Bury them
WHAT?!!
Doctors who change gender are allowed to scrub past wrongdoing from public record
Because changing gender=a new and improved doctor who has never done any harm to anyone?
Sandie Peggie’s case against NHS Fife for alleged harassment after the nurse raised concerns about a trans colleague has caused alarm among women and campaigners across the country. The NHS, she claims, was prioritising the rights of Dr Beth Upton, a trans doctor who was born male but insisted on using the women’s changing room, over her rights to a single-sex space.
Now, it can be revealed that the General Medical Council (GMC), which regulates doctors, takes an even more extreme stance on trans medics – effectively scrubbing the public disciplinary history of doctors who change their identities in this way.
“If a doctor had received a historical sanction [i.e. the suspension is no longer in place] prior to transitioning, this information would not be available on their new public-facing record on the medical register,” says a GMC spokesman. The GMC confirms that Dr Upton is one of 62 doctors to have been given new registrations under different GMC numbers.
It’s reminding me of The Church and the concept of sainthood. Swapping gender=sainthood.
Except of course that it doesn’t. Rather the opposite: it encourages narcissism, bullying, dominance, entitlement, and similar repellent qualities. Look at Upton just for one.
I think members of the GMC’s decision making committees should by law be allowed medical care only by doctors who have previously been censured, and then had their records hidden. If they really think their decision is appropriate, they shouldn’t have a problem with that.
Someone on Ovarit made the interesting point that this change in ‘identity’ seems to include their qualifications, registrations, and employment history, so it’s not as if they can’t, don’t or won’t keep their personal history when it suits them. Only disciplinary actions aren’t transferred to the new ‘identity’.
Disciplinary actions should be a valid reason to DENY a requested change of “identity.” It’s fraudulent to deny the public this crucial information.
I bet Stonewall is behind this. They have long pushed for organisations signed up to their schemes to go beyond (i.e. break) the law in this area. What’s the point of the UK having a legal way to change someone’s name and sex-markers on documents if they aren’t going to employ the law to clamp down on people doing it illegally? It seems that they have de facto self-ID for ‘trans’ without any of the safeguards which would have been put in place by parliament with a properly written law.
Self-ID became law (sneakily) in Ireland some years ago, but I believe that one of the few safeguards which accompanied it was a clause making it illegal for anyone to change anything about themselves in order to conceal a dodgy past.
The same kind of thing is happening here in Belgium. When you officially change your registered sex, you receive a new “national registration number”. But this number is tied to all kind of official information. e.g. the banks use if you apply for a loan, to see if you are not already too much in debt.
But when your number has changed no loans are registered to that new number and you can get a new loan no matter how much you are already in debt. And of course your debtors now have more trouble finding you because they are searching for someone associated with your former number, but that person has “vanished”.