My reply to the email from Cervical Check:
Many thanks for your reply.
However, I still have a number of concerns, particularly as you have not addressed all my questions.
I asked you to point me towards research you may have conducted amongst women with poor English language skills (who, incidentally, are not limited to those whose first language is one other than English) and those who have poor anatomical knowledge, to determine whether they recognised that the term “anyone with a cervix” applied to them. Can you clarify whether you have conducted this research and if so, point me towards the results?
I also asked, if you have not conducted this research, whether you intend to do so, particularly in light of the research conducted by Jo’s Trust in the UK (www.jostrust.org.uk/node/666780) which determined almost 50% of women surveyed did not know what a cervix is? Can you please clarify your position on this?
With regards to your statement “Measures needed to reduce health inequalities include, but are not exclusive to, Health Promotion activities in key populations where uptake is low; having communications materials translated into languages other than English; and using inclusive and accessible language in our communications materials.”, can you please clarify whether you have conducted research to determine whether your target audience find the language used to be accessible? I assume this research would presumably have been carried out as part of that gender impact assessment as per the HSE’s “Equal but Different” report, which requires addressing the question:
• “Are there any areas of the policy or plan that unintentionally disadvantage different groups of women, men and transgender persons or negatively impact on different groups of women, men and transgender persons?”
If so, can you please point me towards that research? Additionally, as I stated above, many people with poor English language skills actually have English as a first language so accessible, simple, language is essential in addition to translating for those who do not have English as a first language.
I am also a little confused by the references you mentioned as informing your policy of gender neutral language (an aim I applaud, unless it leads to confusion). Neither the WHO document nor the Healthy Ireland document mention anything about using gender neutral language of the form you are using. Nor did Dr. Scully use the WHO document to advocate this form of language. Could you please clarify which parts of those documents you are referencing and how they informed your decision to use this language?
With regards to the HSE guidelines on “How to write about people”, they state “Use gender-neutral text wherever possible. Use ‘them’, ‘their’, ‘they’. Use common neutral alternatives, like ‘businessperson’ instead of ‘businessman.’” The guidance does not suggest making the language more complex and difficult to understand.
With regards to your statement that the material has been user-tested with a sample of the target audience, can you please tell me what form that testing took? Specifically, I would like to know the sample size, how the sample was selected, what demographics that sample represented and what type of testing was carried out, particularly in relation to the questions asked of the participants?
I would also like to reiterate that I am fully supportive of your aim to be inclusive of women, transmen and non-binary people who have need of your service. However, my concern is that the way you have done it is likely to unintentionally exclude an already disadvantaged subset of your target users.