Word Mother removed from Scottish governement Policies

[Igneococcus]

In the Times:
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3c959dba-2d2e-11ec-a548-f9bb1ebf6985?shareToken=813627b8a0c3148e479c1a80ef7f5130

OhHolyJesus you WHAT now?

I wonder what interest a children's charity, seeking (as they claim) to help 'trans' children, might have in promoting and campaigning for easier access to surrogacy in the U.K?

Is it because these children (like Jazz Jennings and Jackie Green) are likely to be infertile later in life if they are on a 'medical pathway'?*

Yes, the pathway causes infertility. And an unusually high number of these children on puberty blockers are autistic.

We used to have a word for sterilising groups of people who had a difference, didn't we?

Where are the medical ethics people in this?

Where are the medical ethics people in this?

I can give a partial answer although not from the perspective of eugenics. Recent publication that considers the ethical case for ongoing suppression of puberty:

Notini L, Earp BD, Gillam L, et al Forever young? The ethics of ongoing puberty suppression for non-binary adults Journal of Medical Ethics 2020;46:743-752.

jme.bmj.com/content/46/11/743.abstract

The linked commentaries in response are interesting and raise an array of issues.

I Listened to a very interesting podcast about lobotomies. Absolutely fascinating - a respected ‘treatment’, used until scarily recently.

Does anyone know if the FOI that had the info about removing mother has been published?

Scotland have lost it on this issue

Psychiatry has a long history of practices which turned out to be inhumane. It is something the Royal College is acutely aware of and they been working hard on ensuring things like lobotomies don't happen again.

If I was a psychiatrist I'd be demanding my professional body audits the practices of my colleagues at gender clinics. The Bell case found that the basics of care, assessments, record keeping, differential diagnosis, critical thinking were lacking at Tavistock. The appeal found that the medics should be responsible for decision making, not the court (which I agree with) but that they would also, therefore, be liable for civil action should they be found to have provided inadequate care.

If I was a psychiatrist, a psychologist or an endocrinologist I'd want to be seen to be as far removed from those practices which were criticised in the judgment, which is now a matter of public record.

Has anyone written to the Scottish government about this? I wonder who I would write to? I could write to my MSP, but as it's about the administration of government, not sure this would be right.

For what it's worth, I think this insane attempt to remove the word woman will backfire. It's interesting that I have had three conversations with different friends and relatives in the last week where the topic of erasure of women's rights has come up - not instigated by me. I have been GC for a while and honestly felt very alone but it really is starting to get into the mainstream.

Its sad that they have did this but happy to see them using inclusive language for others. But just so disappointed that they couldn't also keep mother as an option in the language. Maternity care is supposed to be individual and personal to the mother/birthing person and that should include which title they'd like to be addressed as. Anyone else feel like womans rights are slowly being pulled away from us?

Why do we need to use ‘inclusive’ language when the standard is understood?

Don’t feel like a woman? Well who does. Get on with your life.

@Goannaforanna

Does anyone know if the FOI that had the info about removing mother has been published?

If it's not on the FOI site, I wonder if it's something Nolan and Thompson have seen. I don't know if there would be restrictions on them sharing it.

How about non- people who give birth. Sturgeon and her crew plus Stonewall UK would love it.

if someone is a trans man who gives birth it is inappropriate to label them as a mother because that is not the way that they would describe themselves.

If a biological woman utilises their biology to grow a child and birth it, then they are a mother. I honesty cannot comprehend how someone with such dysphoria can tolerate going through what is a uniquely female experience. This removal of language for a tiny, tiny, tiny minority is outrageous, and I hope more people are opening their eyes to it now.

Hmmm

Why is the word mother verboten but not maternity? That makes no sense.

Pink news person says lesbians and gay men find this important. Do they?

Lesbians are... Female! And generally one woman has the baby. Is the mother. Currently in law. I can't see a lesbian who is having/ has had a baby getting referred to as the baby's mother... In the home both women have a variation of mum generally IME.

