Hospital refuses to operate after woman requests all-female care

[Imnobody4]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11316141/Hospital-bans-sex-assault-victim-op-female-care-request.html

I feel quite sick at this.

She was stunned then to receive an email from the hospital's chief executive Maxine Estop Green telling her the operation was off.

She told her the hospital 'did not share her beliefs' and she should make alternative arrangements for her surgery.

The message added the hospital was committed to protecting staff from what it described as 'unacceptable distress'.

Emma urged them to reconsider, adding in a further message she thought they had misunderstood her requests, which she said were entirely within the law.

The hospital said it would offer a private room but would NOT facilitate her requests for single-sex care after her operation.

It also mentioned her comment about pronouns and said it had a responsibility to protect staff from 'discrimination and harassment'.

Another person who hasn't read the thread. Thanks for your enlightening contribution @Qazwsxefv

Fucking Hell this makes me so angry 😡

When I was a cardiology nurse we cared for several prisoners one who was obviously a nasty piece of work they kept him handcuffed to the bed and some staff recognised him as a Pedophile & child murder. Most of us would have rather not helped him as our views certainly didn't align but you know what we were professionals and we just did his surgery like anyone else!

I've worked in a private hospital and we had many requests for female only care especially as ECGs exposes Women's breasts it was just respected!

*What really fucks me off is the absolute muppets who think like this and would joyfully refuse her care would wang on to you at great length about their delusion of being Leftist voters who are all about inclusion, diversity, kindness and in very great detail about their virtue. Whereas they are the ones crueler than any others when it comes to prejudice, discrimination and an absolute failure to put any actions near the values they love the feels of identifying as having.

Hypocrisy and self delusion on crack.*

Exactly this.

What happens in the echo situation is a female is asked to chaperone I've done it more times than I can count.

The issue is they didn't offer a we can't guarantee female only care they basically went go away you bigot for even requesting such a thing!

Yes. And although I'm quite sure that some of them are still in the dark ages, viewing this as being similar to gay rights, there's an awful lot of others who are just thoroughly enjoying gaming the system, looking good, and being bastards.

How many female doctors have been convicted of sexual assault against a patient? Also this patient was not talking about doctors but nurses giving intimate care when unsupervised by anyone else, si hardly the same thing.

Thanks!

I have read the thread and it’s still the key point to me. A hospital cannot guarantee that no male person is going in her room. It’s a impossible request to make. Female only for personal care if at all possible and not an emergency situation yes that could be accommodated. No males in the room not possible.

She will allow male doctors but not male nurses/HCAs/porters/pharmacists/physios/cleaners/radiographers in her ROOM. She isn’t saying she won’t just have them for intimate care but they won’t be allowed in the room. This is not going to be possible - let alone the care staff say there’s a issue with the power supply in her room - do they have to find a female Electrican? If there is a fire and they are evacuating do they leave her because the only porters to move the bed are male. There is no way any hospital would take this on - it’s just too much risk.

I fully support the right of women to have intimate examinations and care from women not including trans women if that is their preference. I have stood up in person and argued this infront of hospital management at risk to my own career and lost friends that way. I have been the hcp on the coal face at 2am trying to find a female senior for a seriously unwell patient who didn’t want a male dr while trying to stop them dying outside of my competency as the most senior female present - and it’s bloody shit.

Yet I do feel the hospital was right to turn this lady down on the grounds of her views. I would support her had she said she wanted female only staff for personal care IF Possible (and staffing meaning it might not be possible and she accepted delays in her care) but she is asking for no males (including no trans identifying males) in her room. That’s not ok - say the the person cleaning the floors is a trans identifying man - she’s not letting him do his job because he’s trans. The hospital have a duty to stop there staff being discriminated against and cleaning floors or serving meals doesn't seem to provide a justification to allow her discrimination under the act.

She also says she won’t deal on pronouns - I don’t fully get what she means but I feel it’s not ok if she doesn't use the pronouns/names staff identify themselves with. The hospital have a duty to protect their staff and other patients from her if she’s going to do that. She’s in the waiting room and one of the other patients is a trans identifying man, she calls this person with a name or pronoun that is offensive to then - what on earth do the hospital do then?

And the hospital CEO did offer to meet to find a compromise

Above makes me sound like I don’t care about her trauma - I do. Solutions I have seen work in practice are

1. agreeing if at all possible for female only staff for intimate care (with signed understandings that this may not be possible if no staff can be found)
2. having a relative/friend stay in the room with the patient to help them feel secure
3. signage on room doors asking people to check with the ward manager before entering other than in an emergency
4. Encouraging the patient to record (audio) all interactions with ataff
5. in non emergencies staff to be introduced by a member of staff the patient is familiar with (“this is Ben he is the ward cleaner today”)

She is not saying no men ever.

She is saying she is not willing to accept intimate care from a male nurse during her time in the ICU, and wants to be consulted if a male member of staff needs to work with her.

This was not the reason the hospital kicked off.

