NHS U turn on trans terminology

Glorianny

CRUK think transmen and non-binary people are discriminated against
news.cancerresearchuk.org/2021/05/18/research-shows-one-size-doesnt-fit-all-for-cervical-screening-in-the-trans-and-non-binary-community/

'According to Stonewall' they are discriminated against. They don't have the last word either, particularly now.

If someone is born female they know, assuming that they are able to organise transition to transmale, that they have a cervix. They are, therefore able to ask for a smear test if their records list them as male (which would be foolish, both on their own part and on that of their doctors, but still). If they have organised things so that they are not routinely called for women's health screening and do not ask for one separately, the fact that they don't get one is not discriminatory. It is their own irresponsibility.

If, OTOH, a woman who does not identify as a man has English as a second language, doesn't know what 'cervix-haver' means and misses out because of this, she is being discriminated against.

Trans men would be called for routine checks if their medical records recorded their biological sex so perhaps this is something that needs to be addressed.

Yes, the general use of the language is to be banned but that does not mean that patients on an individual basis will not be able to be addressed in the way they prefer, as you were when you requested not to be addressed as 'mother', preferring to be addressed by your name.

I fear we are wasting our time, Smileless. We've all been over this numerous times and nothing changes.

The article quoted in the OP sets out a new constitution. I (along with others) am pleased about that, see it as a step in the right direction and hope it is the first of many. Glorianny does not.

Neither of us is making policy, and I assume that nobody on this thread has access to the figures and research used to come to the conclusions that have led to the changes. The OP simply reports the situation as it is, as it appeared in the Telegraph. It's not an opinion piece, it's a report.

Smileless2012

Trans men would be called for routine checks if their medical records recorded their biological sex so perhaps this is something that needs to be addressed.

Yes, the general use of the language is to be banned but that does not mean that patients on an individual basis will not be able to be addressed in the way they prefer, as you were when you requested not to be addressed as 'mother', preferring to be addressed by your name.

Sometimes the use of a term is unacceptable. Suppose you had divorced and remarried would you be happy for. a doctor to insist you were always known by your exe's name?
Transmen do not want to be recorded as women or to be addressed as such.

The equivalent would be if NHS staff were banned from using the term Mrs and I had to be mother.

Should health care ever be rationed to those who use certain language?

I read your link Glorianny but any so called scientific based article that talks about sex assigned at birth is to be read with some scepticism . The midwife, doctor or indeed parent doesn't get to randomly assign the baby's sex, it is observed and if there is any doubt then a simple DNA test is conducted which will 100% verify the infant's sex. And as for cisgender, why are the vast majority of people to be labelled just to validate those who try to deny their sex? I totally reject that descriptor.
That aside, when people decide they want their biological sex markers altered on their medical records they must take responsibility for being included in the wrong sex category. Keep the true sex marker and the transgender status can be added as an extra detail. Then they will be called for the appropriate screenings.
Having your sex marker wrongly recorded in medical records has dangers far beyond screening programs. Many medical problems present differently in men and women, tests for certain conditions have different acceptable levels in men and women. Why would you risk your health by providing false information? We all know if we have one ounce of intelligence that you cannot change your biological sex. You can pump yourself full of the wrong sex hormones but they will not enable one cell in your body to change its sex marker.

Should health care ever be rationed to those who use certain language?

Absolutely not. Which is why terms such as 'cervix-haver' are insidious. Healthcare shouldn't be rationed to those with a basic education in biology either. All English speakers will know what a woman is though - or did until to became anyone who saw advantage in becoming one. It has become clear that a lot of seemingly educated people don't know what a cervix is, and it's not a word that appears in many phrase books for ESL speakers.

Still, all of that is being resigned to the dark side of History now

The text to which Glorianny linked appears to be an article about research carried out by Stonewall. That is not the same thing as a scientific article, and any research carried out by Stonewall is about as far from unbiased as it is possible to be.

Should health care ever be rationed to those who use certain language? No of course not, but how do you propose that the health system which is under enormous pressure, differentiates between a man with the male sex marker, and a transman ie a female with the male sex marker? Aren't all of these screening invites computer generated? Does the computer have some magical insight that tells it someone is "really" the opposite sex?

