Help me respond to a captured hospital please!

[timeforsheroes]

I've nc'd because I made the FOI request in my own name, and these people are also my employer

i asked for the EIAs on 'supporting gender transitioning at work' and 'transgender care' i.e. staff policy and patient policy. I asked what considerations were given to the PCs of sex and religion. I asked who was consulted re these documents, and what was done to ensure all stakeholders were consulted before the documents were approved.

This is the abridged reply: Relevant stakeholders were consulted, involving Trans staff, Encompass network and [local LGBT charity]. These documents were also discussed with management and staff side representatives.

The Trust is alert to the potential that a minority of colleagues or other patients may not understand Transgender rights and may use either their religion or their belief as being Trans Exclusionist Radical Feminists (TERFs) to object to the guidance. However these views are deemed to be transphobic. We have a duty to protect transgender patients and staff from discrimination harassment and victimisation and promote good relations between protected groups. We provide Trans Awareness training for staff to promote understanding to support implementation of these guidance documents.

Trans members of the LGBT+ staff network were invited to comment and consult on the documents by open invitation- to all staff on LGBT+ staff network circulation list were contacted

Both EIA checklist gender but not sex, and have 'positive' against gender reassignment and gender, and 'n/a' against all the other PCs. the patient policy EIA includes this gem:

If there is a negative impact on any of the groups, are you able to justify it, if so how? The Trust needs to be alert to the potential that a minority of colleagues or other patients may not understand Trans needs and may use either their religion or their belief as being Trans Exclusionist Radical Feminists (TERFs) to object to the guidance. These attitudes are deemed to be transphobic and based on misunderstanding. The rights of one group are not allowed to impede the human rights of another protected group. As the guidance states, any transphobic abuse from staff or other patients and families must be submitted through incident reporting, as this is a possible hate crime. Staff will be subject to a disciplinary procedure.



i feel like I've been punched. This is my employer. And the hospital I and my DC and my mum would be taken to if we get ill. Please help me to respond, I'm so gutted they approved this crap, and replied like this, I can't think straight.

[DIshedUp]

That is truly shocking. What hospital is this? Bloody hope I never end up there.

[Sexnotgender]

That’s utterly appalling.

[WeAreJackieWeaver]

OP you might want to contact Legal Feminist on Twitter as see if they can help.

[DIshedUp]

The more I read it, the more angry I get.

Its the blatant of contempt for women and people from religious backgrounds. Its supposed to be a hospital. Its not even the fact they prioritising trans feeling over womens safety, they are actively publicising their hate of women.

[persistentwoman]

All the evidence (and it's interesting that this seems to have stopped in recent years - wonder why?) is that women and men dislike mixed sex hospital wards and women feel unsafe in them.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/30/mixed-sexed-wards-endanger-and-humiliate-women

[DIshedUp]

It makes me genuinely concerned about how they treat their female patients in general. Irrespective of trans rights thats not a hospital I would want my elderly grandma cared for in.

[Manderleyagain]

Also the recent yougov polling suggests if they had asked potential patients their opinion they would have found that many men and women (increasing in older age groups who are more likely to be in hospital) would be worried about this. They don't have to make policy around those opinions but they should be properly consulting and taking onboard patient concerns to work out how the policy will actually work on the ground, rather than pretending that the only objections will be from a small number of t**fs and people who use their religion as an excuse.

[Coffeeandcocopops]

Personally as you work there I don’t think you take this any further. However you could get someone else to ask the same foi who could take it forward.

[Manderleyagain]

Did anyone foi this NHS trust when all the Stonewall foi's were being done - to find out what they had to do to get the accreditation. Just a thought. Tbh that doesn't sound slick enough to be a stonewalled policy. It's so ham fisted!

[Manderleyagain]

I mean eia not policy.

[mumwon]

trans or not
my plumbing & its life cycle & what it goes through due to my obstetric/gynaecological/urological life experiences & the wear & tear (especially the latter in childbirth) is different to someone who has transitioned -& I would feel intimidated at having my bed being next to someone who doesn't have the above,
There is NO privacy in single sex wards - for either doctors examinations or discussions except a thin curtain which don't always shut properly & after covid is over the distance between beds is laughable
No thank you

[MichelleofzeResistance]

I would share that with your MP and ask them to pass it on to the minister for health, with the local council and with the NHS trust. Point out that this has been written wholly from the extreme prejudice view that no female person can ever have a justified or relevant characteristic worth consideration from an equality point of view: have they heard of intersectionality? Do they plan to just not treat women of faiths that mean they cannot access mixed sex facilities? Is there no one in that hospital that knows about PTSD, trauma informed care? Autism? Where in their privacy/dignity/single sex documentation does it say 'unless a male person wants to be on the ward, in which case any woman who argues is doing it purely to be awkward and should be disregarded'?

I'd also point out the extreme gynephobia and the use of TRA slurs makes it look as if this policy was written by extremists without even the basic awareness of duty never mind consideration of other groups under the Equality Act, or the responsibility to take balanced advice and ensure equality impact is properly assessed from a balanced (and non politically extremist) point of view before implementation. I'd be interested in a solicitor's view of where they'd stand if a woman patient complained on the basis of that extremist piece of writing in itself. There's been a major failure somewhere up high.

And then I'd ask whether all female patients are warned in advance that they are entering a hospital in which females are regarded as inferior and second class citizens whose needs are subordinate, and that anyone protesting male-centred practice or raising any needs politically incompatible with the hospital policy may be accused of hate crime. Because that's something they should bloody well be aware of as an informed choice before letting anyone in that place anywhere near them. And I'd be interested in a solicitor's view of that too.

