Hospital told police patient not raped because attacker transgender

[Snoodsy]

A hospital told the police that a patient could not have been raped because her alleged attacker was trans, the House of Lords has heard.

The attack took place a year ago and the woman reported it but when officers contacted the hospital, which has not been named, they were told “that there was no male in the hospital, therefore the rape could not have happened”.

Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne, who raised the issue during a debate on single-sex wards, continued: “They forgot that there was CCTV, nurses and observers.

“None the less, it has taken nearly a year for the hospital to agree that there was a male on the ward and, yes, this rape happened.

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20220317203204/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/03/17/hospital-told-police-patient-not-raped-alleged-attacker-transgender/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20220317203204/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/03/17/hospital-told-police-patient-not-raped-alleged-attacker-transgender/

I want us to find out which hospital it was and have loads of feminists demonstrating outside every day for forever. Maximum press attention and embarrassment. I want to shine a light on this.

@Oblomov22

Lady Nicholson’s proposals were opposed by Lord Etherton QC, who argued that the current policy was “entirely appropriate and consistent with the anti-discrimination law in the Equality Act”.

Why is it being opposed by Lord Etherton QC? Who is no longer the Rolls. Having retired, ill with a genetic blood disorder. Opposed on what stance? The current policy is appropriate? No. It's not.

In his speech, which came straight after Baroness Nicholson's, Lord Etherton said:

It is not a legitimate aim that some people feel uncomfortable sharing accommodation and facilities with trans people of the opposite birth sex. That would make a nonsense of having the statutory protected characteristic in the first place.

If not allowing males to self identify as women and have free access to women only spaces makes a 'nonsense' of the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, he must believe that the primary purpose of that protected characteristic is for access to spaces for the opposite sex.

But if any man can self identify as a woman and gain access to women only spaces, that means that there cannot be any women only spaces and everything is mixed sex. He seems very confused by the law. Is he really a QC?

Link to his speech:
hansard.parliament.uklords/2022-03-16/debates/84C9B6AA-0214-4CEF-A41D-302373BDC190/HealthAndCareBill#contribution-2C34DA23-A5AD-483E-ACB8-AF8A5C547F73

@terryleather, you know I rarely swear but FFS! How have we ended up in this Orwellian nightmare?

I’d join in if it’s vaguely near me. Anyone know where it happened?

And I completely agree. Every complicit individual should be sued.

If a person has a penis he's a man.

HotSauceCommittee

I want us to find out which hospital it was and have loads of feminists demonstrating outside every day for forever. Maximum press attention and embarrassment. I want to shine a light on this.

Me too! This woman needs to know we all support her and the people and organisations who say TWAW must be made aware that it leads to dangerous bullshit like this!!

Every time, no exceptions.

And no, you’re not the most oppressed person in the room.

@ResisterRex

The law on rape DOES says it's a man. How else do you read this?

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1/crossheading/rape

"1
Rape
(1)
A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a)
he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
(b)
B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c)
A does not reasonably believe that B consents."

I believe many laws are written this way, with ‘he’ meant to cover both ‘he’ and ‘she’.

@NecessaryScene

The law on rape DOES says it's a man. How else do you read this?

No it doesn't. For historical reasons, in the wording of UK law "he" can be taken to mean "he or she" whereever necessary, as a general principle.

Its use never means "must be male" - that would have to be explicitly stated.

But then the hospital should have known that a rape could have happened..?

What a sad mess. With real lives and real victims, paying the price of policies lobbied for in clandestine fashion

When will people see GI for the institutionalised sexism it is? This is a perfect example of the institutions aiding and abetting a man's offence. Stonewall, the police, and that NHS Trust all have blood on their hands and have acted in abusive ways IMHO. The poor woman has been assaulted not just by that man but by the systems including those which were supposed to protect.

