The patient appears to be agitated
Case study from NHS policy. If a woman is agitated cos there is a man on her ward then staff should ‘re-iterate that the ward is female only & that there are no men present.’ If she continues to be vocal then ‘Ultimately it may be the complainant who is required to be removed.’!
The Gender Reassignment Policy Review page 16:
Inpatient Scenario:
A nurse is summoned to a patient’s bed in a female ward. The patient appears to be agitated. When asked what’s concerning her, the woman explains she didn’t expect to be sharing the ward with a man and points to the bed opposite. She states it’s inappropriate to have ‘him’ in the ward with the other women. She tells the nurse she can’t relax and wants ‘him’ removed from the ward. If this doesn’t happen she’ll make a formal complaint – the hospital has a duty of care to look after her and they’re not taking this seriously by putting her in this situation.
The nurse listens and tells the woman she’ll see what she can do. She says that she understands having a transgender person on the ward will be upsetting to other women and leaves to talk with a senior colleague about the matter.
The response to the patient’s concern isn’t appropriate and breaches legislative protection afforded to transgender people. Someone’s trans status can not be disclosed to a third party without the express permission of the trans person and the assumption that others in the ward will feel uncomfortable is unfounded. In this instance there is no need to either disclose or seek permission to disclose gender identity. The nurse should work to allay the patient’s concerns – it would be appropriate to re-iterate that the ward is indeed female only and that there are no men present. Her duty of care extends to protect patients from harassment and should the woman continue to make demands about the removal of the transgender patient and be vocal in the ward it would be appropriate to remind her of this. Ultimately it may be the complainant who is required to be removed. The nurse should check with the transgender patient and sensitively ask if everything is ok. If the transgender patient has heard any of the discussions it is imperative that she is given every assurance that the matter will be dealt with. If the transgender patient is visibly upset and there is spare capacity, it would be appropriate to offer her the option to move to a single room, though this must be with the interests of the patient in mind rather than conflict avoidance.
General appreciation of transgender issues is relatively low within our communities and often this is used as a rationale for behaviour that is essentially transphobic. If a white woman complained to a nurse about sharing a ward with a black patient or a heterosexual male complained about being in a ward with a gay man, we would expect our staff to act in a manor that deals with the expressed behaviour immediately.
Emphasis mine.
Notice that there is no requirement to talk sensitively to the woman who doesn’t want to be in a ward with a man. Notice that the nurse is told to tell the woman that the ward is indeed female and there is no man present WHEN IT’S NOT AND THERE IS. Notice that the woman is discussed as a disruption at best and an evil bigot at worst. Notice that all the concern is for the man.
A woman not wanting to be in a hospital ward with a man is not the same as not wanting to be in a ward with a black person or a gay person. It is not the same.
For one thing, a nurse wouldn’t really be expected to deal with those situations the same gaslight-y way, would they?
“Nurse, I don’t want to be in the same ward as a homosexual!”
“He’s straight.”
“Hey, there’s a colored woman in the next bed!”
“No, ma’am, there are only white people in this ward.”
Does this apply to hospitals with modern fluorescent lighting as well?
Notice how legislative protections of women don’t even get a mention.
But someone’s male status is very often plainly visible irrespective of having transitioned. And some women are simply going feel vulnerable in the presence of the male sex at the best of times… and stuck in a hospital with illness/injury is not the best of times. This is a hard-won protection, and it is being stripped away.
So now there is legal pressure on medical staff to lie about medical fact. This had better get some pushback.
Holms:
Too bloody right. It is the thin end of the wedge here. Compromises, which should not be rotten, involve none of the parties feeling they have been cheated.
Hospitals I have visited lately have signs up warning patients and others not to threaten staff, and have guards for such emergencies.
Soon some bloke who believes that boundaries are there to be tested and pushed will overstep the mark and make it into world headlines. My solution: If you were assigned male at birth, then it is into the male ward you go until death do you claim; though big hospitals big enough could have wards for 2. Males, 1. Females, 3. Others.