Gay men? Well saying one of the couple is the mother surely isn't seen as something to push for? I can't see that at all. Daddy and dad etc.

As ever look at the inconsistencies and diversions.

Mother is wanted to mean something else.
Lesbian and gay couples who have a baby can't see this as an issue for the couples in what they are referred to as in hosp.

TM is also a red herring. Only mentioned to support something else. Hardly any.

Sooo.

I reckon surrogacy.

Law here is woman who has the baby is mother. In law.
This means she has a place on records, and if she decides to keep the baby she can.

Push is for laws here to be more USA. Contractual giving 'certainty' to the couple that the baby is for.
Woman has no rights to baby. Further, some contracts the 'commissioning' parents can make decisions like whether or not to terminate any in case of multiple pregnancy. (Want lots of babies can say no against medical advice re risk to mother and other foetuses. Change mind can decide abort. Etc)

Mother is also an emotive word. A fundamental to mammals. Deep reactions to mother and babies being separated on nature progs. And for many. With humans.

Need words that don't invoke those feelings so much.

Gestational carrier is popular.

That's what this is about.

And. Interestingly the desire to separate the baby from the mother in thinking. Is also used by anti abortion types. Esp in USA. Always a pic of foetus floating in space. The fact it's inside a woman is deliberately avoided at all costs.

Exact same approach .
Both about controlling women to get something they want.

I can still see the article but the comments have now gone

Melanie Reid talks about this in her column today:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/f7f5ecc8-2f67-11ec-820f-e2be9b2cb5fd?shareToken=8b4f3bf3b91dd0515e09ad3b436be6a5

Birthing person is no different to calling us breeders.

I know many life long snp voters who were very pro sturgeon up until a couple of years ago and now spoil ballots or don’t vote directly because of this.

Her implication that it’s a positive that the older generation of voters will be dead soon is like spitting image without the irony.

Comments are switched off on the original article and are no longer visible. Is that something that normally happens after a few days?

I've seen it happen before but more often they turn off the commenting but you can still read and recommend. I wondered who was so upset about the comments it needed purging from public view.
There is weird stuff going on at the Times. Yesterday in the comments under the letters to the editor section I had entire comments disappear without a trace mostly answers to the guy who keeps promising references to "proof" that sex is in the brain. I have email alerts of recommends and even of comments in response to these posts but the comments (and comments made to me in reaction to these) are gone without a trace, not even a "this comment violated our policy" there instead, weird.

I also have had comments entirely disappear from the Times. No 'your comment violated our policy'. Just gone. I feel something funny is going on. I think the company running the comment section doesn't like our comments......... And because I haven't actually done anything wrong, they simply erase from the record. Obviously can't substantiate that all.

Franca even before the OpenWeb took over I sometimes couldn't get comments published, often on Sundays especially in the Scotland section. It felt like someone just deleted anything I said. I should have changed name to test that.
Yesterday was weirder than usual, entire exchanges gone from the site without a trace.

Yep. Last Sunday I commented that watching three hours of porn isn't something any woman does. A short conversation took place. Checked back that evening - evaporated.

I also wrote that the trans identifying male in question clearly had deep mental health problems and that had nothing to do with being a woman. And that trans identifying so often seems to go with these mental health issues and problem childhoods. Gone. It's all quite desperate. The only trans identifying male I know of (friend of a friend) had a bad childhood, is an alcoholic and his life is in pieces. Now at the age of 40, he's decided he's a woman. Everyone knows it's nonsense but you're not allowed to say it.

I made some very basic statements about biology, gone.

My other theory is that i have been flagged. So maybe there's a setting of 'trans'. An article is tagged as trans. I am known to comment in violation of their policy on trans tagged articles. Therefore on an article where no moderator is available or resources are constrained, mine are automatically removed.

I wish they were more transparent as to their processes