Male patients asked if they are pregnant at NHS Trust

[laughing dog]

It is a change to the verbal questions given to imaging patients. The person asking the questions already has details about the patient that are relevant to the questions asked, such as the patient's sex.

So what? It is simply a double check to make sure they have the right person in the right place. It is no big deal no matter how much you go on about it.

Let's say the form says 'M, 26 years, John Doe'.

I have absolutely no problem with someone saying 'what is your name', 'what is your sex', 'what is your age'. In fact, this is routine.

I do have a problem with asking male patients if they are pregnant, and I've already articulated the reasons why I have a problem with it.

You given your reasons, all of which ignore the double (or triple) checking dimension.

I do have a problem with medical policy being formed around political tastes, of which this policy is but one example.

Most policies involving human decision making have some political element to them. For some reason, you feel that your political tastes should dictate a UK health trust policy

no. I don't think that. That is a libellous assertion you manufactured from whole cloth.

I'm allowed to discuss public policy, and I'm allowed to discuss what I think makes policy good or bad. I am not a dictator.

No one called you a dictator. Please stop misrepresenting the views of others. While you are very good at it, it provides the basis for your persistent false accusations.

The words you use in the OP and in your responses convey that you think the policy is wrong, should not have been enacted and should be abandonned. You are injecting your political tastes - a clear example of a double standard.

which indicates that you really have no problem with medical policy formed around political tastes as long as you approve of those tastes.

That males cannot get pregnant is not a political opinion. It is a brute fact.

This policy change was not about medical safety. It is about catering to the sensitivities of a movement with institutional power.

First, you are in no position to know all the influences that drove this policy. Second, regardless of the intent, this policy also injects another layer of medical safety.

 

[ZiprHead]

There was already a safe alternative that was jettisoned for political reasons.

Again, I ask for a citation for this assertion.

 

[Toni]

Arctish's line of thinking:

To the boy upset with being bullied about gynecomastia.
Don't be upset that you were teased about your breasts, boy. You being upset is your own moral failing. Being teased about having more female-typical characteristics is a sign that the people teasing you for it are sexist and hate women.

To the girl upset with being bullied about being hairy.
Don't be upset that you got bullied about your body hair. Being teased about having more male-typical characteristics is a sign that the people teasing you for it are sexist and hate women.

To any bullied person.
Stop hanging around with bullies. If you are bullied on the way to school, that's your fault. If you are bullied on the bus, that's your fault. If you are bullied at work, get a new job. It's all your fault.

Arctish, your attitude about bullying is so indescribably detestable I won't be responding to you any more in this thread, because you clearly have no idea how bullying and bullies work, nor have you any detectable empathy for the bullied whatsoever.

Misrepresenting other posters in this way makes you look very small and petty.

You really should stop it.

That is what Arctish expressed.

I've been the victim of bullying. I've been the victim of verbal taunts and physical violence. If an adult had responded to me with the unhuman and inhumane attitude Arctish displayed, that would have compounded the trauma.

Really. I think you must not have read her post 336. Or her post 338.

I hope you do read them and perhaps offer an apology.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

2) I've already pointed out my SIL that has been thought male many times. I'm sure she's lesbian but in the closet even from herself.

And is your sister in law in the habit of telling people that she is male? No? Then I would suggest that her filling out the fucking medical form with her sex as female, and verifying that when the doctor asks really ought to be sufficient.

Did you miss the part where my wife was asked for a pregnancy test at age 70? Having the information in the chart doesn't mean they pay attention to that rather than what their eyes see. Now, asking my wife for the pregnancy test is harmless, but not asking SIL for one could have been (SIL is way past menopause now) harmful.

 

[Emily Lake]

Any adult patient who doesn't understand that sex is relevant in almost all medical situations needs to go back to high school.

This is the problem you and I have having right now. We usually agree on almost everything here, but not this one.

Assuming that every patient who appears to be something, whether sexed or competent or whatever, is not a good assumption. Usually it is, but that's not good enough for what medical technicians are doing.
Check.
Double check.
Triple check.
Ask apparently unnecessary questions. Look for problems.

The human race isn't as simple as it might seem. Make sure you know what you're doing before doing it.
Tom

I think we would have less disagreement if a key element of my position hadn't been missed.

