BMA hand-wringing about the Supreme Court ruling

[Opinionpolecat]

The BMA have put out a hand-wringing statement about the Supreme Court ruling.
They say "access to care should not be determined by a perceived hierarchy of rights." That's right BMA, men's feelings that "require" them to be on women's wards, in women's changing rooms and women's toilets are not more important than women's need for privacy, dignity, and safety when they are patients or staff in the NHS. You need to wake up to the fact that women have rights too.

They say there is increased pressure on the NHS because of the need to find alternative accommodation for trans patients, all because men can no longer be placed on women's wards. They say "we support informed, respectful, discussion by medical professionals of the best ways to manage individual patients, taking a patient-centred approach, which respects their dignity, autonomy, and human rights". It's a shame they didn't take this approach when it came to respecting the dignity, autonomy, and human rights of women to single sex spaces.

They talk about a BMA report which showed high levels of transphobia experienced by NHS staff, but completely fail to mention the high levels of sexism, sexual harassment, and sexual assault experienced by female doctors and medical students, collected by organizations like Surviving in Scrubs. They also fail to mention the ingrained sexism within the BMA, which was revealed by the Romney report, and which they clearly are still perpetuating.

They say "our commitment to supporting our trans and non-binary members, and the wider community of medical professionals and patients remains unwavering." It's a shame they have no commitment to support female BMA members, the wider community of female medical professionals and female patients whose right to single sex spaces had been taken away from them, and continues to be denied to them by the NHS.

https://www.bma.org.uk/news-and-opinion/statement-of-support-for-doctors-affected-by-the-supreme-court-ruling

@Opinionpolecat Hope you're going to send a version of your critique to BMA!

It is so terrible that women have rights too, that can't be obliterated to indulge men.

I mean we don't want the wretched sex class to have privacy, dignity, equality, that kind of thing, but the horrible SC made us.

In 2022, a BMA report in collaboration with GLADD revealed that almost half (49%) of trans respondents working in the NHS had directly suffered from transphobia at least once in the past two years and almost a quarter (24%) had experienced verbal attacks or name calling.

as noted above, I would be interested in the proportion of women staff who had experienced sexism, and the overall percentage of staff who have experienced name calling.

Looking forward to seeing what Hannah Barnes has to say about this. I really think it's time that doctors got together and booted these few rogue TAs out of the union. They keep pretending to represent the entire BMA and yet time after time it turns out they have made statements that were never put to a vote of the members.
They are bringing the entire medical profession into disrepute.
And what happened to their review of the Cass review? I thought it was supposed to be published last year.

And was transphobia misgendering and being recognised as male in instances when sex matters?

I really want organisations to stop framing additional privileges as human rights. Far too much emphasis is placed on the safety and dignity of one group to the detriment of other groups safety and dignity. They continue to ignore the lack of symmetry.

Well yes

’define transphobia’ is my first response when someone complains of suffering from it. Comprehending a person’s sex and treating them appropriately in situations where sex matters is obviously not transphobia.

Wow! Women really don’t feature in their priorities at all do they?

I wonder what this ‘transphobia’ they record consists of. As we know a nurse was disciplined for referring to a male paedophile as ‘Mr’ (ignoring the fact that he racially abused her apparently using the n word).

Hospitals have also withdrawn treatment and ejected female patients from hospital for asking politely for a space away from men.

We have also seen male nurses that clearly fetishise the uniforms of female nursing staff and as we’ve seen with the current court cases, insist on inserting themselves into women’s spaces like changing rooms with a view to watching women change.

It seems that any objection to gross male behaviour is labelled transphobia if the man claims a trans identity.

This is the heart of it. Unions now devoid of everyone but a small number of extremists with a Plan. For all the shouting about diversity they are really quite fantastically undiverse in terms of representation of ages, opinions, beliefs and life experiences, and highly prejudiced against many of those.

If it is discussed here then it might influence writing any related reports and letters to the BMA (a good thing).

It's just such a bloody nuisance that women have rights. Life would be so much simpler if we didn't as, iirc, our old friend RMW recently said.

And if there are so very few trans, why do they need all this effort put into their wellbeing?

