Male asked if I am pregnant when donating blood

[slipperypenguin]

I am a GC male. I am a regular blood donor, but today for the first time I was specifically asked by the nurse to confirm if I am / could possibly be pregnant.

I laughed as I thought she was joking as I felt it was obvious I am a biological male and therefore could not possibly be pregnant, but she told me they were "inclusive" and had to confirm.

This was in Scotland at a regular blood donor clinic.

Am I just out of touch with the times or is the world gone man? I can confirmed that I am a male yet am forced to answer this question in order to donate.

If they ask you again next time, say “Yes” with a straight face, and then just see how they react.

That's fair, although I thought that there were limitations on how much they could ask. Essentially looking at the past 6 months etc.

Essentially the question is, should you be forced to answer any question just because it says "blood donation".

If more people refuse to answer ridiculous questions and the NHS sees a drop in donations it may force the NHS to change their policies, and may actually lead to better data recording and better patient safety.

I think thats what he's got offended about, that they havent validated his manliness and have asked him a question he deems only befitting of a woman.

I mean if a 90 year old woman was asked if she was or could be pregnant you wouldnt get a massive outrage thread about it, even tho her dob was evident on her notes.

This is the problem I have with "gender critical men" - they are turning into the new "male feminists".

There are good reasons for people to be gender critical, being mildly inconvenienced by being asked an unnecessary question isnt one of them.

Yes - deliberately inaccurate medical records are a problem.

The NHS could have gone with accurately recording sex and recording if someone is trans. Instead they have changed the records so that it looks like they are the sex that they are not and have no way of knowing if that is correct, even if they look at the patient.

I think small numbers and privacy was always the reasoning but WishIwas is correct that there are quite large numbers in their 20s who identify as trans with variable amounts of 'treatment' and not all with a GRC, so the system is broke.

Which is why they are now asking men if they are pregnant. 🤦‍♀️

@ReunitedThorns I’m not sure what you mean. They ask the questions so that they can see if they will be able to use the blood. Have hiv, cancer or hepatitis no point wasting time donating. Are you pregnant, had a tattoo, had a new partner and had anal? come back in a few months. None of these things seems unreasonable questions before donating.

Offended is an interesting word.

Personally if I am going to trust someone to stick a needle in my vein and draw blood without causing harm I expect he or she to display a professional level of competence in biological science.

Any discussion relating to pregnant men or ability of humans to change sex immediately dissolves that trust.

People get asked this all the time. It’s just a bloody question. Often they can’t see your history and it’s just someone having to fill in a form. But you ‘look’ male so it’s fine. How about people who don’t? We can’t have it both ways.

Melroses · Today 00:09
The NHS could have gone with accurately recording sex and recording if someone is trans. Instead they have changed the records so that it looks like they are the sex that they are not and have no way of knowing if that is correct, even if they look at the patient.

It is beyond belief that this was ever considered reasonable.

It's only a matter of time when a female - who has been allowed to alter medical records to read "male" - dies when a smear test could have resulted in an early diagnosis.

@Thelnebriati I think that you are missing the point that I am making.

Do you know that to assume means that you are supposing that something is true with little or no evidence.

I haven’t supposed something is true of any one on this thread at all. I’ve merely brought up something that I think is valid for consideration based on an impression I have been getting while reading this thread.
Take it or leave it. Assess for your own self whether it is relevant to you or not.

I am not assuming that all people posting here are offended. I am very aware that there are very valid concerns.

I directed my comment to those that are offended or who are reacting as if they are offended. And I stand by my statement that being offended and attacking people is not helpful at all.

And there are comments that are clearly reactions to being offended. There are some comments that are unnecessary attacks on the wrong people. There were pp who reacted to @Wishiwasatailor ‘s comments in an aggressive way that gave the impression that they were offended rather than acknowledging the very helpful facts in their posts.

I’m describing how some previous posters responses/behaviour gives the impression of being offended. I am not making an assumption about their feelings of being offended.

Can you see the difference?

Also, there are pp about people so offended by the question they choose to not give blood rather than answer it.

My pp was also in response to that.

My point is to take a stance but do it in a way that actually makes a positive difference. Not in a way that just negatively impacts on innocent people.

All to satisfy the requisites of 5000 people

Pressed "post" before I was ready.

Would the solution to this really be to include all men in cervical screening, just in case @Wishiwasatailor ? Or would that be a huge waste of resources?

Someone I knew more than a decade ago was asked something along the lines of whether he had had homosexual intercourse. Precisely because of the HIV risk.

