Princess Grace hospital cancelled vital surgery for woman who requested single-sex care

reported

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Exactly. The rights and wrongs of private medicine, or of what people should be able to pay for are separate to the ethical issue about a hospital agreeing to something they cannot provide, or if they can, that they are not prepared to ensure will happen. It doesn't matter whether the request is reasonable or not. If someone asks for George Clooney to operate in pink scrubs the hospital should explain that this is not possible before taking the money.

My understanding from what I remember reading at the time is that the hospital itself was not directly culpable at the time of the incident - it was (I think) the nurse who chose to enter the room, knowing that the patient had expressly asked that this should not happen. At that point the hospital should have taken action.

Whatever a patient asks for, they should be informed honestly whether they will, or will not, get it.

Passing off a male person (transwoman) as female is dishonest.

The rights of the patient should be put first, to at least have honest communication from a hospital, not the 'right' of male people to pretend to be female.

Private medicine is unfair . if you can pay you can jump queues, get appointments at times to suit your schedule, see the consultant you want and have privacy in hospital, and of course that's unfair to those who can't (and potentially fatal to those being pushed out of the queue).

That's a separate discussion, but if you accept all of those things, there is little difference if you want to specify the sex of the team treating you.

I am sorry but I don't see how anyone can insist or a purely male or female surgeon and team. If you get that by paying privately that's unfair for those that can't. I never wanted men examining me intimately but had no choice if I wanted treatment unless I suffered the consequences.,The NHS is stretched enough.

It is a problem though, if people end up turning down surgery because they can't trust the hospital to honour their wishes.

As has been said, I'm not saying that everyone should be able to choose the staff who treat them based on age, sex, race or anything - particularly on the NHS. But if someone explicitly says that they only want a female environment and is prepared to pay to get that, it should be honoured, or at least they should be told it ca't be before someone walks in on them in the middle of a sensitive examination.

Surgery couldn't have been that important, their decision so no problem..

If trans people were honest about which sex they are, regardless of their clothing, hair etc, there would be less ill-feeling towards them.

If someone asked for black staff, or Jewish staff, or anything else, and was assured that was what they'd have, they would be quite upset to get someone who was clearly not what was promised.

A main point of this case is that the woman had good reason for her request and was assured it would be met.

Another is that an intimate, physical examination should not be interrupted by someone popping their head in the door.

volver

Ah sorry, one post then I'm off before the shouting starts...

Does anyone think it's acceptable to say that you won't accept a nurse of any description because you don't accept their "pronouns"?

Would it be OK to say you don't want Nurse X because they are black, or Jewish? Then publish a whole Twitter thread about how you got the hospital to change their minds? If I needed life saving surgery I'd have anybody I could on the medical team.

Whole things gone bonkers.

Totally agree - I'd accept medical support from any medical person!

We have a trans paramedic working on our local ambulances who said that some patients have refused to be treated by her.
(Even though they would be happy with either a male or female paramedic??)

Lathyrus
So why would anyone resist that?

I don’t know, but I’m sure I’ll be told.

“I am”obviously not Ian 🤭

As many abuse survivors relate, the initial approach is very often, “Ian your friend. I care about you.” Then “don’t tell anyone or they will send me/you away”.

We have to be so vigilant. Abusers are clever, many are charming, likeable people than instil trust both in those they abuse and those who could protect.

I can’t understand this reluctance for robust systems, that function without regard to individual personalities or emotional responses, to be put in place.

If such systems are in place then any group such as trans is being decried unfairly, can show that accusations are false. And those who are concerned about abuse can have confidence that everything is being done to prevent it.

It’s a win/win.

So why would anyone resist that?

Sometimes it can be easier to carry out abuse if the victim likes, feels at ease with and trusts the perpetrator, which is why Lathyrus is correct when she says safeguarding must be more robust than a reliance on feelings.

😬

I think we both know I didn’t say anything of the sort.

Lathyrus

Glorianny

Lathyrus

But management can only provide female only care if they know who is female.

Of course there have been abusive female carers and medical staff too, as I have reason to know. But it is a safeguarding issue to be fully aware of the types of abuse, like rape, that are a possibility so that alarm bells can be rung.

I, in posts I have held, have accepted and agreed that in a position of responsibility, where children and vulnerable adults are concerned some of my right to privacy has to be given up. Advanced checks, previous names, previous positions held, disclosure of offences, information on close relatives or relationships are all standard practice in some positions.

Surely checks of the same standard should be in place in all places were vulnerable adults and children can be targeted?

Surely they are? Isn't that what DBSs do?

As for elderly care if someone is uncomfortable with a carer or nurse and isn't able to say so to staff shouldn't the relatives speak for them? And if it is males that make someone uncomfortable a transwoman might be quite acceptable, if the patient accepted and liked her

Actually I think, where someone has limited capacity, accepting and liking, a carer could render them all the more vulnerable to abuse. I believe this is true and is borne out in accounts by survivors of abuse who had full capacity even.

Safeguarding shouldn’t rely on the feelings of f either person. It has to be much more robust than that.

