CQC are at it now 🙄

[ChelseaCat]

I can see that they’ll be insisting on all healthcare organisations asking for staff/patient pronouns and removing the word women from their vocabulary next....

[quote Kit19]I liaise with someone from the CGQ - pronouns are already in the email signatures

and oh look!

gender instead of sex in the protected characteristics

www.cqc.org.uk/about-us/our-strategy-plans/equality-human-rights[/quote]
WTF
Taking liberties there. Adding gender, gender identity and gender expression When it's Gender reassignment that is protected. They also deleted Sex.

www.gov.uk/discrimination-your-rights
age
gender reassignment
being married or in a civil partnership
being pregnant or on maternity leave
disability
race including colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin
religion or belief
sex
sexual orientation

@JellySlice

So which one applies here?

These:

Article 9 the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion

Article 10 the right to freedom of expression

Well, quite. They protect me from being compelled to espouse a belief I do not share. Wish the CQC had some understanding of how dangerous it is to compel belief.

Sorry I have experience of the CQC and I feel its really unfair to say they don't give a shit. They are really invested in making health and social care good and safe.

My partner has worked 10 and 11 hour days for a year now ensuring that health and social care keeps operating well and safely as well as doing lots re vaccine delivery. So it's pretty offensive to say they don't care. The CQC also know theres an issue with maternity and are reviewing this at the moment. But remember they didn't make it shit.

CQC do just regulate they don't really have enforcement power if health and social care is shit its often related to the ccgs who create the services and the CQC have no remit regarding those.

FOI request? on who at the CQC made the decision to delete sex from the definition of Equality and human rights that underpins inspecting services

They're responsible for reviewing puberty blockers etc aren't they? how can they inspect what's going on if they don't recognise sex as a protected characteristic? Like a Baroness said yesterday, it's not for civil servants to change laws.

CQC has declined to regulate GenderGP ffs

Let's all contact them pointing out they have made up some of the 9 protected characteristics and ask them to change back to the correct ones.

@FindTheTruth

They're responsible for reviewing puberty blockers etc aren't they? how can they inspect what's going on if they don't recognise sex as a protected characteristic? Like a Baroness said yesterday, it's not for civil servants to change laws.

Not really. In general treatment for anything is a decided on with services mhra and ccgs. CQC would review whether medicines are treatments are used in line with this and how the. Mhra say they should be used. But it's not for them to decide if a treatment is safe of already clinically established.

This is my understanding anyway. Not defacto the truth!

You are right OKbussitout that CQC dont decide if a treatment is clinically safe, that's NICE job however CQC should ensure that NICE guidelines on treatment are being followed

@Kit19

You are right OKbussitout that CQC dont decide if a treatment is clinically safe, that's NICE job however CQC should ensure that NICE guidelines on treatment are being followed

Yes sorry forgot nice in the mix I mentioned above. I honestly think an issue is the NHS and provision and regulation of health are is really complex so doesn't help with reviewing what treaent is safe or available.

Ccgs develop their own treatment pathways too absed on nice and mhra so pathways can differ in different areas too.

@EdgeOfACoin

Respecting people's chosen pronouns is a 'basic human right'?

Since when? It is a courtesy, surely, not a basic human right?

For instance, the right to a fair trial or the right not to be made stateless are 'basic human rights'.

Pronouns, not so much.

On the other hand freedom of expression is a human right (Article 10) as is freedom of thought, conscience and religion (article 9) and application of these right must not discriminatory (article 14) ECHR

I believe that after CQC's previous 'good' assessment of GIDs, they had to do a reverse ferret in the light of the High Court determining that the service were treating children with experimental medicine with untested outcomes on fertility, bone density, brain development etc. Oh - and these children did not have the capacity to give informed consent because they were too young.
Last month the CQC suddenly found the service to be inadequate. Not sure what has changed apart from a damning court case that exposed a complete lack of research and evidence into the use of this "experimental" medicine. What a shame that the CQC were unable to spot this in their previous inspection as all of the above existed then. Such a worrying lack of curiosity into the health, safety and welfare of children. Still, they were a Stonewall Champion, so all was well.

