Dr loses job for refusing to use hypothetical preferred pronouns...

[picklemepopcorn]

Anyone seen this?

apple.news/Afntf3zVlTtOz2Tt82jpwVw

I don't know if that link will work. In the telegraph, David Mackereth.

The father-of-four alleges he was asked in a conversation with a line manager: “If you have a man six foot tall with a beard who says he wants to be addressed as ‘she’ and ‘Mrs’, would you do that?”

If that is verbatim, exactly the line manager's words, then the line manager has behaved in exactly the same way as Dr Mackie. Therefore the line manager should also have been encouraged to leave their post fired. Have they?

Dr Mackereth, not Dr Mackie.

It's all smoke and mirrors.

I think he might lose this case. Courts and prisons are required now to use 'preferred pronouns'. This seems similar in that there's a power differential between the Doctor and claimant.
This is really important, wish it was being tested with a stronger case. The behaviour of management is appalling. If this can be written into contracts then it is de facto self id.

I wish religion wasn't constantly brought into it. I'm a Christian, but that is a totally separate issue from being GC. If anything being Christian would lead me to use preferred pronouns, because, well, it's kind.

This expectation of 'being kind' to claimants by using their preferred pronouns is a bit bizarre, though, given how unkind and disbelieving claims assessors appear to be, according to reports in media and on SM.

Doesn’t any doctor need to first do no harm? What if the doctor believes that using gender pronouns is harming the person and encouragingly gender dysmorphia or other harmful things? Is there an evidence based best practise guide ?

I don't think it's kind to reinforce someone's delusion. Quite the opposite

Hannah Arendt taught that when language is twisted so that black is now white and white is now black, all meaning is lost.

A society that removes the power of the truth from the people can do anything to the people without being challenged.

The use of pronouns is a method to control people and remove the power of being able to speak the truth.

If you can not define woman because what you understand to be woman has become fuzzy or you are afraid of identifying whether someone is a woman you remove the power to express what problems a woman might uniquely face.

Thus pronouns are important as they blur the lines of communication and they allow errors to be possible and for abuses of power against women to take place without being seen as clearly as they should be.

Healthcare relies on understanding the sex of someone to give good and appropriate care. In a busy hospital, a doctor or nurse should check notes every time but in reality this doesn't always happen. A patient always referred to by certain pronouns might slip through the net.

Thus it is important to a doctor to maintain pronouns based on sex for the patients safety and the doctors own protection from error or the errors of others.

It helps to preserve the integrity of data so that for example you know that the blood of a male isn't included in a clinical study which is only for women's related issues.

Pronouns are not neutral words which are only about being polite. They are a way of identifying sex and conveying other meaning to others.

A male using a female pronoun is exercising power over women by demonstrating that women can not define themselves on the basis of sex. This leaves women with less power.

The desire for a woman to preserve her dignity and right to privacy for example on a ward from the male gaze is rendered invisible. She comes second to the rights of the person identifying as female and using female pronouns.

It removes the power of a woman to consent to with full information. It has the potential to leave vulnerable women with a history of abuse of some description in situations where they feel uncomfortable and find it difficult to challenge for whatever reason.

There are many reasons why pronouns should not be seen in the context of merely a way of being polite. The use of pronouns is much more than that we should understand that pronouns convey a huge amount more as a communication tool - they are identifiers and markers of power.

Why does a doctor need to talk about a patient with their pronouns anyway?

Surely confidentiality means they won't be saying anything about their private appointment... e.g. 'the boil on Mrs Smith's penis is hurting her' so why worry about pronouns?

It'd be very easy to do an appointment without using pronouns at all.

I’m an atheist. I don’t think religion comes into it. Nobody should be forced to deny material reality whether they believe in the next life or not.

And the manager referred to this person as a man in the question. The hypothetical encounter, with someone obviously male that the manager destined as a man, seems like a deliberate attempt to bait the Christian. I’d be interested in whether the manager has tried pulling this trick on a member of a different faith.

... that the manager described as a man...