I'm not suggesting that medical folks should "guess" about a person's sex. Sex is on the form already. I think it's a fine idea if techs want to double check with a verbal ask of sex.

And patients should answer that question honestly.

 

[Emily Lake]

ASK FOR SEX

That should also not be a big deal. And if a person's sex is female, ask about pregnancy. That should also not be a big deal.

But males CANNOT get pregnant, and engaging in this pretense is a betrayal of rationality and objectivity.

What is bizarre to me is that there is no way in the universe that hospitals, not even hospitals that have already been institutionally captured, have not already obtained the sex of the patient.

Loren and others appear to think hospitals do not have a patient's details on file. Your name and date of birth and sex are on file. Your medical history is on file.

Hospitals already have your sex on file. If it's your first visit to a hospital, and that hospital is from the 19th century and has no contact with any other hospital ever, they'll ask for your details, including your sex.

My medical professionals also gave my name and date of birth on file—right at the top! Along with my patient ID, insurance information, height and weight.

Yet at every single appointment, every single person I see asks my name and date of birth. Someone will check my height and weight each time and verify my insurance, address and phone number.

I assume you have no problem with them verifying sex as well, right?

 

[Emily Lake]

Asking possible males if they are pregnant or intend to become pregnant takes about one second, and their answering the question takes maybe two seconds if they really have to think about it.

Doing a comprehensive genital/gonad exam before asking the questions on a pre-treatment form takes a lot longer.

But I suppose it's important to check what's in their pants and karyotypes because Kami forbid we hurt someone's feelings by not caring about their looks.

This is entirely disingenuous. Unless you think all transpeople are complete morons, maybe? Or that nurses are absolute dolts? Or you've bought into the absurd argument that nobody can ever tell anybody's sex without investigating their nethers?

For 99% of people, their sex is readily apparent from their faces alone. Even the butchiest lesbian is still going to clock as a woman, because humans are *wired* to identify sex. Sure, some very few people are going to fall in that 1%. And if so, it is on them to inform the doctor what their sex is.

I am part of the generation that first embraced blue jeans ans short haircuts for women. I was frequently mistaken for a guy. I wasn't a big deal.

I had a friend with a slender frame and beautiful shoulder length platinum blonde hair. He was frequently mistaken for a gal. It only became a big deal when the guys trying to catch his eye were being particularly obnoxious and harassing him.

I really don't see why having questions about pregnancy on the pre-treatment questionnaires is such a big deal. We ask people if they have asthma, tuberculosis, heart disease, fungal infections, compromised immune systems, etc. What's the freaking big deal about asking if they might be pregnant? Do we really need blue for boys and pink for girls on a freaking medical form? Are we so wedded to sexism we can't just have one single form for everyone?

There seems to be a really key element missing in this entire discussion.

Sex is relevant to a whole bunch of things in medicine. Well outside the realm of merely pregnancy, it has significant impacts. Doctors should be asking and verifying SEX when they see a patient.

If sex is asked after, then one only needs to ask about pregnancy for females, as pregnancy introduces additional concerns.

If sex is known, it is a waste of everyone's time and dignity to ask males if they might be pregnant, because males cannot get pregnant. If doctors are asking about pregnancy and are NOT asking for sex, that is a massive risk to patients across the board.

 

[Emily Lake]

The argument has been made that there is no need to ask for obvious information.

That is not the argument that has been made.

 

[Toni]

Asking possible males if they are pregnant or intend to become pregnant takes about one second, and their answering the question takes maybe two seconds if they really have to think about it.

Doing a comprehensive genital/gonad exam before asking the questions on a pre-treatment form takes a lot longer.

But I suppose it's important to check what's in their pants and karyotypes because Kami forbid we hurt someone's feelings by not caring about their looks.

This is entirely disingenuous. Unless you think all transpeople are complete morons, maybe? Or that nurses are absolute dolts? Or you've bought into the absurd argument that nobody can ever tell anybody's sex without investigating their nethers?

For 99% of people, their sex is readily apparent from their faces alone. Even the butchiest lesbian is still going to clock as a woman, because humans are *wired* to identify sex. Sure, some very few people are going to fall in that 1%. And if so, it is on them to inform the doctor what their sex is.

I am part of the generation that first embraced blue jeans ans short haircuts for women. I was frequently mistaken for a guy. I wasn't a big deal.

