (except, for
instance, that pre-operative trans people should not
share open shower facilities); "

There's an example in the leaflet of a young female nurse refusing to wash a trans person because it was against her religion. This is held up as an example of trans discrimination.

I am struggling to square this away with feminism. In fact, I don't think it does square. Women have fought for this segregated space, based on female sexual characteristics (not a preference for make-up, long hair, but XY/vaginas/generally smaller in stature and weaker). But now, apparently, if you decide you feel like a woman, you're entitled to be on a woman's ward when women are at their most vulnerable.

It means if you're sectioned under the mental health act and a trans woman with a penis is on the ward, you have no legal argument to get them removed to make you feel safer.

How is this right?

Most trans in a hospital environment, without cosmetics, wigs etc won't pass. You can't possibly have a situation where each person is graded on whether they pass, whether they are intact, whether they are a predator delighted to self identify to access women, etc. It's a bureaucratic, and legal nightmare. And completely unenforceable.

You go according to your biological sex. Where you would be treated according to your own physiology, and not that of the opposite sex. It's a hospital after all.

How hard would it be to explain to the other patients? If that puts people in danger, well welcome to the world of self identification.

Sometimes you have to choose the lesser of two evils.

ego, I think transpeople should go in the ward for their biological sex. Or on mixed sex wards, obviously.

And I do think numbers are important. In terms of surgeries, since 2000, a total of 853 trans women and 12 trans men had state-funded surgery to change sex. Pink news in 2010. You probably have more up-to-date info.

So your chances of encountering a biological woman identifying as a man on a women's ward is actually pretty small.

And of course by identifying as a woman or identifying as a man well of course what does that mean exactly? It can mean full surgery, partial surgery or no surgery. The majority of biological men who identify as women have a penis and intend to keep it.

I'm sorry Ego, but I volunteered with trans people at university. None of them would have passed without their make-up.

I'm sorry Ego, but I volunteered with trans people at university. None of them would have passed without their make-up

So what's your point?

Do you think that trans men should go on female wards then? Beards, muscles, deep voices etc.

Would you be happy with that?

ego, I think transpeople should go in the ward for their biological sex. Or on mixed sex wards, obviously.

So you'd be happy to have a trans man on the ward with you?

ego147

Yes of course! I don't understand how people can even use this argument. The fact is violent crime, and sexual crime are overwhelmingly committed by men. A transman is a woman.

If she happened to look unusually male, then this can be explained to the other patients. If I thought she was a man and I was told no, she's a woman. I'd be fine.

Ego

I mentioned it because you said earlier that there are some trans people who we wouldn't be able to tell are trans. I think you're wrong. Men and women have different skeletons and muscle structure. You can always tell if someone is trans.

So you'd be happy to have a trans man on the ward with you?

Of course. Why wouldn't I?

Where should a transman go for a hysterectomy? Or ovarian cancer? A men's ward?

And where should a transwoman go for a vasectomy? Or prostate surgery? A women's ward?

Of course. Why wouldn't I

Because a trans man looks male.

Hospitals are rightly segregated by sex. So transwomen in male wards and transmen in females.

Hospitals don't treat anyone on their looks but by their biology.

And of course - sexual violence is overwhelmingly committed by men so why is it unacceptable to some that transwomen - especially those who have transitioned go in a side room?

Do you think that a trans woman who has transitioned is safe in a male ward?

If they are segrated by sex, it is for reasons of comfort and safety.

So transwomen in male wards and transmen in female

So can you explain how a transwoman would feel safe in a male ward? Are they safer than a woman in a male ward?

If you are happy with having transwomen in a male ward, then surely you're happy with a woman in a male ward?

What's the difference?

ego, you are saying it is not safe for you to be in the same hospital ward as a man.

We are saying that it is not safe for us to be in the same hospital ward as a man.

Your rights do not trump ours. You don't get to escape from the potential for male violence while at the same time introducing the potential for male violence into a female space. Why do we have to share with a man when you are adamant that you cannot share with a man?

But you don't seem to get that. I don't think you are ever going to get that.

I'm fine with males being on a male ward, regardless of how they identify.