They say "access to care should not be determined by a perceived hierarchy of rights." That's right BMA, men's feelings that "require" them to be on women's wards, in women's changing rooms and women's toilets are not more important than women's need for privacy, dignity, and safety when they are patients or staff in the NHS. You need to wake up to the fact that women have rights too.

These ^^

Always the loss of women’s rights and negative impact on women somehow just not seen, not considered nor computed… it’s this more than anything else that tells us just how little women’s comfort and safety means to men. It is always men’s needs and wants first and foremost.

GP and BMA member here. I'm embarrassed at them. Don't feel I can leave as they are making some progress on important GP issues but this is nonsense.

That fucking nonsense about the "perceived hierarchy of rights" - implying that the rights of women are being given higher status than those of trans people! What a perverse misreading of the Equality Act! Everyone, trans or not, male or female, is equally protected under the Equality Act from discrimination on the grounds of sex. The act made no statement whatsoever prioritising the rights of women. It simply clarified that ,for the purposes of the Act, transwomen's sex is male, and that their trans-related protections are fully defined by the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, not by a legal fiction of femaleness.

The practical consequence of this ruling is that where single-sex spaces are required to avoid disadvantaging women (or men), single sex means just that. It doesn't mean that the PC of gender reassignment is less important. It simply means that trans people's needs must be met in different ways.

It is easy to imagine parallel situations in which it is important for a space to be for gender-reassigned people only, e.g. a drop-in centre for transwomen, set up to combat social isolation resulting from trans-ness. If a woman tried to muscle her way into that space , she could quite legally and properly be refused access, on the grounds that merely being a woman doesn't make her a transwoman.

No hierarchy of rights in either case, just the activation of different PCs under the Act

I have posted my thoughts on this a few times on other threads - but I believe that transphobia isn't technically possible...

phobia = fear (annoyance / frustration / anger / sadness - all yes, fear, less likely unless large male in women's space I guess!)

trans = transition - we know scientifically that you can't physically transition from male to female or vice versa - and if referring to gender, we also know that you can't transition gender, all you do is change society's perception of your sex...

so transition is a very inaccurate word and transphobia is not technically possible.

What we are seeing is just more word guff used to play an emotional and bullying game where logic fails - the minute you put the word phobia into a conversation it pre-supposes bias / bullying / aggression / harassment from the other side (the women in this case) - it is a good example of using language to try and change / distort the reality - it is deliberately chosen and used as a weapon.

All that we can do in response is to take people back to the building blocks of truth - what is possible and what is not - to reclaim words for their dictionary meanings and to challenge and not allow the misuse of language to suggest a different reality.

not easy, but worth fighting for.

the overall report is a good example of dreadful logic, assumption, changed reality.

• there is no pressure on the NHS - everyone has a natal sex and wards are already set up on that basis.
• there is no transphobia - they don't get to classify conversations as they wish to suggest a reality that doesn't exist - calling a man a man is not transphobia, it is reality / using correct pronouns is not misgendering - it is reality

However there are plenty of examples in the NHS of sexism / harassment / aggression / intimidation towards women - including the same scenarios that they then classify as transphobic...

"Taking a patient-centred approach" appears to mean, to the BMA, centring the needs (or wants) of a particular patient without considering the needs (or wants) of other patients. Such a good example of words which sound lovely but don't have a clear meaning.

I agree with a PP that it would be great if the OP could send her views to the BMA. If they mean what they say - "access to care should not be determined by a perceived hierarchy of rights" - they need to stop putting trans rights front and centre while ignoring the other protected characteristics, including sex.

I agree with all the above points, I'd just like to add that it's unfortunate that the title 'BRITISH MEDICAL ASSOCIATION' sounds so formal and authoritative and institutional. I've seen pro-trans commentators saying things like 'But the BMA have stated..' as if that meant that the entire might of the medical profession was behind the statement.

I understand that GPs like bluecurtains14 are stuck with them as their trade union, and I sympathise because like so many other trade unions, they can be good on some work-related issues, and on the other hand, absolutely in thrall to genderwoo

DB has left the BMA over their stance on this - he just couldn’t justify household income going to them (plus SIL and DM are both quite vocal on this!). Instead he’s joined the Hospital Consultants Association (which you don’t actually have to be a consultant to join) as they seem slightly less insane. Appreciate that’s probably not an option for the PP who is a GP.