@RoyalCorgi

How can dictating how people talk about you when you're not there be a 'basic human right'? Is this enshrined in the Human Rights Act?

Exactly. It's a crock of shit. I loathe every single thing about this. A generation of children in adult bodies.

[quote OldCrone]I get why people care about pronouns. But I think a lot of people feel like it seems petty. So I'd rather focus on the things which have potential to have a negative impact on women in a bigger way.

Read this and see if you still think the same about pronouns being unimportant.

fairplayforwomen.com/pronouns/[/quote]

Thanks for this link.

Over-apologising may stop people from sharing pronouns in the future, you say...?

Hmm...

CQC are a waste of space. I recently took over from an HCP who works for the CQC as part of an inspection team. It was incredible how inadequate the practice was in CQC terms. They had not been inspected for years because the owner/CQC employee had ‘arranged it’ so they were put back to the bottom of the inspection list whenever they reached the top ( this was openly disclosed). It was strange how quickly the business was inspected when taken over. Also they timed it so that we were right at the peak of chaos while remodelling and updating.

Email sent complaining about omission on page below.

www.cqc.org.uk/about-us/our-strategy-plans/equality-human-rights

I think the CQC got themselves monstered on twitter last year by saying they used gender instead of sex to be more inclusive, because "everyone had a gender"

Didn’t Lord Lucas submit a parliamentary question about this - after the CQC tweeted about the use of gender instead of sex.

Does anyone have an update?

The CQC stated that they wanted to expand the definition without realising that if you expand the definition, you destroy the definition of sex, and who isn’t included sex anyway?

X post with Pothole!

Yes - the CQC therefore don’t believe everyone has a sex! Worryingly...

A woman is a biological female. A man is a biological male. This is all I have to say on the matter anymore, I no longer have the energy

thanks Uppity how interesting

Written Question
Care Quality Commission
6 Jan 2021, midnight
Questioner: Lord Lucas

Question

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the Care Quality Commission’s justification for the use of the word gender in the equality and human rights statement on its website reflects Government policy.

Answer (Lord Bethell)

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has used the word ‘gender’ instead of ‘sex’ in their Equality, Diversity and Human Rights Policy and Principles of Workforce Equality Monitoring since these documents were introduced in 2011.

These documents were reviewed by the CQC’s Staff Equality Networks and approved by the CQC’s Joint Negotiating and Consultation Committee, which includes trade union representatives and senior managers, alongside external, national union officers and were signed-off by the CQC’s board at that time.

The use of the word ‘gender’ did not arise as an issue of concern whilst completing Equality Impact Assessments for new human resources policies. It was neither subject to a specific assessment nor to legal advice at the time, but Government Legal Services have now reviewed the CQC’s use of the word gender in these documents and confirmed that this meets the requirements of the Equality Act 2010.

www.parallelparliament.co.uk/writtenanswers/search?document_type=writtenanswers&mp_type=1879

current CQC board
www.cqc.org.uk/about-us/meet-our-team/our-board

@UppityPuppity

X post with Pothole!

Yes - the CQC therefore don’t believe everyone has a sex! Worryingly...

Dunno what you're talking about. Well known phenomenon. Indeed, as I'm sure everyone knows, Jane Austen's famous Pride and Prejudice details what happens when Mr and Mrs Bennet keep trying for a child with a sex (because the conditions of the entail require a male OR female child as an heir) and end up with five offspring of varying gender identities, but of neither sex.

Whole book about her attempts to marry these sexless adults off to eligible bachelors and bachelorettes.

and confirmed that this meets the requirements of the Equality Act 2010.

Does this mean then that the term gender can only be narrowly used as an exact synonym for the protected characteristic of sex?

Potholes - I must have read a different book - In the book I read Mrs Bennett spent the whole novel worrying about 5 people with vaginas , because for some inexplicable reason - the law knew exactly who to discriminate against before the discovery of chromosomes and without the need for genital inspections...

Interestingly, the law managed to discriminate correctly each time.