Doodledog

The text to which Glorianny linked appears to be an article about research carried out by Stonewall. That is not the same thing as a scientific article, and any research carried out by Stonewall is about as far from unbiased as it is possible to be.

The link I posted only refers to an original question raised by Stonewall. It is an account of an investigation by a number of academics and there is a link to the results. One of the questions raised which might be of benefit to all people who currently don't take up cervical screening is the opportunity to perform a self-smear test. It is awful when people dismiss valuable information purely on personal bias.

Rosie51

^Should health care ever be rationed to those who use certain language?^ No of course not, but how do you propose that the health system which is under enormous pressure, differentiates between a man with the male sex marker, and a transman ie a female with the male sex marker? Aren't all of these screening invites computer generated? Does the computer have some magical insight that tells it someone is "really" the opposite sex?

You don't have to. You use inclusive language which covers all options. So the invites to screening would be woman, non binary with cervix and man with cervix. The computer would understand
By the way things will get more complicated uterus transplants are being considered for transwomen.

Glorianny
Should health care ever be rationed to those who use certain language?
No
But that has certainly been tried by a group trying to make people be identified by body parts associated their birth sex, which caused unnecessary problems for those who had needed medical treatment resulting in removal of those parts. A woman (AHF) is a female whether or not she has had a full hysterectomy or needed surgery for breast cancer.
Being a cervix-haver automatically stops if you lose your cervix, meaning the appellation is no longer appropriate. Being female is permanent, with or without a cervix.

Referring to males as cervix-lackers would be equally inappropriate, though true, but would condemn females who have needed a hysterectomy to the same title.

It is awful when people dismiss valuable information purely on personal bias.

😂😂😂

Why are you getting so exercised if the computer is going to be able to identify women who need smears regardless of how they 'identify'?

🤣🤣🤣You don't have to. You use inclusive language which covers all options.^ Your
But what if females don’t want to be referred to by inclusive terms? Are you saying they must be?
So the invites to screening would be woman, non binary with cervix and man with cervix.
The computer would understand.
A Computer is not a sentient being.
Remember GIGO?
By the way things will get more complicated uterus transplants are being considered for transwomen.
Yes they will be more complicated. They’ll still be male and they’ll need medication for the transplant which could affect any child growing in that uterus. Not that they’ll care about that, as long as they can pretend.

Doodledog

*It is awful when people dismiss valuable information purely on personal bias.*

😂😂😂

Why are you getting so exercised if the computer is going to be able to identify women who need smears regardless of how they 'identify'?

Referring to “people who have ovaries” rather than “women” will also be prohibited under plans to ensure hospitals use clear language based on biological sex.

Sorry how will a computer be programmed if language is restricted. If "people with ovaries" is banned will non-binary or man with cervix be acceptable?

What would the status of women be if men didn't need us for childbearing?

Glorianny

Rosie51

Should health care ever be rationed to those who use certain language? No of course not, but how do you propose that the health system which is under enormous pressure, differentiates between a man with the male sex marker, and a transman ie a female with the male sex marker? Aren't all of these screening invites computer generated? Does the computer have some magical insight that tells it someone is "really" the opposite sex?

You don't have to. You use inclusive language which covers all options. So the invites to screening would be woman, non binary with cervix and man with cervix. The computer would understand
By the way things will get more complicated uterus transplants are being considered for transwomen.

The computer would understand Central computer invites know the age and sex of the invitees. The sex category is decided by the sex recorded on their medical record. If that is the wrong biological sex I fail to see how the computer will know that John Smith sex marker M, has a cervix. Or are you proposing that central screening computers have full access to everyone's medical records? Now a doctor has not only to change the sex marker, they must ensure the medical record says John has a cervix. I'm not at all convinced my doctor has it recorded anywhere that I have a cervix, I think it's a given because I'm female and have not undergone a full hysterectomy.
Uterus transplants may be an aspiration for some transwomen, but realistically if they ever happen how many do you expect? Where are these uteruses (or is that uteri?) to come from? Given these males would be on anti-rejection drugs and monitoring for the duration I don't imagine they'd be needing computer generated invites for cervical screening.