So the imaginary pronouns situation didn't happen anywhere other than in the mind of the supervisor? How the fuck is that legal? I hope he goes to a tribunal, the DWP are wrong. Self ID is not legal here yet and pronouns cannot be enforced.

Why does a doctor need to talk about a patient with their pronouns anyway?

Surely confidentiality means they won't be saying anything about their private appointment... e.g. 'the boil on Mrs Smith's penis is hurting her' so why worry about pronouns?

It'd be very easy to do an appointment without using pronouns at all.

If you are writing notes about a patient. Which a patient has a legal right to see, it becomes a problem. Someone working for the DWP probably is writing a lot of reports about people which are to be seen and recorded in data in various ways.

Also if you pass those notes on to another doctor, who fails to double check the patients sex this could be a problem.

The sex of a patient is relevant to the presentation of different conditions which might not have anything to do with male / female anatomy (for example heart conditions).

A doctor using the correct pronouns by sex is actually protecting the health of a patient and at the same time is protecting themselves from being accused of misdiagnosis.

I find the questioning by manager bizarre. It does look strange if there has been no incident or complaint. But if a claimant has the right paperwork, that's really it I would have thought. The issue is what if they don't have paperwork but just declare on the day.
genderedintelligence.co.uk/projects/kip/transitioning/docs/depwork
: the DWP will not change your gender on the system until you have a Gender Recognition certificate, but they will change your name and title.

In a statement put before the court, Dr Mackereth said: “I appreciate that in the present political climate, some people, including some of those who believe they are transgender, may find my beliefs to be offensive.

“However, in a free society, this is not a good enough reason to censor my beliefs and coerce me to act contrary to my conscience."

he's basically saying what many people here say (although the next bit about transgenderism being a rebellion against god is a bit more unusual). This is one to watch with interest

If you can not define woman because what you understand to be woman has become fuzzy or you are afraid of identifying whether someone is a woman you remove the power to express what problems a woman might uniquely face.

This. Gender expression/identity need their own distinct and clearly identifiable and describable categories, in certain circumstances

In this case though, there's no healthcare involved. In fact, some would say it's entirely the opposite. The job in question was DWP assessor for ESA and PIP.

One would have thought writing "the claimant" would be sufficient compromise - so I assume that the DWP has a Stonewall unit in its training or something and this doctor failed that?

I agree with all PPs about language, particularly, Red. I just wish this could be a more sympathetic case. Wannabe DWP assessors aren't my favourites.

I'm in Birmingham. If anyone knows which day next week the hearing's scheduled for can they post? I'd very much want to go along with a placard to show my support for the doctor. I'm an atheist but am 100% with him on being GC.

I'm confused. So people are allowed to refuse to provide morning after pills or abortions etc based on religious grounds but this isn't acceptable?

Most of what he said (apart from the religious bits) makes a lot of sense.

“Moreover, as a doctor, my responsibility is always to act in good conscience in the best interest of the patients - not to adopt various fancies, prejudices, or delusions, to avoid offence at all cost.”

He said: “I am, of course, aware that there are men or women who believe they have been trapped in a wrong body, and I do not question the sincerity of their convictions.

“A small number of such people have always existed. Up until recently, such a belief was considered by medics to be delusional and a symptom of a medical disorder.

“It is only recently that transgenderism has been recognised as normal and such delusional beliefs accepted at face value. What is responsible for that change is political pressure, not scientific evidence.”

This is being presented as being about his Christian beliefs, but the religious belief which is really at the heart of this is the genderist belief. People are being forced to comply with the beliefs of gender ideology, which is similar to forcing people to follow the requirements of a religion, whether they are followers of that religion or not.

So people are allowed to refuse to provide morning after pills or abortions etc based on religious grounds but this isn't acceptable?

Of course. What sex is the hypothetical 6 foot bearded person? What is the sex of a person who might want a morning after pill or an abortion?

The doctor is a bloody idiot. He is being asked to politely refer to people by their chosen pronoun. He'll have to do this when writing reports or letters about them.

He doesn't have to believe they are genuinely a man or a woman, but out of professionalism and perhaps Christian kindness just treat people with respect.

He'll get nowhere with this.

What's polite about telling lies?