Also left the BMA due to their stance on this. Shocked but not surprised at this latest nonsense. Similar drivel emanating from my local trust who are of course, standing with the community who have been affected by this judgement, but not apparently standing with all the women who have been affected by their illegal policies for the past decade or so.

As per previous poster, the HCSA is another union that hospital specialists can join, but is not open to GPs unfortunately.

Unions have been abusing women for years.

Difficult to understand the benefits of joining a union that has such a flawed understanding of equality legislation.

The HCSA is great @MyMPfinallyreplied - they are interested in pay, working conditions and employment law. And nothing else.

When I had to contact them I was immediately assigned a professional case worker, no going through AskBMA or relying on a union rep. They were incredibly supportive and effective.

Another one fixed.

This is all I ask:

Equality: both groups affected are referenced equally.

Inclusion: both groups affected are included.

You want to know what's distressing, BMA? Your statement. This is prejudice, and it frightens me.

Statement of support for trans people and women affected by the Supreme Court ruling

by the BMA

We reaffirm our commitment to supporting trans and female members, and the wider community of medical professionals and patients

Location: UK

Published: Thursday 29 May 2025

The recent Supreme Court ruling has undoubtedly had a profound effect on many individuals and communities. Since the announcement of this decision many of our members have shared their feelings of uncertainty, distress and concern for the future. We acknowledge that this is a direct result of our having misinterpreted the Equality Act 2010 across an extended period. Many female employees are likely to be distressed by this realisation. Meanwhile, many trans employees are facing the similarly distressing revelation that they have been led to believe they had access to facilities and services that were, in fact, not for them, and our consequent failure to plan to provide alternative facilities and services to the best of our ability.

The public and political narrative about the effect of the ruling presents a ‘biological woman’ vs ‘trans woman’ issue. The health sector is limited in resources but access to care should not be determined by a perceived hierarchy of rights. The ruling will not change the problem of lack of available facilities in the NHS and may put more pressure on services to find alternative accommodations for trans patients who could not be accommodated safely or with privacy in accommodations which align with their birth sex. Such provision is something we now recognise is in line with the law and necessary to the safety and privacy of women. A lack of available funds does, and can never, justify a national institution's systematic removal of a demographic's legal entitlements. As such, we regret not having acknowledged this conflict previously, and not working to pre-empt the current concerns regarding provision for trans people.

The reality is that greater resources are needed for the NHS to guarantee the privacy and dignity of every patient. At the practical level we support informed, respectful discussion by medical professionals of the best ways to manage individual patients, taking a patient-centred approach, which respects their dignity, autonomy, and human rights.

In 2022, a BMA report in collaboration with GLADD revealed that almost half (49%) of trans respondents working in the NHS had directly suffered from transphobia at least once in the past two years and almost a quarter (24%) had experienced verbal attacks or name calling. Likewise, statistics indicate that female employees also face misogyny not limited to verbal and name-calling attacks, but extending to physical violence and rape. It is imperative any amendments to NHS and EHRC guidelines and policies reflect this harsh reality and actively incorporate the voices of trans staff and trans patients, and female staff and female patients, with explicit consideration of how they will have dignified access and experiences of the healthcare environment.

Our commitment to supporting our trans and non-binary and female members, and the wider community of medical professionals and patients remains unwavering. For trans and non-binary and female doctors and medical students, it is important they continue to feel they can train and work in inclusive environments, free from hate and discrimination.

If you are experiencing any form of discrimination, harassment, or emotional distress because of the recent Supreme Court ruling, please know the BMA is here for you (see below for how to contact us).

To support you better, we would like to hear from doctors and medical students who have been impacted by the Supreme Court ruling – please contact us at [email protected]

Together, we can uphold the principles of justice, equality and compassion.

Cool! I got a black box!

Nooo! Edited, and the cool black box disappeared!

Trying to get it back...

This is all I ask:

	Equality: both groups affected are referenced equally.

	Inclusion: both groups affected are included.