BMA and the Forstater case

[GiantsnakesofHades]

Are there any other BMA members out there considering what the implications of the Forstater case are for the BMA's position on trans rights?

Last year the BMA backed a motion which included self-ID and these statements:

'enable trans people to receive healthcare in settings appropriate to their gender identity; ensure trans healthcare workers are able to access facilities appropriate to the gender they identify as; ensure trans people are able to access gendered spaces in line with the gender they identify as.'

www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjV--6k4uv4AhWPS8AKHQYICNgQFnoECAcQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bma.org.uk%2Fmedia%2F3264%2Fmotion-4-healthcare-and-rights-of-transgender-and-nonbinary-individuals-briefing-arm-2020.pdf&usg=AOvVaw310olWaHejsFTJnqNfYpVw

This document makes it pretty clear they don't think GC beliefs are WORIADS.

The BMA also think everyone has a gender identity (bye bye evidence based medicine!) www.bma.org.uk/advice-and-support/equality-and-diversity-guidance/lgbtplus-equality-in-medicine/inclusive-care-of-trans-and-non-binary-patients

These flout the EHRC advice on single sex spaces and will be counter to the beliefs of GC BMA members. Are there any senior people in the BMA who aren't totally captured? Would they actually represent a GC member if they had to?

My gender identity is non-existent, does this mean the "appropriate facilities " are too? That's pretty exclusionary.

How did the BMA get so captured? As a complete outsider, don't even have a first aid certificate, it seems bizarre.

Is it one of those cases where the members pay little attention to who sits on the committee so single-issue obsessives have been able to take over and get policies passed which most of the membership don't even know about?

The BMA annual reps meeting where these votes take place has a self selected audience of voters and lots of med students and junior docs and many of the young activists who want to attend a 1-3 day meeting during the week are captured. Gender woo is being taught in medical schools. Lots of doctors who don't believe it ( and most docs over 30 don't) don't want to speak out and get called names and not "be nice" and risk not getting re-elected on to committees

I was afraid that might be the case. Do you have any sense this might change, @2Rebecca?

@Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g you are right and @2Rebecca explains it pretty well.

I was horrified when I saw this motion had passed. It’s an embarrassment to our profession and to our union. There is a very vocal (mostly young) minority in the profession so one could be mistaken for thinking theirs is the commonly held view. In my experience however most doctors’ views are more gender critical (even if they have never heard the phrase). Most doctors want to be “kind” though and just because they’ve studied for decades doesn’t mean they know everything - there’s a lot of ignorance and misconceptions regarding what “trans” means and what the implications are for healthcare as well as obviously women’s rights. We are all coming up against these issues in our clinical practice now and I think the majority view is with us.

I am quite open with my views in my professional life and among colleagues but have yet to experience anyone disagree with me in person. That only ever seems to happen online for some reason… I would never express my political views to a patient though (or in this case, alarmingly, scientific facts and evidence) so will use a patient’s preferred pronouns.

I could talk about this at length and the issues it causes but sorry very tired today, don’t know if any of that was coherent. The BMA is such a depressingly self serving organisation and has a reputation for perhaps not representing its members views very well. I doubt Forstater’s brilliant case will make a single bit of difference to that particular motion but if a doctor were dismissed for their GC views them I hope the BMA would defend them to the hilt.

Thanks. I hope you're right about the BMA defending a doctor who falls foul of the activists. Sounds like they would have a steep learning curve, but the law is a lot clearer now, thanks to Maya.

I'll admit to not being very engaged with the BMA before, and only just realising how unrepresentative the meetings are where motions like this are passed. If you're not in easy travelling distance of London, working in an understaffed speciality and have other committments it's nigh on impossible to get to these meetings.

Do the meetings still have to be attended in person?

No but this year's ARM was spread over 3 week days and you have to apply and fill in forms to get to go if not nominated from an active division and whilst med students and junior docs have active divisions many other areas that are geographical don't