NHS LGBT policy

[RonSwansonsTurfNTurf]

So I work for the NHS and before confronting the writer of the policy I'd like to have a coherent argument and am hoping you can help.

The policy is emblazed with stonewall emblems and they seem to have taken their lead from them. www.stonewall.org.uk/our-work/working-organisations
Can anyone provide robust manipulation of stats and general wrongdoing in furthering by their cause?

Among many contentious issues is very vague wording whether a transitioned individual would need to provide pre transition names/addresses etc

Thirdly all individuals transitioning seem to be granted self Id with total confidentiality, no mention is made as to whether patients would be aware of the individuals biological sex.

ALL THOUGHTS WELCOME, ID LIKE TO BUILD A STRONG CASE.

As I'm off work today I can access the policy however anyone wishing to see it I'll try to anonymously post tomorrow.

TIA

Apologies for word jumbles, hopefully it makes sense!

Pre transitioned names etc for DBS. Note self always preview

Thirdly all individuals transitioning seem to be granted self Id with total confidentiality, no mention is made as to whether patients would be aware of the individuals biological sex.

How does that square with informed consent, I wonder?

I would suggest the following:

Ask if they have completed an Equality Impact Assessment.

Ask whether safeguarding of ALL patients has been considered. Not just physical safeguarding but emotional/psychological safeguarding.

Gently point out that Stonewall are a lobbying group and have no expertise in the area of NHS safeguarding. Suggest that they/you should raise any potential safeguarding issues with a safeguarding lead.

Ask if they have also consulted with female patients and women's groups, in order to provide a balanced set of views.

Be prepared for a battle!

I'm sure others will be along soon with some excellent advice . . .

Good luck!

If the NHS believes it has taken the correct stance, when will they be informing the general public?

Is the policy for patients, or for trans staff?

(I'm assuming that the LGB part of the policy is fine and it's the trans part that might raise conflicts of interest?)

Thanks for all the advice so far, yes the issue for trans staff

There was a question on the crowdfunded opinion poll that about trans HCP treating patients who had asked for a same-sex provider - large majorities of the public in favour of a sensible policy.

I don’t have a link but I’m sure someone else will be able to supply it if it’s useful.

Thanks Homestar

*There was a question on the crowdfunded opinion poll that about trans HCP treating patients who had asked for a same-sex provider - large majorities of the public in favour of a sensible policy.

I don’t have a link but I’m sure someone else will be able to supply it if it’s useful.*

Does anyone have the link to the crowd funder opinion poll please?

Excuse my ignorance, but if a person is transitioning, as there is currently no self ID and they do not yet have a GRC, they can request their preferred pronoun but do they have right to confidentiality of their biological sex?

And following that do individuals with a GRC have total confidentiality regarding their biological sex, when it comes to treating patients, given transitions are not uniform in their approach?

Ask what their legal department said during the equality considerations and what their assessment of the likelihood of judicial review was.

uploadfiles.io/wxbzm

mobile.twitter.com/helenstaniland/status/1055128941890027522

Link to the poll results and the Twitter thread summarising some of the outcomes. Hope this helps!

fantastic!! thanks homestar

Dr Christian asserts you don't need to know the sex of your patient, but trans people on hormones are at double the risk of PE and stroke. So identity/confidentiality re previous identity are a patient safety issue but some doctors don't agree on this!

Of course you need to know the sex of your patient.

https://www.bhf.org.uk/what-we-do/news-from-the-bhf/news-archive/2018/november/8000-uk-women-die-due-to-unequal-heart-attack-care

Both because male symptoms are often different BECAUSE MALE, and because an MTF who is perhaps more likely as pp said to have an increased risk, as well as due to the fact that they are male, and men are seen at higher risk because they tend to have heart attacks younger may be allocated to the woman pile and receive the lower standard of care mentioned such as not being given angiography to investigate.

“We also show that not all differences are down to bias – some are down to biology. Only with more research can we hope to better understand how to target biology and best treat heart attacks in women.”

Christian is talking out of his arse.

That's before we get to the relative likelihood of pregnancy, ovarian or prostate cancer.

That is terrifying from Dr Christian. There was a very sad case of a transman in America who ended up with end stage kidney disease due to not being treated early enough - because what still counts as "normal, but at the high end, so keep an eye on this patient" levels on the blood tests in men is in fact "end stage, dialysis right now, transplant asap or the patient will die" levels in women.

Of course biological sex matters in a whole range of diseases.

Regarding trans staff we tend to talk here about the impact on women and haven't given much thought about the impact on men as far as I am aware. We have some excellent Male urology specialist nurses who tend to deal with Male patients, prostate and catheter problems etc. What if they announced they were women, or worse, did a Pips Bunce? How would the men feel about that I wonder?