They refused her care because in specifying that she wanted female only intimate care she added - following a negative experience with a male member of staff presenting as a woman and demonstrating major boundary and professionality issues - when she said female she needed this to mean biologically female and not male people who identified as women.

Because she has PTSD and is triggered by male people, and will be very vulnerable during her time in the ICU, not because she felt a bit like being an arse.

Think of the degree of special care to the needs and feelings of male members of staff who wish to present as women, and then compare it to the degree of care this hospital is prepared to extend. No discussing, negotiating, planning with her, extending a bit of basic knowledge of PTSD and trauma, just withdrawal of all care on the grounds of her repulsive belief that she has the right to have a boundary against male TQ+ people who wish her to permit access to her body she would not permit to other males.

<Checks watch>

Yep, still running accurately, synched to the point in the thread where people try to derail it to talk about "what FWR is like".

Again. For those that still don't get it.
You do not unilaterally cancel such a procedure at the last minute because someone has asked for something you might not be able to provide, and you even more don't do it because you don't like what they think.

Yet I do feel the hospital was right to turn this lady down on the grounds of her views.

Well, as her views are protected under the Equality Act you're supporting illegal discrimination.

I would support her had she said she wanted female only staff for personal care IF Possible (and staffing meaning it might not be possible and she accepted delays in her care) but she is asking for no males (including no trans identifying males) in her room.

Without prior permission from her - so all your examples of electricians etc would be covered, and presumably she would agree that her consent would also be assumed in emergencies.

That’s not ok - say the the person cleaning the floors is a trans identifying man - she’s not letting him do his job because he’s trans.

No, because he's male.

The hospital have a duty to stop there staff being discriminated against and cleaning floors or serving meals doesn't seem to provide a justification to allow her discrimination under the act.

Single-sex care is provided for under the Equality Act.

And finally you have conveniently elided the questions of a) how reasonable and practical it was for the hospital to accede to her requests, and b) whether it is a sensible response to cancel her life-saving surgery at short notice.

@Sickoffamilydrama the hospital did offer to meet to compromise in there second or third letter.

it’s going to be a lot of work for them though because in her simple male doctors ok, everyone else not she is showing how little she understands about the system and how multi-professional it is. Say the junior doctor on nights is actually not a doctor but a ANP as is so common now, are they included or not (I assume not as there she says “registered doctor” - probably not applicable as it’s a private hospital but her wording would exclude fy1 doctors as they are pre reg).

I think they read her first letter and just though - we can’t manage this- and then sent not the best reply. no way do they want to risk either her then saying they didn’t do what they said they would with providing female staff or probably worse in there eyes getting sued for negligence because she has a worse post op outcome because of all the delays and limitations in her care. You’d need a team of lawyers to draw up the consent forms covering absolutely every angle and most healthcare professionals would say - no not worth it.

And yet the hospital offered her none of those things as you can see if you read the email correspondence.

The CEO just wrote back to her and told her they were cancelling her operation because they didn't agree with her views.

And if you read the thread you will also see that the hospital has a large number of Islamic women patients. Who also have requirements for single sex care.

This woman wasn't asking for anything outlandish or that the hospital does not regularly provide for its female patients. Her operation was cancelled simply because she doesn't think men are women if they say so.

I've been thinking about something the amazing Dr Em said, about how we resort to the shorthand of "intimate care" to preserve patient dignity, and how bad faith actors exploit the careful language we use. What is intimate care? Let's quote from her. She distinguishes very well between nursing care provided to her by both sexes, and intimate care provided by female nurses.

I’m going to respond to Mr Comerford. Even with my broken brain I think I have a better grasp on this ideology and its implications than he does. He has had me blocked for a long time, I’m the wrong kind of woman as I am sans penis. My ‘disgusting’ writing about my disability is available here:Dr Em and Brain Damage, A Full Disclosure.

If me speaking about what it is like to live with a severe disability is ‘disgusting’ to you because I required female only care I don’t think the problem is with my outlook but yours. I had no knowledge or say in who was caring for me, being in a coma. When I was awake I did have male and female nurses change my tubes, feed me, look after me. The NHS is staffed by super heroes. What I was talking about was the need for female only intimate care. I described how as a schoolgirl I was stripped naked and washed by strangers, for months. How I hated it and couldn’t communicate my distress nor move my body away and how it has had a lasting impact. The term ‘intimate care’ obscures what we are talking about. I still get a sense of deep shame and hurt to tell people this. It is not just one’s back,legs and other limbs which are washed, it is your vulva, your breasts. Strangers are touching these parts of you. What about my humanity? My last shred of dignity? This was distressing enough with same-sex nurses, can you imagine what it would have been like having an unknown male do this to me?why disabled women requesting female-only intimate care is not disgusting

And the hospital CEO did offer to meet to find a compromise

After they cancelled her planned operation without any warning on ideological grounds, not even bothering to inform her properly, leaving her to get ill from the stress and distress it caused her.

Some might say the "let's meet to find a compromise" after the fact is purely back covering. They may have realised too late that it wasn't the smartest idea to put in writing a pious statement that you are going to discriminate against someone on the grounds of their protected belief.

