I am Janice Turner's No 1 fan - another excellent article

[Stopmakingsense]

This one picks up in particular the huge rise in women identifying as men, and the increasing inability of anyone being able to question it:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/even-asking-questions-is-now-transphobic-ztk3rlrfk?shareToken=1f64a5116171eb54a9a866590e6432ec

My main concern with the whole business is: what safeguards are in place to prevent this Act being exploited by abusive cismen? If a predatory cismen invades, say, women's toilets/changing rooms/medical facilities, he is a potential danger to transwomen as well as ciswomen (don't forget, cismen often violently assault transwomen if they think, or want to claim, that the transwomen 'decieved' them).
Also, what of companies who are criticised for having an all-male management team? How soon before they are cheerfully deflecting criticism of those all-male Board pictures by stating that two of the suited, bearded men actually identify as female so they are promoting 'women'?

I also wonder how it would work if a whole load of ciswomen in male-dominated, sexist workplaces decided to identify as male and demand equal pay. I bet they've thought of ways round that loophole...

The ones who really boil my piss are the late transitioners who have lapped up male privilege their entire lives in the public and personal spheres (including having wives who have often cooked, cleaned and cared for them to the detriment of their own careers, as well as borne them children) and who then suddenly announce, when they have reached their prime, that actually they are women. FTS.

BBC is reporting today that the US Marines has commissioned its first female officer...

I found myself wondering if it was a real woman - or just a MTF as was the case with the fairly recent announcement by the British army about a 'female' first.

I found myself doing the same listening to the evening news of the stabbing by a 16yo girl in Lincolnshire.

Our language was perfectly clear until this all started. Why can't MTF be "transwomen" and FTM "transmen" in the media, medical and crime statistics, E&D reporting? On that latter point, how are we to assess the success or otherwise of legal and other interventions to support trans individuals against discrimination if we can no longer identify the affected population to determine outcomes? It's stupidity on a really basic level.

I thought that too about the US marine. What a load of absolute cobblers this all is.

Me too @badbadhusky. Our language now does not mean what we think it means. I shouldn't have to find a photograph of a criminal to try and figure out if they are a woman or a man who says he is a woman. I remember the first time that happened was Clare Derbyshire, way before I'd hit peak trans.

I was so horrified by the oddness of the crime that I looked it up online (I normally only listen to the radio). That was when I realised we'd sleepwalked into an Orwellian world of doublespeak

Me three bad and Jiggly. I thought now I'm going to have google the perpetrator and see if there's a picture to see if it is a boy/girl (as I heard it on the radio too).

I googled Lauren jeska when I heard about the crime a woman was supposed to have committed. That was the first time I thought hold on a minute

"who then suddenly announce, when they have reached their prime, that actually they are women".

I did hear on the radio a couple of months ago that there was a bit of a concern that there could be a growing number of men who transition very late and then claim retirement and pensions earlier than expected. I wonder if this could provide a motivation, in some instances.

Also, yes, I too am assuming the first female marine announced today is MtT until it is clarified.

Are trans people allowed in the US military? I thought Trump banned them? Or did he change whatever passes for his mind on this matter?

On the whole GP/medical records/single sex wards/GMC advice topic:
All the GPs I know (and that's a fair few) were astonished by, and remain very uncomfortable with, the suggestion (and that was what it was, not a directive) that GPs should consider prescribing hormonal treatments to patients while they are waiting to be seen by GID clinics. We are well aware of what our competencies and are more used to the GMC reminding us to stay within them or face their wrath if things go wrong. The advice appeared to be in direct conflict with their document "Good Medical Practice" which is generally held to be sacrosanct (by them). It has led many of us to wonder what the motivation behind this has been.
Helen Webberley is currently under investigation. Based on this and the information available from the CQC and GMC I don't think there are many GPs who will want to model their practice on hers and she is not seen as some sort of trailblazer or the epitome of gold standard care because we are all well aware of what happens when we work outside of what accepted medical care is (aside from all the other difficulties relating to prescribing hormones in these cases).
CCGs are not responsible for medical records and health authorities no longer exist. Individual GPs can of course edit the medical records they hold in their practice. For example if I see a patient and record an entry in their notes and then 5 minutes later remember I wanted to add an additional detail I can do that. I can also delete the details of an entry. However, events entered into the notes are still coded and cannot just be removed. There is an audit trail for all of this and while it is fine for me to edit someone's notes to add in a blood pressure recording for example, widespread editing or deleting records is another matter entirely and usually results in a chat with the GMC.
Hospitals are fined heavily for having mixed sex wards. Through my training I worked in 10 different hospitals and never came across a mixed ward save for ITU, and even there beds were allocated to male and female. Patients often end up being shunted around, sometimes in the middle of the night, to accommodate other patients to the right sex bed.
Sorry, long post but I hope it's helpful.

