Doctors set out medical guidelines for trans men giving birth - Times

[Igneococcus]

Can't see this shared yet:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/1471a020-0d2c-11ed-a4af-79eb4b98fc31?shareToken=6ca0e34c47283d9e0ec2cb0554eafa64

Thanks OP. I'd like to see that document have something about the dangers of testosterone for the babies, in vitro and in maternal bonding. Good to see the Times covering this and realising that the trans language is contentious

Here's the consultation details.

www.rcog.org.uk/guidance/guidance-consultation-documents/

Aside from the rest of it, I’m very confused about why the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists has included advice about transwomen being in women’s wards in this guidance. What on earth has that got to do with gynaecology?

I hate that word ‘chestfeeding’ - especially when both men and women have breast tissue. If you want to give birth to a baby then accept the language that goes with that!

What I don’t get is why we have to call breasts ‘chests’ for the benefit of transmen, but transwomen still call their penises their dicks. It’s very confusing.

I don't understand why, if you identify as a make, you would then want to go through something so profoundly and innately female.

others desire disconnection with the process and express a preference for caesarean birth.”
You want to give birth to a baby but to disconnect from it? You want to breastfeed a baby, but to disconnect from it?

Brilliant. The Royal College of Nursing will also call all us boring birthing people 'cis women' to boot. F. Off.

I assume there will be some transmen who get pregnant accidentally, not as a choice.

The article, and the consultation it discusses, are such profound gobbledygook that it is difficult to believe they are serious. Why is the language of a document that purports to give clarity so unclear that they have to constantly explain whether they are referring to males or to females? Why refer to males, anyway? Why isn't a document from the organisation which sets clinical standards for childbirth and illnesses affecting female reproductive organs entirely female-centred? Why would the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists issue guidelines about the treatment of male patients?

So much of that is directly against government advice!

No wonder people are confused.

Why would the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists issue guidelines about the treatment of male patients?

Captured.

I cannot get my head around a woman who completely rejects being a woman in a female body to the point of medically transitioning for mental health reasons then wanting to have a baby, the most female thing a female body can do.

It's not that pregnancy and birth are feminine. It's that they're biological, female, physical experiences, the exact thing these people go to great time and energy and personal cost to eradicate in themselves. It's hard to believe that trans men get pregnant by mistake and then by mistake keep the pregnancy. Knowing what they do to the human female - not ever male - body, I don't understand how or why they'd accept doing it, while simultaneously wanting to permanently live as a man.

I'm not saying they don't have the right to get pregnant. I'm saying I can't understand it.

I also don't understand why when you're pregnant - and before, when TTC or after when breastfeeding - women are shamed for smoking, drinking, eating certain foods or not taking vitamin pills, but trans men's testosterone seem to be of little to no concern.

Real mixture of stuff in there. Some definitely needed (of course the NHS should offer screening based on sex, it is ridiculous that it allows transmen to be forgotten about for cervical screening etc).

Some things I would class as ‘in an ideal world’ so elective surgery (hysterectomy for example). We know women generally find the NHS reluctant to perform this surgery - the same criteria should be used for everyone - is it medically necessary and how necessary.

Some things appear harmful to other groups (mainly women) such as transwomen on female wards, use of less clear language.

*I'm talking about trans men who take T, not those who don't do anything other than claim they're a man.

Interesting this guidance seems to erase women like me - biologically female, but with no gender identity. What happens to us? Do we not exist now?

We have to have the language changed for all women because of a very few?
Why?

They have assumed that women who don't say they'e trans are cis. Highly disrespectful.

That's not what I meant @JohnsShirt
It was in response to posters saying why someone who rejects being female would become pregnant. I'm sure there will be accidental pregnancies by transmen who believe that identifying as a man means they are in fact a man and that they can't get pregnant. Or pregnancies by rape. Not all pregnancies in transwoman will be planned.

Going through with the pregnancy is a choice, though? I suppose there'd be the occasional case where they didn't know they were pregnant, but those must be rare.

There won't be any Transwomen pregnancies.

"Not all pregnancies in transmen will be planned" I meant of course.

Not sure why that got deleted! Probably the dictionary definition. Sigh.

Going through with the pregnancy is a choice, though? I suppose there'd be the occasional case where they didn't know they were pregnant, but those must be rare.

Yes, and I assume they will then have an abortion if under the time limit.
My point was entirely and solely about the fact that not all pregnancies are planned. I'm not asking for language to change.