I had a friend with a slender frame and beautiful shoulder length platinum blonde hair. He was frequently mistaken for a gal. It only became a big deal when the guys trying to catch his eye were being particularly obnoxious and harassing him.

I really don't see why having questions about pregnancy on the pre-treatment questionnaires is such a big deal. We ask people if they have asthma, tuberculosis, heart disease, fungal infections, compromised immune systems, etc. What's the freaking big deal about asking if they might be pregnant? Do we really need blue for boys and pink for girls on a freaking medical form? Are we so wedded to sexism we can't just have one single form for everyone?

There seems to be a really key element missing in this entire discussion.

Sex is relevant to a whole bunch of things in medicine. Well outside the realm of merely pregnancy, it has significant impacts. Doctors should be asking and verifying SEX when they see a patient.

If sex is asked after, then one only needs to ask about pregnancy for females, as pregnancy introduces additional concerns.

If sex is known, it is a waste of everyone's time and dignity to ask males if they might be pregnant, because males cannot get pregnant. If doctors are asking about pregnancy and are NOT asking for sex, that is a massive risk to patients across the board.

I agree that a great deal of information is gained from knowing biological sex, in terms of diagnosis and treatment. But this is not necessarily that simple: is the patient transsexual? Have they had gender conforming surgery? Do they retain testes? Ovaries? At what point—pre or post adolescence or mid, for that matter. Are they on a hormone replacement regime? And of course there are true intersex individuals or individuals who have a number of known anomalies—like I have which on only one occasion—which led to the discovery—had any effect on diagnosis or treatment. It’s really just something that I have filed away, to bring up and infirm a new provider.

I am with you 100% in sex does aftercare diagnosis and treatment.

I do not think asking about possible pregnancy is onerous or horrifying. I’ve seen the look on peoples faces when someone asks if that is a possibility when, until asked, it had not occurred to them that they might be pregnant. And they were pregnant! I even know of someone who had been told she could not become pregnant, after years of trying and who later exhibited obvious signs of pregnancy but because her medical providers were so certain that pregnancy was impossible, it was ignored and she was given treatment that negatively affected the child she was carrying. No one even did a pregnancy test because they were convinced it was impossible. ( Yes, they were idiots and yes there was a lawsuit and yes, everyone has lived happily ever after—but it could have been even more devastating.)

 

[Emily Lake]

I think the change from 'females' to 'individuals' does no harm and is, in fact, beneficial to individuals and society at large.

99% of sexual crimes are committed by individuals. 95% of the victims of sexual crime are individuals.

Individuals make up 51% of our society, but hold only 20% of political positions.

Individuals should be checked for cervical cancer annually. Individuals should be checked for prostate cancer beginning at age 50. Individuals should get mammograms beginning at age 40.

Individual violence against individuals has been rising during the pandemic, and there are not enough services accessible to individuals who have experienced violence.

Individuals in Afghanistan are now not allowed to be educated beyond grade sex, however individuals can continue education through post-secondary schooling. Individuals are also not allowed to drive cars, or to be out in public unless accompanied by individuals.

Individuals in large swaths of Africa are subjected to individual genital mutation. And in many parts of the world, fetuses are aborted specifically because they are individuals and only individuals are considered valuable to families.

 

[Metaphor]

No one called you a dictator. Please stop misrepresenting the views of others. While you are very good at it, it provides the basis for your persistent false accusations.

Hint: if you don't want me to think you called me a dictator, don't accuse me of 'wanting to dictate' policy.

The words you use in the OP and in your responses convey that you think the policy is wrong, should not have been enacted and should be abandonned. You are injecting your political tastes - a clear example of a double standard.

The policy is bad policy because it is a solution in search of a problem.

First, you are in no position to know all the influences that drove this policy. Second, regardless of the intent, this policy also injects another layer of medical safety.

We will have to see if the number of pregnant people imaged in error goes up or down. However, since the policy change was not the result of any pregnant person imaged in error, I wager the previous figure was zero, and it's very hard to go down from there.

 

[Emily Lake]

Yes.