@Cailleachian if you had bothered to read any of my follow up posts you would clearly see that I wasn't offended that she may have thought I was a trans male or that she somehow hurt my manliness. That's just a narrative you have created in your own head and it's ridiculous as it's just used as a shut down for any male who is willing to voice a gender critical concern.

She didn't think I was a trans male. She made this clear after we both laughed at the question being asked. Your assumption is wrong.

I was not "offended" and never said I was - that's a word or notion that has been later introduced in this thread through no input of me.

I was not offended but I am concerned. I am concerned this is being pushed as an acceptable part of main stream society that biological males can be pregnant when they cannot. That is a recent change that concerns me, as a father of a daughter, and reinforces other concerns I have about the gender movement. I'm not going to justify or explain that further to you as it's clear you are just a poster who is going to make up your own narrative as to why I have posted or that I was offended for other reasons to suit your own agenda. That's not accurate and it's unfounded and made up in your head - much like the concept people can just change from male to female at free will. :-)

@Cailleachian and also - a question in regards to being pregnant IS only befitting to ask a woman. Biological men cannot get pregnant. Fact.

@DdraigGoch in an ideal scenario when documented sex changes they are sent information regarding smears and it should be offered in a trans friendly setting and if that if they don’t want to be called they can request to be removed but unfortunately they have to request to be added to the list which many don’t know or don’t want

@DdraigGoch when you get a new nhs number after reassignment your medical records are transferred across too to ensure continuity of care, e.g. smears

@slipperypenguin biological males can not get pregnant we all (mostly) agree. However not all biological females are recorded as such and they may also present as male.
There are some masculine looking females (butch lesbian stereotype for example (not meant offensively))
90% of the time at work I’m trying to remember and juggle many things. I can reel off the admission paperwork questions without thinking I don’t need the computer checklist (because we only have one computer on wheels and it’s never charged!) I just tick and cross on a piece of paper. I don’t have the capacity to make a judgement about whether you are a masculine looking female male or feminine male female especially when I could be mistaken I just need the answers so I can move on so I can do my job

@ToffeeEl the recall list for smears is taken from gp records based on sex you change sex you are no longer automatically called for smears

@Wishiwasatailor fair enough my mistake! Other continuity of care then

@Melroses and @Thelnebriati I agree. This is the real crux of the issue.

Wishiwasatailor · Yesterday 23:06
@ScrollingLeaves of course you may ask. I was trying to differentiate between biological sex and sex documented on medical records. I used assigned because as you are aware I work in paeds where I come into contact with many who use this terminology. I agree that simply stating biological rather than assigned is more accurate however I’m sure you appreciate that I have to modify language in certain circumstances

Thank you for answering. I personally wish you would take a lead and not say ‘assigned at birth’ rather than ‘recorded at birth’. I am not sure why working in paeds would mean you come into contact with many who use this terminology? Does paeds not mean paediatric? Are you getting a lot of trans gender identifying children? Are you in a gender clinic?

Im not sure if you are aware but adults can apply to have their sex changed on their medical records, they are then given a new nhs number so if you look them up you would not know their sex was not their biological sex without a bit of digging.

(this was not my personal doing it’s just the system that I am working under)

Thank for explaining. I had not realised that sex could be changed on medical records as I had not realised that the legal lie (I think it is called) of a GRC would be extended to this. One would have thought these would be biologically based, with the change of gender identity recorded separately. I wonder how many patients have misleading NHS records like this?

I can see it is tricky given the falsified records.

On another point, but related to the question, ‘Are you pregnant’, some women must sometimes not realise they are pregnant when they come to give blood.

Creating documented fiction about the facts of life is bound to cause harm.

There was never a need for the NHS to submit to this sort of myth, it doesn't help anyone. Gender could be whatever you want and recorded alongside the scientific fact of sex - records stay accurate and those wishing extra accommodations for varying gender can have those noted and acted on inclusively/kindly etc.

The increasing emergence of people detransitioning and the enormity of the damage done to them together with the increased lifelong medical support they will require will clarify the need for factual records and reason over dogma.

Please do this.

@ScrollingLeaves No I’m not in a gender clinic. Just a regular DGH, I probably meet 1-2 gender questioning kids a shift with a range of gender presentations. You should understand that hospital environments can be quite stressful and we have a very short time to develop trust and build a relationship with that young person. Its not the time to challenge identity with an unwell teen who you need to comply with what is going on and getting their back up because they think I’m not accepting is not helpful. I say assigned because that is common parlance although I think maybe sex at birth is better.
Yeah an additional gender option would probably be helpful.
I think the question was could you be pregnant but I maybe mistaken.