Use of “inclusive” language in medical leaflets etc

[TimeandMotion]

As I understand it, one of the pillars of GC thinking is to resist the creeping use of “inclusive” terms in the medical context such as “people with cervixes” or “pregnant people” or “anyone who has ovaries”. I’ve seen examples of this and find the erasure of the word “women” and “female” quite chilling.

What I don’t understand is this: every trans person knows they are trans. They are well aware of what organs they do and don’t possess because they have either been through a complex set of medical procedures, or they have chosen not to transition medically. They have probably been advised during that process (if they had surgery) that they are still at risk of cancers etc in those organs.

Surely a trans man can’t find it that difficult to read a leaflet and say to themselves “I know this says women and I live as a man now but I understand that this applies to me because I have these organs”. Or, conversely, a trans woman thinks “I know this says women but I can ignore it because I live as a woman but I am perfectly aware that I don’t have a uterus”. There is no medical need for each leaflet to remind a trans man that this could apply to him too.

On the other hand, there are women out there who don’t have a good handle of their own biology, whether due to youth or lack of education. It’s important for them to say things like “women are at risk of this disease”. By their very history of having struggled with identity vs sex, trans people do not lack this awareness. And don’t they have any empathy for other members of their chosen gender who need to be protected like this through the use of simple, understandable language?

I know that I am not saying anything new or insightful here, but I am really failing to understand why this medical language thing is a hill that trans people feel the need to die on…or why the NHS have taken this approach.

But I am also painfully aware that what I have just said may well look like a classic example of “look at the words on that leaflet, it’s political correctness gone mad I tell ya”. And I know I’d be the first to say that an official form should, for example, never assume that all married women have husbands, or men wives.

This is the current approach, but this is as a result of campaigning by women on the issue - a couple of years back that would have just read "people with a cervix" with no mention of women

Indeed. An example from 2021 from the Scottish Government/NHS Scotland -

www.heraldscotland.com/politics/19639181.snp-ministers-criticised-urging-anyone-cervix-get-smear-test/

The national radio campaign at the time referred only to 'those with a cervix'.

And of course, when all the links on the NHS Scotland website were being changed to have 'inclusive' language, it was all the conditions which affected women which were changed first, before any changes were made to any conditions which affect men.

Much of the NHS CSP professional guidance now refers to individuals with a cervix https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cervical-screening-programme-and-colposcopy-management/1-introduction-and-programme-policy

If a woman has her medical records changed to male, then the central screening database is also changed to male. She won’t be part of the call/recall system and manual arrangements must be made with the GP Practice, joint responsibility between patient and practice for invitation, result letter, communication with colposcopy if appropriate etc.
This is the programme guidance for trans gender and non binary people
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nhs-population-screening-information-for-transgender-people/nhs-population-screening-information-for-trans-people

Women who no longer have a cervix, and don’t require follow up for treatment are ceased by the practice using either the prior notification list or a standard form (probably both) https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cervical-screening-removing-women-from-routine-invitations

In routine work, request forms arriving marked as male or nb mean additional checks to find out whether the medical records and screening database have been changed. Or it’s just been written on the form but no formal record changes - this makes a difference. If the records at all parts of the system don’t tally it causes problems and it’s important for the patient to get a result and any relevant treatment.

The problem with saying "women and people with xxx" is that means women are considered people as they are seperate from people with a xxx.

Health literacy is poor in most countries. Vital screen services need to do general messaging clearly. Then do specific and specialised messaging for groups that may need it.

All the nonsense about it's just more ink is pointless actually health services need more money to do specialist services.

*aren't considered people. Ffs

“Women, and other people with a xxx” maybe.

Buy them there is probably some issue around “othering..”

Or we be clear that health and sickness are rooted within physical bodies and humans have two sexes male and female.

Here is the procedure for gender change in NHS England England:

pcse.england.nhs.uk/help/patient-registrations/adoption-and-gender-reassignment-processes

It does appear to be quite comprehensive at first glance although transfering cervical screening to the practice for FtM seems a bit risky. Also, prostate cancer is completely ignored.

Also, as has been noted upthread, there is no guarantee that the process is followed by all practices.