@LaughingPriest if a patient asks for something you cannot provide you have to cancel the procedure because otherwise their consent is invalid. Her letter says she is expecting x y and z. She isn’t going to be able to get x y and z so her consent is not informed and so invalid. Only option is to cancel.

the Hospital states that they checked with her specialist and they said a delay was ok

And unfortunately for them it's completely illegal to refuse her life saving treatment on those grounds.

This woman wasn't asking for anything outlandish or that the hospital does not regularly provide for its female patients. Her operation was cancelled simply because she doesn't think men are women if they say so.

This. The CEO put it in writing in her email.

say the the person cleaning the floors is a trans identifying man
Why do words matter? Because I read this as a woman? Others seem to think it's a man. When words no longer have meaning you get this confusion.

So I was going to answer so what, a trans identifying man is a woman therefore no threat?
And still and again for those at the back.
The operation was cancelled because they dont like her thoughts. Fin

if a patient asks for something you cannot provide you have to cancel the procedure because otherwise their consent is invalid.

That is an interesting point, but I find it hard to believe it's that simple. So if another patient said, "I want only kosher food," or "I'm assuming my bathroom will have a bidet", or "I want my husband to be able to visit at any time he likes," and you're not entirely sure you can comply, the reasonable option is to cancel the operation unilaterally, without discussion, because they are taken to have withdrawn their consent?

@SelfPortraitWithFoxInSmokingJacket i think most of my post is why her requirements as she initially stated them are not possible in a safe healthcare system.

No men entering her room rather than female only care is more than what is normally provided in nhs hospitals caring for staff that request female only care (never worked in this particular hospital) which suggests it is out of the usual.

also I am not sure (has it ever been tested in court) that the single sex exemptions with regard to hospitals include hotel like services?

you say it is clear in an emergency that she would allow men in - it is no way clear that she feels this in her letters. And what hospital feels is an emergency and what she feels may be very different.

With regard to her views - they don’t state the values that she holds thay they find objectionable.

My reading of it is that is that she is declining to use the preferred pronouns of people. She can believe as I do that gender is a load of bullshit but she can’t then start referring to hospital staff by the pronouns and names that she wants to. I can hold the protected belief that homosexuality is a sin due to my religion but I can’t then refuse to acknowledge two men are married to each other (as in the case with the marriage registrar).

she also clearly puts doctors on some sort of pedestal which is contrary to my professional values as mandated by my regulator . I believe that my allied health colleagues are my professional equals and these are the values of the hospital in which I work. Patients cannot refuse to see a nurse consultant or a pharmacist prescriber saying they want to see a doctor instead as this is contrary to the hospitals values on professional equality. She cannot say doctors are some special group from which males are allowed but all other groups are lesser. A patient saying this where I work would be told that they can have care from an appropriate practitioner or they can not have care (they can however in non emergencies choose the sex (not gender - this was a fight that was won) of the healthcare professional if one is available.

she also clearly puts doctors on some sort of pedestal which is contrary to my professional values as mandated by my regulator . I believe that my allied health colleagues are my professional equals and these are the values of the hospital in which I work. Patients cannot refuse to see a nurse consultant or a pharmacist prescriber saying they want to see a doctor instead as this is contrary to the hospitals values on professional equality.

What a load of guff to avoid admitting that you know she means she doesn't want a male washing her vulva.

I honestly don’t know how this can be any clearer

its been said eleventy billion times that she didn’t want males doing intimate care and due to her history wanted a heads up if any males were going into her room

If a patient says verbally "I'm assuming my bathroom will have a bidet", or "I want my husband to be able to visit any time he likes” you explain why that isn’t possible and ask if they want to go ahead knowing that (we have kosher food). Bathrooms people get over usually, husbands not being able to stay had led to several people walking out on the day of the procedure as they are not happy to proceed on those grounds. It’s easier face to face to say he can’t do x do you still want to go ahead…..it dosent matter if it’s life saving or not, if the patient wants something not possible and can’t be persuaded to go ahead without it then there is no surgery. We defiantly don’t promise stuff we can’t do and then not deliver - that’s invalid consent.

She didn’t discuss this in advance or at pre op though , she stated what she expected to happen in writing post pre op and worded it in such a way that it sounds as if she had assumed all of this was the case and had booked with them on those grounds. As she had written they replied in writing to say they couldn’t meet her requirements. Should they then have offered a meeting to discuss - yes I think they should have. Is their initially email vague and weird - yes.

do I think this hospital is infiltrated with TRA - possibly. Do I think they discriminated against her due to her gender critical views - possibly. Do i think she is asking for the impossible and there is no way that she will ever be happy with the care provided and so it’s just not worth the risk for the hospital - absolutely. She is going to end up suing because either they didn’t keep the area male free or because her care suffered due to it being male free and so they panicked and cancelled. There now being sued for discrimination kind of proving their point (payout probably less than a massive medical negligence one)