Thanks for the replies and for the clarification @Blackandwhitehorse. I forgot about non-binary, which is a concept I struggle with and had to go and google the genderqueer definitions a bit more. One article I read mentioned one form of discrimination non-binary people suffer is erasure, when others don't acknowledge their experience and existence. It doesn't make sense to me that in order not to erase a minority that does not conform to a socially constructed gender idiology, the solution is to erase all biological women.
After reading @DaisiesandButtercups post, I came across a document from Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals called "Perinatal Care for Trans and Non-binary people".
The entire document focuses on being inclusive and using gender neutral expressions when caring for trans and non-binary patients and adding their preferred language, not simply erasing the word woman like many companies seem to be doing, nor using the gender neutral language for all.
It recomends changes such as postnatal ward bathroom signs saying "Birthing women and people only" instead of "women only" or using always "women and birthing people" in a sentence when speaking to trans/non-binary people instead of generalising and using the word "women".
But surely, in the context of maternity care, regardless of how you identify, the approach needs to be to place that person at the centre of the experience. So saying that birth is not a woman-centred experienced in an attempt to be inclusive and PC, simply has the effect of allienating 99.3% of their client base, who are looking for their services precisely because they want their birthing experience to be woman-centred/patient-led, no?
I thought we were working towards a less stereotypical society, where traditional gender roles were dismantled; a society that listened to women and they experiences, which are based on their biological sex.
I guess I was wrong...
I shall be looking at alternative hypnobirthing options then...