This is a SBARD (SITUATION/BACKGROUND/ASSESSMENT/ RECOMMENDATION/DECISION) I just received from a mental health ward nurse. Another scandal in plain sight. Her comments follow the document. “I’ve attached a picture of the SBARD that all staff in an NHS trust have had to read and accept.
This nurse is all for the acceptance of 'trans' men and women, as long as we're able to keep single sex spaces. That's how I used to be. But after immersing myself in this movement, I'm way beyond that. There is no such thing as 'trans'. No one can 'transcend' their biological sex. They can only express their personality through the 'gender' stereotypes they are inclined to adopt.
So in a mental health ward, spaces that have always included the best and worst of people, a woman may have to share a room or ward with a maniac male acting as if he’s a woman. But let’s be politically correct so as not to hurt a potential monsters feelings? This is the upside down.
Soooooo any man admitted to a mental health ward can tell the nurse that he's a woman with a GRC, honest guv, and have him or her change his record to say he's female, and the nurse is not allowed to question him or put any note in the record that it has been altered? Smashing. No-one would EVER take advantage of that amount of rank stupidity.
How can it be that a document (GRC) holds the power to completely alter your legal and medical records and how you are treated by others, but the people expected to facilitate these monumental provisions aren't allowed to ask to see the document before they do so? Why are professionals being put in that position?
Not only does that pose privacy and safety issues for other NHS users, but surely also for the person with the GRC too. If the treating doctors don’t know the patient’s biological sex, how can they determine whether he or she has a condition related to the biology of the sex opposite to that of the one on the medical records? It gets worse when you see guidelines like these saying you mustn’t even ask.
Also will the rest of us be subjected to unnecessary medical examinations and procedures? Should the doctors treating my stomach issues assume that I might have a womb that I haven’t told them about and carry out a procedure to check it just in case there is one that responsible for my stomach pain?
The GRA must be repealed. My understanding for the reason for it's existence was to allow same sex marriage under the guise of medical transition? We don't need it now as there is no restriction on same sex marriage? Hope that's correct? It's being used in a totally different way now and it's created a superior entitled class, to the detriment of women in particular! This has, for me, now moved into a very dangerous zone!! It needs to go!!
This seems to be a crazed return to the 1950s and before even that decade.
We were supposed to be progressing, moving forward towards the bright uplands of a future where the lessons of the past had been comprehended and the rights and dignities of the vulnerable, of the marginalised and discriminated were going to be upheld and strengthened. We are even told at the beginning of some television shows broadcast way back that they reflected views that be now regard as archaic.
The reality is unfortunately, the complete opposite. The transing-the-gay movement has easily bested the worst that past, allegedly homophobic society was ever capable-of. Now, in these supposedly enlightened times, the while male is supreme, able to lord it over every and any institution, simply by demanding that he be regarded as a 'woman'. Male white supremacism, in its guise of the trans movement, is now rampant, triumphant even, having steamrollered over the Left, over liberalism, even progressivism. 'Woke' is now associated with militant homophobia, misogyny, and with the constant comparisons of white males with black women, incessant racism.
Activists seeking to preserve women's right, children's safeguarding and the hard-fought rights of gay men and lesbians are branded 'fascist', 'far-right' or 'Nazi's'. Those opposing BigPharma and neoliberal corporations are branded 'bigots'.
In this topsy-turvy-world, the active collusion of NHS managers and staff who sacrifice the safety and wellbeing of vulnerable women and girls to service and satisfy the needs of a white male supremacist movement perhaps isn't such a surprise.
I've been on a mental ward twice. Women walk around half naked and sometimes strip off completely in the throes of psychosis. These are extremely vulnerable women. At the hospital where I was admitted, there was a mixed ward, and luckily I was not put on this ward, the idea for which was probably some top-down utopian bullshit. It of course benefitted the male patients, as the women were considered to be a calming influence, and massively disadvantaged the women.
If having a GRC gives XY access to female spaces etc but service providers can’t require XY to produce a GRC to get access to female spaces, the fiction is that the GRC framework is not de facto self-id.
