CQC and NHS -"women and birthing people" and "pregnant people"

[Chersfrozenface]

The Care Quality Commission being quoted in a story on thd BBC News site about all too familiar failings in maternity services, this time in Hull.

Nonsense like "[the] design, use of facilities, premises and equipment did not always ensure women and birthing people were safe".

Also the Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust's statement says that since April a number of new staff had been recruited, including a head of midwifery and three consultants, in order to "ensure that pregnant people requiring urgent care are assessed rapidly and appropriately and receive the care they need in a safe and timely way".

Remarkably, the BBC's own text, with the byline "Paul Whitelam & PA Media", when it's not quoting others contains the completely sensible term 'pregnant women'. And Sky News has the story with seemingly almost identical wording. So perhaps we have PA News to thank for that.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-66444802.amp

Oh ffs.

It does not help the population they are intending to signal their righteousness to as most people will read that and mutter through their teeth women. They are all women. You sexist bastards.

It's enraging and exhausting in equal measures. Birthing / pregnant "people". Such drivel from the allegedly intelligent.

Turkeys voting for Xmas.

Maternity care can be shit. And for certain demographics its even worse than shit. Of course hospitals will jump at the chance to remove langauge to talk about minority groups. Why give them that ability? How does that help anyone regardless if identity?

If 100 percent of transmen die giving birth and the statistics can be hidden by recording under the non existence of men giving birth there fore reducing it to a more " acceptable " level and ensuring the hospital doesn't need to investigate their care standards then how does that help anyone ?

None of this helps. Its just removing the ability to talk about what's happening. Transmen etc will not be better off for this ffs.

"birthing / pregnant people" doesn't just include transmen, though.

It also includes NB's and any other of the however many genders. Any female bodied person who doesn't want to he called a woman, basically.

'be called', obviously.

Ah the birthing people, who are all female btw!

What better way to hide the reality of women than expanding their category to people.

Dressing it up in words does nothing whatsoever to change the reality.

I can spend today insisting I'm a tea pot, but the facts are I remain a biological human female, the word for which is 'woman'.

Getting grumpier and grumpier about all this bull, it's bloody exhausting.

Oh, I agree

Only women can birth babies, that's the reality, however much some want to pretend they're something else.

They are of a mammalian species. That's the way mammalian reproduction works, only the females give birth.

The two biggest questions with this stuff for me are informed consent, and insurance.

Can someone who can't even acknowledge biological reality despite doing the most female thing ever truly be considered as competent enough to make their own medical decisions.

And, in the event of a bad outcome , how would malpractice insurance work if it turned out that a patient claimed they were unaware something applied to them, or they didn't understand what the dr meant because instead of using factual and the medical/correct words fir things they were given an "inclusive" explanation instead.

Yes. Your second paragraph is definitely food for thought.

You've got some really good points here.

'Pregnant people' are all biological women. Men cannot give birth. It's ridiculous

Seems it's the CQC which uses that language. Here's snippets from another recent report:

“Also, there were delays in people having elective caesarean sections and induction of labour, which must be addressed as a priority to protect people and babies from coming to harm at such a vulnerable time.
“However, we did find some outstanding practice. For example, at Saint Mary’s Hospital, high dependency nurses provided care and treatment to people who required high dependency care alongside midwives, in four enhanced maternal care rooms.
“Since the inspection the trust have developed an action plan and started to make improvements. We will continue to monitor it closely, including through future inspections, to ensure they have been made and embedded, so people and their babies can receive safe and appropriate care. If this is not happening, we will not hesitate to take further action.”

Emphases are mine.
Not only do they erase the sex-based existence and embodied identities of most of us; they also create less clarity. 'People and their babies' suggests that a) babies are not people and b) that fathers ('impregnators' for the woke) somehow are also possibly receiving care here as they, too, are people who have babies.

I've had a quick look at the report itself and the term used throughout is that I highlighted in the quotes from the CQC in the BBC story - "women and birthing people".

Yes. The examples I quote come from another of their recent reports.

A young woman (aged 31) who I know, is getting married in October, and she said there will be alcohol freeze booze there - for her stepdad - who doesn't drink much and wants to drive back after. She said she is getting it in for him, and because there will be 3 pregnant people there.

It really jarred me and rankled me so much that I felt the hairs stand up on the back of my neck, and the blood rush to my face. I was FEWMIN. I shouted 'SO YOU MEAN WOMEN THEN YOU FUCKING ARSEHOLE?!' (in my head....) Seriously I said nothing to her, but I was so annoyed I had to go to the fridge and crush a few of her grapes ...

😂😂A great explanation of the fury that so many women encounter when our loved ones sign up to ludicrous thinking (especially when it's our children) 😉

LOL yes! This was a colleague. But my (adult) children and (adult) nieces and nephews are the same. The girls/women moreso weirdly!!!

A woman who believes subjective, esoteric things is nonetheless a woman. Non-binary, trans, Jim Jones Adherent, Christian, Hindu, etc., etc., etc.

The objective reality hasn't changed, so it is odd to just alter it as if it had for some select groups.

I find it extraordinary that the NHS is using terms such as chest feeding and birthing/pregnant people when in the outpatient departments of my local hospitals all the men are called to their appointments as Mr John Smith and all the women as Jane Smith. The women are addressed with less courtesy than the men and therefore less favourably than men in the 21st Century. It is an execrable practice and I do not know how it continues to exist within the NHS which seems obsessed with woke inclusion but still fails to treat women as equal to men. I challenge it every time and invariably receive the NHS curated eyeroll. Every time I wrote to the relevant CEO and get a letter back telling me they are working on all aspects of equality. They have had nearly 50 years for this one.

Don't get me on the topic of inadequate pain relief being afforded to women co.parwd to that offered to men.

I simply don't understand how 51% of the population is treated unfavourably when so much is spent on EDI. I might do an FOI request to my local trusts.

Gynophobia. Terrified and appalled even by the word ‘woman’,,it appears.

One of the first things I noticed when I read the article this morning. Sad times.

CQC treating people as individuals (comes under caring)
https://www.cqc.org.uk/assessment/quality-statements/caring/treating-people-individuals

• When people receive care and treatment, all staff must treat them with dignity and respect at all times. This includes staff treating them in a caring and compassionate way.
• All communication with people using services must be respectful. This includes using or facilitating the most suitable means of communication and respecting a person's right to engage or not to engage in communication.
• Staff must respect people's personal preferences, lifestyle and care choices.
• When providing intimate or personal care, provider must make every reasonable effort to make sure that they respect people's preferences about who delivers their care and treatment, such as requesting staff of a specified gender/sex

This one is important. Sex must mean sex, not gender.

• People using the service should be addressed in the way they prefer.

I'd like to be addressed by my name and referred to as a pregnant woman. Or I would if there was any chance of me being pregnant again.

• People using the service must not be neglected or left in undignified situations such as those described in the guidance for Regulation 13(4) below.

I have to be honest and say this is where I am really undecided. As long as they use pregnant women and …., I personally don’t have a problem as it puts 99% of women first so adding extra terms is inclusive.

Pregnant people etc on their own are a big no no.

The problem is this is the thin end of the wedge and so I know it has to be pregnant women.

My pet hate is chest feeding. Breast is a gender neutral word as both male and female humans have breast tissue, all humans can sadly get and die from breast cancer. Breast feeding is therefore a gender neutral word.

Women just have to stop humouring these balloons.

The CQC are relentless pushers of the Kool-Aid. Pronouns in every signature block. When they inspected our unit, the only specific group of patients they cared about were transgender - we didn't get asked about any other protected characteristic or potentially vulnerable group.