Male or female avoids the need for cervix-havers or people with ovaries or any other terms that deliberately avoid using the correct, truthful biological terms male or female.
Computers are not sentient beings. They repeat the “truth” that is put into them. If you put a lie into a computer, that’s what it will reproduce.

I agree with limiting the extent of these terms.

But if you actually work in the NHS you do need to know the complexities of trans medical possibilities or you cant help people. The language used on notes needs to be adequate to the task.

It is proper etiquette to ask a patient what you would like to be addressed as. First names work well for me but "Mrs or Ms X are more comfortable for some patients.

It needs to be recorded on a patients notes if they are transgender and personally if I were a nurse and asked by an ill patient to be called "her" gender wise whatever she/he looks like I say go with it, it's not the time to start on gender theory arguments. Or someone who you know is male asks to be called by a female name.

As we keep saying though, there is no problem with that at all. The problem comes when leaflets or posters refer to cervix-havers, or chest-feeders, and the terms are applied to everyone.

Negotiating a name with a patient is easy - I like it when I am asked, as I rarely use my given name, but prefer a shorter version. I would not, however, be comfortable with ‘cisgender’, or to be addressed by reference to my biological parts. That should never be the default, which is what the TRAs ignore when women say so. Heaven forfend that we are taken into consideration by those claiming to want to join our ranks.

Transmen do not want to be recorded as women or to be addressed as such.

Women do not want to be recorded as chest-feeders or cervix-havers - it undermines their status as women.

I have seen placards among gatherings of the trans-community with inscriptions and slogans like, trans lives matter, trans forever, trans people belong, trans rights are human rights, etc.

The trans community is a legitimate fraternity of people who want to identify differently to their natal sex, neutrally, or even as both at different periods.

So what the heck is wrong with transwomen, transmen or gender neutral as the general descriptive in medical literature?... women and transmen, or even women and transwomen if the subject matter is appropriate, and women and gender-neutral? No one is being named and the personal preference can be accommodated once the would-be patient is entered into the computer / system.

How you identify is personal, it is how one feels, it is not a biological status.

Are men referred to as penis-havers?

A NHS guide on matters relating to various body parts - testicles, penis, and... "becoming a dad" - these are all labelled under Men's Health. No tricky twisting of the terminology there.

It's women, once again, being expected to accommodate a handful of men who are not content to simply express themselves, but who want to dilute women to the point that they no longer have legitimacy as a biological sex.

Hence all the nonsense about same-gender attraction used as a verbal weapon to berate those who are same-sex attracted - because it re-enforces the fact that, for example, lesbians are generally not attracted to transwomen because they are men. And the only way men can get round this is to attempt to change the language, because they cannot change the fact.

I actually think it's quite abusive to ask staff to participate in a belief system they may not believe in. If I was asked to say Hail Mary when I was working with a religious service user I would feel the same. This doesnt mean I am anti religious people, its means I don't share that belief. When I use a pronoun I am referring to someones sex, I think gender is an oppressive set of values decided by society.

Galaxy

I actually think it's quite abusive to ask staff to participate in a belief system they may not believe in. If I was asked to say Hail Mary when I was working with a religious service user I would feel the same. This doesnt mean I am anti religious people, its means I don't share that belief. When I use a pronoun I am referring to someones sex, I think gender is an oppressive set of values decided by society.

Yes indeed.

Are men referred to as ‘penis haters’. Good question Dickens - answer, of course they aren’t.
As for Diversity Forms - they’re required for every child involved in Family Court proceedings. Hence the question on the 6 week old - birth sex, gender identity.
I’m cross

Galaxy

I actually think it's quite abusive to ask staff to participate in a belief system they may not believe in. If I was asked to say Hail Mary when I was working with a religious service user I would feel the same. This doesnt mean I am anti religious people, its means I don't share that belief. When I use a pronoun I am referring to someones sex, I think gender is an oppressive set of values decided by society.

I still don't know how you are aware of anyone's sex. I've just been on holiday.When I was people watching I started trying to spot women who were not particularly feminine in appearance There were many. I think they were women but I really don't know for certain.

Here we go again. The magical impossibi,it’s of spotting women who lack a particularly feminine appearance
Goodness knows how we’ve all staggered into our seventies with suc limited abilities