"We need to take the mentally ill patients out of mental health care because they are too dangerous..."
This shows just how much bollocks you spout and how little understanding of the world you have.
I'm sure transmen don't want to acknowledge they are female. The trouble is they are female and it's integral to their mental health, partly because hormone imbalances can send you crackers (Been there, done that, got the t-shirt), because being in a state of constantly pretending to be something you are not is straining on your mental health and because a constant desire to be something you are not or achieve something impossible will send you mental. In terms of pathological avoidant type behaviour - which this is - a form of extreme anxiety you can't get better without dealing with it head on. That means exposure to being told you are female and coming to peace with it. This is the treatment for other types of extreme phobia which have become so problematic they effect everyday functioning. Yet this is the one thing that isn't 'allowed' if trans. This attitude basically keeps deeply unwell women in a permanent state of mental illness.
It's akin to wanting to have treatment for cancer but not wishing to have invasive surgery because it upsets you to admit you have a tumour. Saying you don't want surgery doesn't help. No one wants surgery, but they just have to suck it up.
This is the same. They may not want to be referred to as female and treated as female, but unfortunately this isn't optional and I want shouldn't be getting.
Not only does it place the women in question at risk, but you have a myriad of other people directly and indirectly affected by her saying I'm a man and those who have responsibility nodding along like Muppets going 'yes of course'.
We have staff who no doubt saw this coming and felt unable to challenge who are deeply upset and traumatised. You have other patients who may have witnessed this who are deeply affected - you know mentally ill vulnerable patients. You have the men themselves who are responsible - who were mentally ill at the time but still had some capacity who really should have been put somewhere else because they were dangerous. They have the paradox of being vulnerable at the same time to acting on their unacceptable behaviours because they were enabled by fuckwits. You have all the patients affected by this court case and how it impacts on costs and staff out of the ward. You have everyone here deeply affected and numerous women who will avoid mental health care because they don't trust it and are concerned they may come across men - it means their mental health is more likely to hit crisis before getting help against their will when early intervention would have been better. The trust in HCP generally is a huge harm.
There are times when 'i want' shouldn't get. When there is no way to avoid the reality of a situation and it has to be confronted head on.
If you have bowel cancer, you almost certainly will face the indignity of having something shoved up your arse at some point. There are some issues which can not protect your dignity at all times.
You can't change mental health wards in the sense that you are going to have a bunch of people in them who are immediately going to identify your sex. Yes they should be more staffed. But ultimately you still have to identify the female patient. You can't protect them unless you do. You have to treat them differently.
How viable is it to protect a female patient in a male mental health ward with the best will in the world? These are men who don't have inhibitions and often display sexualised behaviour due to their condition. Is it reasonable to expect one to one protection for all transpatients? Is that equality of care for all patients? Maybe many of the other patients would benefit from one to one. We don't put mental health patients in isolation unless there's very good reason as there's an inherent danger to isolation for their own well being. Given that staffing ratios are appalling as it is, where are you going to take a member of staff from in order to enable one to one protection for a transperson? And how does this stop the comments of other patients or inappropriate flashing behaviour of other patients which still presents a risk to the patient b
So we have to put patients somewhere. We should be putting them in sexed wards because this is reflective of the levels of risks to and presented by males and females.
It's tough shit if you don't like it.
Women in Intensive care can't get single sex provision for good reason - they by nature need high staffing ratios. Why should women who want to be men get inappropriate care and be put at risk (and put others in positions where harm is likely) because they don't like it. It's not a good enough reason to allow it.
There are times where not only is it appropriate to say no we can't accommodate that, but actually we have good reason why it's harmful to you to say no because you need to deal with it or it will cause even more harm.
This is one.
The fact staff aren't doing this is awful. They are failing transpatients. It is one thing to want to be called male at certain times but at others you HAVE to acknowledge reality when it's appropriate. This isn't kind to fail to do. It's actively cruel and harmful.
The clearest thing here is you have zero experience of the mental health system nor had serious mental health issues yourself. It's totally speaking out of arse.
It's like saying we should stop murderers being in nasty because it makes prison dangerous.
Honestly all you do is show the unbelievable level of privilege and entitlement trans ideology is built upon.