Also, yes, I too am assuming the first female marine announced today is MtT until it is clarified.

Which sucks whichever way round it actually is. The piece I read had a link about female US marines being filmed naked without their knowledge ... my assumption is they're not MtT.

Women are being erased. From public life, from statistics, crime reports and news.

Yes, very helpful @Poppyred85. Thank you

Today 11:22 Hayesking

Isn't our actual DNA male or female? Noone can change their DNA can they? The whole thing is mind boggling.

Correct. And yes, it's that stupid.

Poppyred thank you. That's a really helpful clarification.

Poppyred one question (since you're here, hope you don't mind). What is your opinion about prescribing puberty blockers to teenagers? Are the risks as low and effects as reversible as transactivists claim? Have there number of requests increased in your experience?

I'd also like to gauge the number of patients presenting with trans medical issues, including gender confused teenagers, in comparison to the the number of females with MH issues that stem from e.g. sexual abuse, DV. But have no idea where to find properly researched statistics. Do you have any pointers?

Thank you!

Poppyred85

I also have a question.

We had a doctor on here earlier in the year who said they were not allowed to divulge the sex of a trans patient when referring them to a specialist, if that patient asks them not to.

In fact it was a criminal offence (not civil, criminal).

It meant that she could only refer them with a note saying this person has a pain in their 'stomach area' (whilst thinking it was ovarian cancer), but could not directly say something that revealed their natal sex.

It was assumed, I think, that no one with an ounce of sanity would want to be ambiguous about their sex if it was detrimental to their health.

But given that the trans-ideology is not characterised by rationality, indeed it is driven by subterfuge and opacity, it seems an extraordinary law to have to adhere to. Time wasting in the extreme.

They should never have written into law that a person can pretend to be the opposite sex to that extent that they can deceive doctors, the police etc. They could still have had equality and anti discrimination legislation without it. This is where we went wrong.

Retreat
I'm yet to have a patient present to me to request referral to a GIC or have a patient on hormonal treatment but I'm not based in a big urban practice so can't really comment on how common it is. I think anyone who plays down the potential risks of some of these drugs is being somewhat disingenuous. There isn't enough data to know long term about the effects of using these drugs in teenagers but we do know that there are risks associated with their use in other patient populations, including risk of osteoporosis, blood sugar and blood fat abnormalities, liver problems as well as more "routine" side effects such as mood changes, nausea, headaches. It appears that transwomen who use oestrogen therapy are at increased risk of developing breast cancer.
Looking for research is difficult! I tend to use Pubmed www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/ for literature reviews but that's tricky even when you know what you're looking for and have specific search terms. Sorry I can't be much help in that, and I'm not sure if much research is actually being done in those areas.
Datun
My understanding of current guidance is that we are allowed to disclose to other professionals that someone has undergone transition or previously lived under a different sex/ is still in possession of ovaries etc when it is directly relevant to their health and medical care. As I understand it, to use the example you posted, I would be allowed to disclose to the specialist that I am referring to that while the patient may be Mr X I am concerned about the possibility of ovarian cancer as Mr X has transitioned but still has them. It's also suggested that this is done with the patient's consent and I think that would widely be considered good practice. If I'm referring someone I routinely discuss with my patients why I'm doing it and I think most GPs do the same. My reading about this also seemed to say that transmen who still have a cervix should be included in cervical screening and mammography programmes unless the opt out, but I have no direct experience of this.

Thank you so much Poppyred. That's what I suspected re. puberty blockers. I'll try to have a dig around on PubMed.

Poppyred85

Thanks for answering. Is it possible to double check that? The only reason I say is because it is in direct conflict with what this other GP said.

She was quite adamant when questioned. Not to mention outraged.

Is it at all possible that she has different guidelines to you?

The other doctor who posted about this specifically said that she had been told it was a criminal offence to tell literally anyone else without permission, as pp said. As far as I know explicit consent for anything other than to prevent a serious crime or as part of legal proceedings would be more or less obligatory under the DPA as this is sensitive personal data. Not just best practice. I don't think there is an exemption for medical treatment, they have to consent.

This link seems to confirm this. It's very interesting.

www.pulsetoday.co.uk/your-practice/regulation/qa-recording-gender-in-medical-records/20008359.article

Hi everyone, I am the other doctor you are talking about (have name changed). We have a number of trans patients in the surgery so have had to take advice about this. I am afraid it is not correct that doctors can disclose trans status if relevant to the patient's health care. In fact, in one recent case in Scotland, a GP was even criticised for disclosing trans status to a colleague in the same practice And it is potentially a criminal offence - see the Pulse article link.

The links that I originally posted about this are here and here