I can’t imagine the jealosy of those men whose fetish is to treated like infants. If they were hospitalized, they wouldn’t be put in the pediatric ward. They would not be clothed in diapers, or offered a wet nurse. Yet they have to watch autogynophiles get affirmation, validation and legal protections from state authorities and institutions. It mut be galling.
Yes, there was the one case in British Columbia where the student was suing the university for discrimination because he (it’s always a he…) demanded to have his diaper changed, talk in babytalk, etc., but I think that was more an exceptional case rather than the general acceptance and encouragement so willingly offered (and vociferously demanded) by trans identified men.
Outrageous. Condoning outright LIES at the expense of women’s safety.
And, once again, if the word “woman” is officially redefined to denote people who think and feel in … whatever way angry trans activists with innate physical traits more representative of fathers than mothers happen to think and feel, the question is no longer why the trans person belongs in the “women’s” ward (tautologically true), but why on earth the people with innate physical traits more representative of mothers than fathers are still assumed to belong there. After all this presupposes that all these people really do think or feel the required way about themselves, which is a very big presupposition indeed.
Sorry for sounding like a broken record, but I don’t think this can be emphasized enough:
Either the word “women” denotes people with innate physical traits more representative of mothers than fathers, in which case people with innate physical traits more representative of fathers than mothers don’t belong in the “women’s” ward* -regardless of how they think or feel,
or there is no justification for assuming that any of the people with innate physical traits more representative of mothers than fathers belong there, and we’ll need some sort of psychological profiling to make sure that only people who really do think and feel the required ways** are allowed in.
You cannot have it both ways.
*Or “women’s” bathrooms, “women’s” sporting events, “women’s” shelters, “women’s” prisons etc… etc…
** What “required ways”? All we ever get are tautologies and circular definitions.
So if a woman complains that the person in the bed next to her is a man, they are NOT allowed to ‘disclose that person’s trans status’ but they SHOULD say ‘that is not a man, there are not men here.’ I don’t think they’ve thought this through.
Many years ago I was agitated in an NHS ward because they were insisting that I should stay in when I thought I could go home. They gave me valium to calm me! which I pretended to swallow then spat out. Wrote a stern letter later on and got an apologetic reply. Expect these women to be slipped some calming pills.
For what it’s worth, I have spent a lot of time in hospitals in different countries; and, apart from the times I have had a room to myself, have only very rarely been in one which wasn’t openly mixed-sex. Frequently, I have been the only woman on the ward. The privacy issues are huge, not to mention the safety ones.
#8
Trans status cannot be disclosed. Why? Because it is a protected category.
Sex status can and should be disclosed. Why? Obviously, it is no longer a protected category. The ultimate goal of the trans lobby.
And by ‘sex status’ of course I mean ‘claimed sex status’, which only emphasizes that the trans lobby opposes sex protections.
It’s really quite amazing (by which I mean “terrifying”!) just how very *eager* so many people are to screw over *half the population* in favour of a tiny fraction of a percent of the people around – a group made up of a few thousand lost souls, and a few thousand entitled perverts who’ve decided to take their gross fetish full-time.
It’s just like, how much must all these people really, really HATE women & girls? They really don’t see us as fully human, as Real People like males, otherwise surely it would be obvious that this is a problem?
Every time this comes up, it’s *always* women & girls that get our boundaries stomped all over. Never are the doodz expected to “expand the bandwidth of Male”, no. Males are Real People, and get to have basic dignity. Our safety and privacy, our basic humanity, our lives and experiences, our oppression and struggles… all can be put aside without a thought to make absolutely sure that some entitled, narcissistic dood is catered to and “centred” in everything.
Watching so many people jumping at the chance to strip away hard-fought protections that still haven’t been fully implemented or taken seriously to begin with is utterly infuriating! The sheer cruelty, and delight in that cruelty, should be shocking. It’s obvious that “TERF” is a “woke” way to say “bitch”, and the revelling in violent rhetoric (and the attacks which inevitably follow) shows just what these individuals are itching to do.
