Doctors’ union votes for ‘identity-based care’ despite warning over lawfulness

[IwantToRetire]

The doctors’ union has voted for transgender patients to have “identity-based care” and called for this approach to be embedded into training.

But the British Medical Association (BMA) has been warned the move risks going against the law, after the Supreme Court ruling in April that the terms woman and sex in the 2010 Equality Act “refer to a biological woman and biological sex”.

At the BMA’s annual representative meeting in Liverpool on Wednesday, a majority of members voted in favour of a motion said to centre on “respect, safety and dignity” of LGBTQ+ doctors and patients.

From https://www.impartialreporter.com/news/national/25267354.doctors-union-votes-identity-based-care-despite-warning-lawfulness/

The article is confusing and I feel like perhaps the motion was confusing too.

Why does the motion cover both patients and staff?

And what does it cover in respect of patients? I believe that a trans woman who is a patient should have the right to request a female doctor. (A man who is a patient may also have reasons for wanting to request a female doctor, for example, if he has been raped by another man.) Female doctors treat male patients all the time so I can't imagine it would be difficult to find one willing to accommodate the request. But I don't believe that trans women should have the right to request, for example, a gender affirming smear test. I believe that trans mens should be allowed to be referred to as though they are men whilst having a smear test if this makes them more comfortable receiving necessary sex based care.

The situation in respect of staff is completely different. If transgender staff don't feel comfortable using single sex changing facilities for members of their own sex then efforts should be made to find a third space. Other staff and patients should not be forced to pretend that transgender staff members are the opposite sex in situations where it is to their own detriment, for example, nurses wanting single sex changing rooms or female patients wanting a female doctor.

The formatting of the article also makes it look like (the brilliant) Louise Irvine was urging fellow members to vote in favour of the motion, when actually she argued against it.

Thank you

I believe that a trans woman who is a patient should have the right to request a female doctor.

Again, though, we see the inequality between sexes. Males requesting female doctors has a whole different set of issues than females requesting female doctors, or females requesting male doctors, even.

This is not the rabbithole I needed this morning.

www.sciencefocus.com/science/is-water-wet

Well, yes, but I think that if you are not willing to treat a patient of the opposite sex you are probably in the wrong profession, whereas you don't get to choose not to be a patient.

If the patient is particularly problematic then it may be necessary to have more staff than usual present to ensure that the doctor is protected.

Uh oh! I shouldn’t have clicked on your link as I’m now down there with you and my flabber is well and truly gasted😲

How they gonna treat a prostate cancer that 'identifies' as a non-existent female medical mystery? I almost hope they DO stick to this. It'd negatively impact exactly the adults who deserve to meet reality head-on. But in truth I expect it'll just end up harming yet more vulnerable girls. It always does, no matter what the nature of the issue of the day - the net result is always girls and women being harmed.

So we take it seriously. Very seriously.
Doctors in league need to be FLOODED with women temporarily 'identifying as men' and insisting that they need men's medical care: Viagra, prostate screening, anything non-invasive and harmless. Tie them up in bullshit demands daily. Waste their time without mercy to demonstrate the sheer stupidity of this ruling, and go to the press immediately if you're denied 'gender affirming care' or if they dare treat you as a woman.

Two can play this game. But it's more effective if thousands play.

PractisingMyTelekenipsis · Yesterday 22:52

Are you my son?

Only of you're posting from The Other Side!

P.S. does anyone know what a Napwizard is? I daren't Google... someone who's really good at 7 Card Whist?

It's zis' Gender Identity.

Lol idk, another bullshit occupation these people fabricate. Unprofessional and does not inspire confidence.

I'm hoping this will merely be "politeness" rather than full on treatment of man as woman with female issues ha.

Morning Susan, bend over for your prostate check. Better take the tights off first though luv. OK, what eyeshadow are you using these days, those Bic razors are useless for chin hairs aren't they. Ok,you can pull those silk knickers up now and I'll post the results to your email. Lovely to meet you Susan, bye now.

Or something like that.

I think it’s just a funny name for an anaesthetist, which is what he is.

I wonder what other specialists call themselves?

'defined as care and policies that actively account for the individual’s lived, intersecting identities (including sexuality, gender, neurodivergence, race, and cultural background)'
In other words, treat people as individuals.

Unlike most of the people on these threads, Doctors have to deal with real, vulnerable people in real life, not some theoretical everytrans.
Of course they should respect the stated identity of that person.

The comments on this thread are so over the top and ridiculous

The BMA and the NEU both really discredit their professions now.....and are one of the major reasons their professions are losing public respect and trust. They don't act like professionals committed to their work, they act more as political agitators who care not much for their pupils and patients at all. And then they have the nerve to strike for pay rises and more respect.

What does this mean though? My son is in a relationship with a trans man. I respect his gender identity. I've also reminded DS that pregnancy is a potential risk. Because sometimes biology matters more.

How revolutionary.

So what's all the fuss about? All these over the top comments just because doctors want to treat patients in the way that best suits their needs.

Yes, what DOES it mean? Operationalise the term. Does it mean Call them by the preferred bloody pronouns while treating them medically by their actual sex? Does it mean pretending they're treating a woman and role-playing a gyenological exam on an intact adult male? It's easy to say Respect Their Identity! but what does this actually mean?

Yes, what DOES it mean? Operationalise the term. Does it mean Call them by the preferred bloody pronouns while treating them medically by their actual sex? Does it mean pretending they're treating a woman and role-playing a gyenological exam on an intact adult male? It's easy to say Respect Their Identity! but what does this actually mean?

Is it respectful to remove and incinerate a teenage girl's perfectly healthy breasts? Please don't try to tell us that isn't happening. It's medically documented everywhere including in the American Journal of Pediatrics - Pediatrics, the branch of medicine dealing with CHILDREN.

Times link doesn't seem to work. Think this is it:
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/healthcare/article/bma-in-turmoil-over-abysmal-handling-of-cass-review-critique-bfr39t6qv

Also in full at https://archive.is/HXr5b