This isn’t as uncommon as you may think. It works both ways: male-female, female-male wards. In my trust there was an enquiry as to why nurses refused to admit a known rapist on to a female ward because he now identified as female. It came fairly close to staff being suspended as a result until the RCN got involved. This is a trust who’s gender identity unit produced a leaflet for staff listing 50 ways people may identify their gender. It seems once you identify as a particular gender even if you have no intention of physically transforming (more male to female than the reverse) you become a cause celebre where no one can challenge the reasons behind it. I watched a youtube video recently where a ‘redneck’ allegedly, was being lured into the ‘gotcha’ trap when asked about gender. The guy made the perfectly valid point that gender identity is a social, not biological, construct and continued by pointing out the patently obvious. In 200 years time when an anthropologist is asked to evaluate a skeleton they will determine whether it was biologically male or female depending on bone structure; particularly around the pelvic region. I’m with JKR on this: live your best life regardless of how you identify, but there needs to be protections in place to prevent the type of abuse of what should be protected female spaces by men for their own voyeuristic purposes. Both trans men and trans females I know are horrified at how this debate has disenfranchised women to be allowed safe spaces and blame certain people who scream transphobia the loudest of pursuing their own agenda, not that of the trans community in general.
How dare they conflate then need for privacy of adopted children and witnesses with a trans person. I’m an adoptive parent, I frequently have to inform health professionals about this fact, when they ask about family history, etc. Adopted children are still identified as such on their birth record and are not now taught to deny their identity. In fact, it is considered harmful for them to do so. Why the difference, I wonder? Health records for adopted children show their lifetime medical history and the only change is their name. Because biology doesn’t care about legal fictions. This hiding and no questions asked protocol only benefits people who choose to obscure their original identity, and that is either delusional or nefarious.
Interesting that a GRC equates to being in witness protection.
What is the point of a GRC if nobody is allowed to ask about it? I have utter contempt for law drafters who are incapable of thinking beyond the superficial.
This nurse is all for the acceptance of 'trans' men and women, as long as we're able to keep single sex spaces. That's how I used to be. But after immersing myself in this movement, I'm way beyond that. There is no such thing as 'trans'. No one can 'transcend' their biological sex. They can only express their personality through the 'gender' stereotypes they are inclined to adopt.
So in a mental health ward, spaces that have always included the best and worst of people, a woman may have to share a room or ward with a maniac male acting as if he’s a woman. But let’s be politically correct so as not to hurt a potential monsters feelings? This is the upside down.
Soooooo any man admitted to a mental health ward can tell the nurse that he's a woman with a GRC, honest guv, and have him or her change his record to say he's female, and the nurse is not allowed to question him or put any note in the record that it has been altered? Smashing. No-one would EVER take advantage of that amount of rank stupidity.
How can it be that a document (GRC) holds the power to completely alter your legal and medical records and how you are treated by others, but the people expected to facilitate these monumental provisions aren't allowed to ask to see the document before they do so? Why are professionals being put in that position?
As I read this I thought that the Gender Recognition Act 2004 (see https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/7/pdfs/ukpga_20040007_en.pdf) must have included some sort of exemption so that the NHS would know someone’s biological sex, but it seems not.
Not only does that pose privacy and safety issues for other NHS users, but surely also for the person with the GRC too. If the treating doctors don’t know the patient’s biological sex, how can they determine whether he or she has a condition related to the biology of the sex opposite to that of the one on the medical records? It gets worse when you see guidelines like these saying you mustn’t even ask.
Also will the rest of us be subjected to unnecessary medical examinations and procedures? Should the doctors treating my stomach issues assume that I might have a womb that I haven’t told them about and carry out a procedure to check it just in case there is one that responsible for my stomach pain?
The GRA must be repealed. My understanding for the reason for it's existence was to allow same sex marriage under the guise of medical transition? We don't need it now as there is no restriction on same sex marriage? Hope that's correct? It's being used in a totally different way now and it's created a superior entitled class, to the detriment of women in particular! This has, for me, now moved into a very dangerous zone!! It needs to go!!
This seems to be a crazed return to the 1950s and before even that decade.