So are you saying that a patient has to accept care from someone simply because they've been passed through a safeguarding system? Because you think that someone they like is more likely to abuse them. So what choice does the patient get?

Glorianny

Lathyrus

But management can only provide female only care if they know who is female.

Of course there have been abusive female carers and medical staff too, as I have reason to know. But it is a safeguarding issue to be fully aware of the types of abuse, like rape, that are a possibility so that alarm bells can be rung.

I, in posts I have held, have accepted and agreed that in a position of responsibility, where children and vulnerable adults are concerned some of my right to privacy has to be given up. Advanced checks, previous names, previous positions held, disclosure of offences, information on close relatives or relationships are all standard practice in some positions.

Surely checks of the same standard should be in place in all places were vulnerable adults and children can be targeted?

Surely they are? Isn't that what DBSs do?

As for elderly care if someone is uncomfortable with a carer or nurse and isn't able to say so to staff shouldn't the relatives speak for them? And if it is males that make someone uncomfortable a transwoman might be quite acceptable, if the patient accepted and liked her

Actually I think, where someone has limited capacity, accepting and liking, a carer could render them all the more vulnerable to abuse. I believe this is true and is borne out in accounts by survivors of abuse who had full capacity even.

Safeguarding shouldn’t rely on the feelings of f either person. It has to be much more robust than that.

Sadly not all the elderly in receipt of care have relatives or anyone else for that matter to speak for them. For someone to decide whether or not they are happy to have a transwoman attend to them, they would have to know that they are trans.

But management can only provide female only care if they know who is female exactly, and those receiving care can only know if they are being attended too by females, if they know their carers are female.

Lathyrus

But management can only provide female only care if they know who is female.

Of course there have been abusive female carers and medical staff too, as I have reason to know. But it is a safeguarding issue to be fully aware of the types of abuse, like rape, that are a possibility so that alarm bells can be rung.

I, in posts I have held, have accepted and agreed that in a position of responsibility, where children and vulnerable adults are concerned some of my right to privacy has to be given up. Advanced checks, previous names, previous positions held, disclosure of offences, information on close relatives or relationships are all standard practice in some positions.

Surely checks of the same standard should be in place in all places were vulnerable adults and children can be targeted?

Surely they are? Isn't that what DBSs do?

As for elderly care if someone is uncomfortable with a carer or nurse and isn't able to say so to staff shouldn't the relatives speak for them? And if it is males that make someone uncomfortable a transwoman might be quite acceptable, if the patient accepted and liked her

But management can only provide female only care if they know who is female.

Of course there have been abusive female carers and medical staff too, as I have reason to know. But it is a safeguarding issue to be fully aware of the types of abuse, like rape, that are a possibility so that alarm bells can be rung.

I, in posts I have held, have accepted and agreed that in a position of responsibility, where children and vulnerable adults are concerned some of my right to privacy has to be given up. Advanced checks, previous names, previous positions held, disclosure of offences, information on close relatives or relationships are all standard practice in some positions.

Surely checks of the same standard should be in place in all places were vulnerable adults and children can be targeted?

Firstly I think anyone should be able to request the care they feel they need and the carers they prefer.
I simply posted my mum's experiences because they contrast with the warnings about elderly care being given out. I think if we are not to discuss the subject properly and only discuss certain aspects of care then a skewed picture emerges which, especially on a site like GN, could be worrying for some people.
My worst experience of care came from a female nurse we nicknamed "the dragon" who when my mum was first admitted virtually accused me of hiding the fact that she was incontinent (she wasn't). The nurse was rude, demanding and scary. But much later when I discussed a DNR with her and my mum was seriously ill she changed completely. So it isn't just the nurse or the gender that matters some nurses and carers are better at certain stages of life.

Rosie51 I am sorry your aunt received poor care. Can I ask why you didn't point out her discomfort to staff and ask for a different nurse.? My mother at 94 was still capable of telling staff when she didn't want to be touched or managed and often did so. Had she not been capable I would have taken over supervision of her care as I did many of the other things we had problems with, like her diet.

Quite. Care for people like my daughter is not a temporary situation, it's a long term one and unfortunately the abuse statistics speak for themselves hence why there are laws around female only personal care. My daughter is lucky that she has me to advocate for her as lots of other women don't receive advocacy at all and they are left with people making their own interpretations of law.

I could go into more detail about things that have happened to us/her directly when poor decisions have been made but she requires a degree of confidentiality.

I'm sorry if people think I have been unkind. I have received male care myself but I have a choice and I have mental capacity

I may be reading this wrongly Janejudge, but a great concern for you is that your daughter would be unable to tell anyone if her care was inappropriate?

That has to raise extra safeguarding issues.Management and other staff at least have to know (I can’t put this any other way) that penetration is a possibility so that any signs noticed by other Carers are not just dismissed as that couldn’t have happened because all her carers are women.

When dealing with children and vulnerable adults who are unable to protect themselves we all have a responsibility to insist that safeguards are in place.

Wow Glorianny!
Don’t you think quality of the care is about how it makes the patient feel - both mentally and physically?
Or are you now the arbiter of what’s OK?
So if you think it’s OK, then it’s OK for everyone.