How's about transmen and women who have undergone bottom surgery go in the same ward as the gender to which they have transitioned; everyone else (trans or not) goes in the ward of their biological sex.

Same with prisons, same with toilets.

The difference, ego, between having a woman (i.e. a female human) on a male ward and a trans woman (i.e. a male human) on a male ward is that its only the latter who belong there.

Where is the evidence that males who identify as women are more at risk of violence on a male ward than males who dont identify as women?

I havent ever seen any evidence that males who identify as females are subjected to the same sort and level of male violence as women are. Can you link to any evidence, ego? Otherwise, youre just asking for male feelings to be prioritised over female safety. Is that your argument?

And for the billionth time, if the problem is male violence then surely that needs to be sorted out rather than forcing women to put up with men in women's spaces?

And you know, I don't see forcing women to put up with men in women's spaces as a step towards reducing male violence, rather the opposite. It just means that there are fewer restrictions on male violence.

Sort out male violence, ego. We're shoulder to shoulder with you on that.

"Do you think that trans men should go on female wards then? Beards, muscles, deep voices etc."

Are you suggesting that if women (female humans) who dont conform to stereotypes of femininity are acceptable on a ward for women (female humans!), then actual men (male humans) should be allowed to if they adopt stereotypically feminine behaviours/appearance?

I hope thats not what youre suggesting because that would be seriously misogynistic and lesbophobic. Not to mention also illustrative of unexamined male entitlement.

Ego transmen are biologically women of course they should be on female wards. I don't know how much clearer you expect me to be.

I have to take issue with this statement made earlier in the thread.

Your example about a sectioned patient having to stay on a ward with a trans person with a penis is utter pie in the sky.

People detained under the mental health act have rights, and a voice and the option to move wards if they felt unsafe about ANYTHING.

This is absolutely and categorically false and has been the experience of at least three people I know who have had recent (in the last year) stays on MH wards in various parts of the country. On every single occasion, the woman expressing fear about the behaviour of the FtT people were told that they were being bigoted toward them and that they were in the wrong. This includes the woman who had a FtT person in the cubicle opposite her who masturbated at her whenever she returned to her bed space and the other woman who had been sexually assaulted by the FtT.

The second point is that the idea that there are beds on other MH wards is what is pie in the sky here. Women who are detained under the MHA are often as not incarcerated a very long way from their families because there simply are no neds on acute wards for women. In a recent example here, a woman was placed on a ward over 300 miles away from her children and family, because it was the ONLY bed in the country available. How exactly does anyone expect a woman who is experiencing acute MH problems to stand up for herself in these circumstances? When, if they do, they are bigots (which stays on their medical records) and even if they are moved, it might be to the other end of the country from their support systems?

" kua Tue 29-Nov-16 15:29:09

Hospitals are rightly segregated by sex. So transwomen in male wards and transmen in females.

Hospitals don't treat anyone on their looks but by their biology."

Kua, I think you're mistaken there. The 2009 DOH document Annexe E states:

Delivering same-sex accommodation for trans people and gender variant children
Transsexual people, that is, individuals who have proposed, commenced or completed reassignment of gender, enjoy legal protection against
discrimination. In addition, good practice requires that clinical responses be patient-centred, respectful and flexible towards all
transgender people who do not meet these criteria but who live
continuously or temporarily in the gender role that is opposite to their natal sex. General key points are that:

• Trans people should be accommodated according to their presentation: the way they dress, and the name and pronouns that
they currently use.
• This may not always accord with the physical sex appearance of the
chest or genitalia;
• It does not depend upon their having a gender recognition certificate (GRC) or legal name change;

• It applies to toilet and bathing facilities (except, for instance, that pre-operative trans people should not share open shower facilities);
• Views of family members may not accord with the trans person’s wishes, in which case, the trans person’s view takes priority. "

So with the exception of open bathing facilities, shared toilets, etc., would be expected for a MtF transindividual on a female ward.

Forgot to add the link here

Thanks Lougle. I guess the core guidelines safety , dignity and respect have gone out the window for women then!

However, the guidelines are still for sex segregation they just didn't figure "feelz" into it. Which is quite mad when you think about it...