It’s amazing, isn’t it. I went through the 97 stages of rage reading it yesterday. SUCH bleeding throbbing concern for the trans laydee and SUCH cold hostility for the woman who doesn’t want to share the ward with a man. I’ve been wondering who could have written this, and if the NHS simply farmed the job out to the nearest “activist.”
Note that the safety of a trans male patient is not even discussed.
OK, so you can’t reveal the trans status of a person. That doesn’t mean it won’t be accidentally revealed to other patients. Using the offered analogies, obviously a black person is black but a gay person isn’t visibly gay necessarily. It doesn’t mean their homosexuality might not be revealed, say in conversation or even in an overheard consultation. So dismissing the scenario as impossible is ridiculous. The assumption made that others won’t feel uncomfortable isn’t the point. Nobody writes a scenario for training/policy demonstration purposes where a thing happens and everyone is OK with it so… nothing. It’s stupid. So, in our fictitious case, let’s go along with the idea that someone is uncomfortable. Now you have to decide what to do about it.
Removed where exactly? A private room? Oh no, that’s only offered to the trans person. Anyway, there may not be one available because they may all be occupied and not all NHS hospitals even have them. So what now? Call around other hospitals in the area to find the complainant a place? Even if she’s had some kind of procedure that means moving her would be dangerous? Kick her out into the street? The NHS has a duty of care there too. They can’t refuse to treat someone who is not threatening them and being upset does not even begin to meet that definition.
Manor? Really? Who edits these things? This isn’t Downton Abbey.
Cluecat, #13.
But the varying figures bandied about by the TRAs claim that the trans population is between 1%-10% of the population as a whole. Taking the average of 5%, and generously allowing a 50/50 split between transwomen/men (although I suspect it’s nearer 95/5) means that we should believe that the UK has a shade over 1.6 million transwomen: the USA has around 9.3 million transwomen, and the transwoman population of the world is a mere 220 million.
Either a lot of men are passing unnoticed as women, or the TRAs are not very good mathematicians.
Ah but just you wait, it will turn out that half the population is trans before long! Then the earth will fry and no one will care any more.
Cluecat #13 wrote:
I suspect it might be a different kind of misogyny, one in which the sweet, gentle wisdom of womanhood is considered so powerful that men who identify as women immediately take on its benevolent character. There’s no need to seek protection from trans women because all their masculine rage and potential for violence has just melted away — or never existed in the first place. That’s the strength of the feminine nature.
See, they LOVE women and girls.
Ophelia @ 17: First, we say all women who don’t think, behave, and dress in appropriate, innately womanly ways are actually trans. Then we say all the men who have long hair, don’t like football, or otherwise flout innately manly mannerisms in some way or another are actually trans. I think if we do a few rounds of this we can easily have the trans population in the billions
“If a white woman complained to a nurse about sharing a ward with a black patient”
Actually a closer analogy would be “if a black patient complained to a nurse about sharing a ward with a patient in blackface” – though it’s hard to think of a case where patients’ skin colour would be relevant to anything, whereas patients’ sex could be important in a number of ways.
Although you can certainly see how a black person would find that pretty god damn annoying, in a hospital ward and all!
If a woman objects to a man on her hospital ward, the woman must be removed. If a man objects to a woman in the seat next to him on a plane, the woman must be moved. I think I see a pattern.
Yeah, because segregation by race and by sexual orientation is standard in hospitals. Oh, wait a minute (checks calendar, sees it’s not 1950), my mistake.
When all they’ve got is false equivalences, they’ve really got nothing.
Except that the false equivalences are working brilliantly on all too many people.
When an institution (e.g. healthcare or medicine) adopts gender identity ideology (which is incoherent), the incoherence poisons the institution.
Gender identity ideology poisons everything (to steal from Hitchens’ recurring phrase in his book).