We were supposed to be progressing, moving forward towards the bright uplands of a future where the lessons of the past had been comprehended and the rights and dignities of the vulnerable, of the marginalised and discriminated were going to be upheld and strengthened. We are even told at the beginning of some television shows broadcast way back that they reflected views that be now regard as archaic.
The reality is unfortunately, the complete opposite. The transing-the-gay movement has easily bested the worst that past, allegedly homophobic society was ever capable-of. Now, in these supposedly enlightened times, the while male is supreme, able to lord it over every and any institution, simply by demanding that he be regarded as a 'woman'. Male white supremacism, in its guise of the trans movement, is now rampant, triumphant even, having steamrollered over the Left, over liberalism, even progressivism. 'Woke' is now associated with militant homophobia, misogyny, and with the constant comparisons of white males with black women, incessant racism.
Activists seeking to preserve women's right, children's safeguarding and the hard-fought rights of gay men and lesbians are branded 'fascist', 'far-right' or 'Nazi's'. Those opposing BigPharma and neoliberal corporations are branded 'bigots'.
In this topsy-turvy-world, the active collusion of NHS managers and staff who sacrifice the safety and wellbeing of vulnerable women and girls to service and satisfy the needs of a white male supremacist movement perhaps isn't such a surprise.
My aunt is a MH nurse in that NHS Trust, she is very sensible and lovely, I must ask her what she thinks of this.
I've been on a mental ward twice. Women walk around half naked and sometimes strip off completely in the throes of psychosis. These are extremely vulnerable women. At the hospital where I was admitted, there was a mixed ward, and luckily I was not put on this ward, the idea for which was probably some top-down utopian bullshit. It of course benefitted the male patients, as the women were considered to be a calming influence, and massively disadvantaged the women.
If having a GRC gives XY access to female spaces etc but service providers can’t require XY to produce a GRC to get access to female spaces, the fiction is that the GRC framework is not de facto self-id.
"What is going on?" Someone's standing between a man and his orgasm.
This isn’t as uncommon as you may think. It works both ways: male-female, female-male wards. In my trust there was an enquiry as to why nurses refused to admit a known rapist on to a female ward because he now identified as female. It came fairly close to staff being suspended as a result until the RCN got involved. This is a trust who’s gender identity unit produced a leaflet for staff listing 50 ways people may identify their gender. It seems once you identify as a particular gender even if you have no intention of physically transforming (more male to female than the reverse) you become a cause celebre where no one can challenge the reasons behind it. I watched a youtube video recently where a ‘redneck’ allegedly, was being lured into the ‘gotcha’ trap when asked about gender. The guy made the perfectly valid point that gender identity is a social, not biological, construct and continued by pointing out the patently obvious. In 200 years time when an anthropologist is asked to evaluate a skeleton they will determine whether it was biologically male or female depending on bone structure; particularly around the pelvic region. I’m with JKR on this: live your best life regardless of how you identify, but there needs to be protections in place to prevent the type of abuse of what should be protected female spaces by men for their own voyeuristic purposes. Both trans men and trans females I know are horrified at how this debate has disenfranchised women to be allowed safe spaces and blame certain people who scream transphobia the loudest of pursuing their own agenda, not that of the trans community in general.
How dare they conflate then need for privacy of adopted children and witnesses with a trans person. I’m an adoptive parent, I frequently have to inform health professionals about this fact, when they ask about family history, etc. Adopted children are still identified as such on their birth record and are not now taught to deny their identity. In fact, it is considered harmful for them to do so. Why the difference, I wonder? Health records for adopted children show their lifetime medical history and the only change is their name. Because biology doesn’t care about legal fictions. This hiding and no questions asked protocol only benefits people who choose to obscure their original identity, and that is either delusional or nefarious.
"What is going on?" is the BIG question, isn't it?
Interesting that a GRC equates to being in witness protection.
What is the point of a GRC if nobody is allowed to ask about it? I have utter contempt for law drafters who are incapable of thinking beyond the superficial.
Here is another scandal. At least in England it’s reported in one national newspaper. In Ireland it would most likely be suppressed https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11268259/Transgender-paedophile-moved-prison-wings-starting-relationship-female-inmate.html