That needs sad facing all over the daily mail.

[teawamutu]

Every word of what Michelle said.

[MichelleofzeResistance]

Oh and where do they refer patients (taxpayers) that they reject or who can't access care with them because of their political views?

Or can they please provide the link to the government guidance that it's now ok to deny healthcare to taxpayers who do not obey set political views?

And that needs to be in the newspapers too. They should have to stand and defend it to the general public. "We believe in distressed, frightened, threatened, excluded female people. We see that as 'inclusive' and 'kind'. We refuse to consider answers that work for all: instead we exclude those who don't fit our politics". Own it.

[Tibtom]

It sounds like harassment in relation to sex and belief to me. If you want to say something state this as that becomes a protected act and any further mistreatment is victimisation. (which is what Allison Bailey is now suing for)

[Sexnotgender]

@teawamutu

Every word of what Michelle said.

100% spot on as usual.

[timeforsheroes]

Thanks FWRers, I've no one I can talk to about this in RL and I'm just floundering. It's so bad. I will get myself together and marshall all the helpful info thank you, I'm just not there at the minute!

[persistentwoman]

Tbh - that reads as if it was written by a local trans activist - not a professional - healthcare, HR or anyone with a legal background.
Maybe they gave it to a 15 year old work experience student who spends too much time online?

[Thelnebriati]

IDK if this will help but the NHS can only refuse you treatment if you are violent or abusive to staff or other patients.
www.citizensadvice.org.uk/health/nhs-healthcare/nhs-patients-rights/#h-right-to-hospital-treatment

news.sky.com/story/nhs-staff-can-refuse-to-treat-racist-or-sexist-patients-under-new-rules-11937175

There are some excellent posts by PencilsInSpace on another thread and I'll repost them and link them.

''PROHIBITED CONDUCT UNDER THE EQUALITY ACT

1. Harassment
   
   //www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/26
   
   A service provider is prohibited from subjecting you to unwanted conduct related to a protected characteristic that has the purpose or effect of violating your dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for you.
   
   'Unwanted conduct' related to the protected characteristic of sex, in a medical environment, can include things like:
   
   

• Placing male patients on female wards
• Gaslighting female patients by telling them that a male patient is female
• Sending a male HCP to do an intimate procedure when a female patient has specifically requested a female HCP''

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a3751152-Only-consenting-to-receiving-medical-treatment-from-a-female-is-not-acceptable?msgid=91881182

[Thelnebriati]

''PROHIBITED CONDUCT UNDER THE EQUALITY ACT

2) Victimisation

//www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/27

A service provider is prohibited from treating you badly if you make a complaint, raise a grievance or bring proceedings under the equality act, give evidence or information related to someone else's complaint or legal case, make an allegation that someone has contravened the equality act or do any other thing for the purposes of or in connection with this Act Or if you haven't done any of these things but the service provider believes you have or that you might do.

These are called 'protected acts'. You don't have to expressly mention the equality act and you are still protected from victimisation if your complaint or legal case is unsuccessful or if you were mistaken in what the law said or meant. As long as you are acting in good faith you are protected.

Examples of victimisation in this context can include things like:

• telling off a female patient because she says she feels uncomfortable and anxious about being on the same ward as a male patient
• moving her off the ward because she complains
• disciplining a HCP for preventing harassment of female patients
• disciplining a HCP for questioning one of these policies
• receiving a written request from a patient that the service provider use a single sex exception, making clear her consent to be treated by female HCP for mammography, cervical smears or any other intimate procedure and withdrawing blanket consent in advance for situations where this is not possible, and then including those letters (edited to misrepresent) in your publicly available policy as examples of 'highly discriminatory' 'unacceptable communications' which must be referred to the 'Equality, Inclusion and Diversity team'

ANY WOMAN SUBJECTED TO THIS TREATMENT HAS A CLAIM FOR VICTIMISATION''
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a3751152-Only-consenting-to-receiving-medical-treatment-from-a-female-is-not-acceptable?msgid=91883197#91883197

[Thelnebriati]

PencilsInSpace Tue 26-Nov-19
''PROHIBITED CONDUCT UNDER THE EQUALITY ACT

3) Instructing, causing or inducing contraventions

A service provider is prohibited from instructing its staff to discriminate against, harass or victimise service users. Even if the staff ignore the instruction. Claims can be raised by patients affected by the unlawful policy or by staff who are expected to abide by it, if they have suffered a detriment.

These policies tell HCP to harass and victimise female patients. Staff also may be harassed and/or victimised if they do not follow these policies. These are detriments. See previous posts for examples.

ANY WOMAN SUBJECTED TO THIS TREATMENT HAS A CLAIM FOR INSTRUCTING, CAUSING OR INDUCING CONTRAVENTIONS''
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a3751152-Only-consenting-to-receiving-medical-treatment-from-a-female-is-not-acceptable?msgid=91884674

[Thelnebriati]

PencilsInSpace Tue 26-Nov-19 22:38:08
''As well as PROHIBITED CONDUCT there are also DUTIES under the EA, primarily the public sector equality duty (PSED).''

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a3751152-Only-consenting-to-receiving-medical-treatment-from-a-female-is-not-acceptable?msgid=91885269

[Thelnebriati]

PencilsInSpace Tue 26-Nov-19 22:40:18
''Public Sector Equality Duty is here:''
//www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/149

''Instructing, causing or inducing contraventions''
//www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/111

[Umbivalent]

Fucking hell that's appalling. I can't believe they used T*. Fucking awful.

[Skyliner001]

Love their response😊