This will get worse. Devon, Oxford and Nottinghamshire are among the NHS trusts that have devised policies stating that male born sex offenders must also to be allowed to be placed on women's wards

Unbelievable to think that there are people working in the NHS who actually want and plan to put male born rapists / paedophiles alongside their victims - but here we are...

Couldn't find an article in the Guardian but the Times, Mail, Express and Telegraph have covered it:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9854261/Convicts-born-male-identify-female-placed-women-wards.html

@Snoodsy

I don’t think we need to obfuscate the laws or language more than it already is, that’s what got us into this mess. We don’t want rape victims having to call their rapists meow/meowself in court.

Absolutely agree with this. We gave an inch, they took about three thousand fucking miles. Human adult males are men. Penis havers are men. This rapist is a man. Woman can commit sexual assaults of varying kinds, but they don't have penises to rape with.

This is beyond horrific.

I cannot comprehend how medical professionals can deny basic biological facts. Irrespective of what people want to 'identify as', the rapist is a man, he has a penis.

That poor woman, raped AND gaslit. It's sickening. I pray that she is able to access appropriate support services and that she sues the NHS as they failed in their duty of care.

The law on rape does refer to a man because it refers to a penis. It should stay that way. What needs to change is the ridiculous notion that a person with a penis is not a man, however he chooses to ‘identify’.

A penis person is still a penis person. I’m going to come back stronger every time. Let’s see if they can put us all in prison shall we? The country would ground to a halt!

No. You do not get to lie to me and demand that I lie.

This incident was discussed on this thread about Baroness Nicholson.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4506091-Emma-Nicholson-in-the-Times

A barrister posting on that thread had asked for evidence of harm being caused by this NHS policy. They dismissed this rape as 'anecdote', not evidence.

I hope they do sue the NHS. Money seems to be the only language they understand these days.

This was an example of the NHS being an accomplice to rape, by not only facilitating, through their own policy, a rapist being on a ward with vulnerable women but by then deliberately covering that rapist's tracks. They gaslit a woman and denied her own appalling, visceral knowledge that she'd been forcibly penetrated by a penis.

This is why we need single-sex spaces.

This is not an 'imagined' scenario. This is not a 'hypothetical' scenario.

I weep for the victim and hope she has good support. And I hope criminal proceedings are brought against the man who raped her and the NHS employees and policy-makers who perverted the course of justice.

Just when you think things couldn't get any worse, they always manage to surprise you.

Baroness Nicholson is utterly magnificent in her work to uphold women's fast-disappearing rights and speak up for those who are being most impacted by this dystopian nightmare. I am in awe of her relentless dignity and calm

This tweet...

twitter.com/Baroness_Nichol/status/1504586110848090125

We need single sex spaces and we need people not to gaslight women about male sexual violence.

I didn't the trans rights people are fighting for is to be able to rape women in their most vulnerable state without consequence, but if this is what trans activists are standing for then good for them for finally being honest about their aims.

I wonder what our visiting friends have to say about this?

@EmbarrassingHadrosaurus I immediately thought about Maya’s case. Was it yesterday…one of the male witnesses scoffed and thought it transphobic and insulting when Maya dared to suggest there could be safeguarding issues with allowing trans women into women’s spaces.

I am possibly more open to the idea that TWAW than most on this thread. However, anyone who chooses to use their male organ to perpetrate an unspeakable crime is - without any question at all - not a TW.

The same goes for TM who give birth.

It has taken nearly a year for the hospital to agree that there was a male on the ward and, yes, this rape happened

I'm only surprised it wasn't longer, or wasn't admitted at all - after all, denying it is another way of pretending it "never happens" and that appears to be the priority for some

Really, though, I'm posting to see what the enablers have to say, and to read the deletion message

So what happened to the duty of candour which is now a statutory requirement of all HCP? Lying to patients is a breach of ethics and falls short of the standards of performance and ethics of the HCPC, &
I would expect, the NMC! No wonder patients have no faith in the healthcare professions with this sort of gaslighting going on! Hope the woman involved is ok and she sues anyone she can!