I would advise him to learn about gynecomastia and other biological quirks that result in some people not conforming to society's gender expectations, like hirsutism in women or intersex conditions. I would tell him that there's nothing wrong with having male characteristics, female characteristics, intersex or asexual characteristics, but that sexism is deeply entrenched in our society so he'll probably have to deal with sex-based prejudice a lot, and I would urge him to seek out people who don't judge the worth of others based on their bodies.

And since the people harassing him are displaying very sexist thinking and trying to demean him, I would also advise him to avoid hanging out with them or buying into their bullshit.

I'd say there should be no shame attached to having a medical condition... but telling someone that there's nothing wrong can be quite misleading. Several CCSDs introduce increased likelihoods for cancers and other complications that actually do need awareness. For most CCSDs, at a minimum, there is a risk of sterility.

Learning about gyencomastia should include making the boy aware that he will be at increased risk of breast cancer, even if he has that breast tissue removed.

Honestly, this is one of the cases where the Trans activists latching on to CCSDs to make a point about gender does an immense disservice to people who actually have CCSDs. Those conditions are legitimate medical conditions that often have harmful effects on people. I don't think it's even remotely sexist to make sure that a boy with gynecomastia is aware that him having "female characteristics" like breasts DOES come with a risk.

He shouldn't be subjected to harassment or bullying, he shouldn't feel ashamed of it, certainly not. But "there's nothing wrong with it" is actually medically false.

 

[Metaphor]

Really. I think you must not have read her post 336. Or her post 338.

I hope you do read them and perhaps offer an apology.

I responded to her original post where her advice to the bullied child is 'you feel that way because you are sexist', and to instruct the child to get better friends.

I accept her backtracking, though I firmly believe Arctish cannot ever have been bullied given the advice she thought was reasonable.

 

[Emily Lake]

That is what Arctish expressed.

Oh come off it, Met. Arctish's response wasn't perfectly worded, but it is pretty clear what she was saying. Don't twist it around. Your stuff gets twisted all the time, and I know it bugs the hell out of you. So don't do the same thing.

 

[Metaphor]

There was already a safe alternative that was jettisoned for political reasons.

Again, I ask for a citation for this assertion.

I'm sorry, you would have to read and process the article in the OP.

 

[Emily Lake]

I agree that a great deal of information is gained from knowing biological sex, in terms of diagnosis and treatment. But this is not necessarily that simple: is the patient transsexual? Have they had gender conforming surgery? Do they retain testes? Ovaries? At what point—pre or post adolescence or mid, for that matter. Are they on a hormone replacement regime? And of course there are true intersex individuals or individuals who have a number of known anomalies—like I have which on only one occasion—which led to the discovery—had any effect on diagnosis or treatment. It’s really just something that I have filed away, to bring up and infirm a new provider.

A transsexual patient is still the same sex they were when they were conceived. If they are MtF, they still have a prostate, they still lack a uterus, and they will still have a male pelvis - even if they've had an orchiectomy and a vaginoplasty, that doesn't alter their sex. Likewise, if they're FtM, they will still lack a prostate and will still have a completely separate ureter and a female pelvis. Questions of whether they've had surgeries, and retain specific anatomies would be relevant in specific situations, and I would hope doctors are asking relevant questions. I think it would be absurd for a doctor to as a MtF transsexual whether they still have ovaries, seeing as they never had them in the first place. And it should be incumbent upon the patient to make sure their doctor is aware of ALL medications they are taking - including hormones!

I am with you 100% in sex does aftercare diagnosis and treatment.

I do not think asking about possible pregnancy is onerous or horrifying. I’ve seen the look on peoples faces when someone asks if that is a possibility when, until asked, it had not occurred to them that they might be pregnant. And they were pregnant!

I will bet you a thousand dollars that the person who turned out to be pregnant was NOT a male. Like I said above - asking about the possibility of pregnancy makes perfect sense for a female patient. It makes zero sense for a male patient.

I even know of someone who had been told she could not become pregnant, after years of trying and who later exhibited obvious signs of pregnancy but because her medical providers were so certain that pregnancy was impossible, it was ignored and she was given treatment that negatively affected the child she was carrying. No one even did a pregnancy test because they were convinced it was impossible. ( Yes, they were idiots and yes there was a lawsuit and yes, everyone has lived happily ever after—but it could have been even more devastating.)

Then her doctors have failed to do the very reasonable and responsible thing of verifying that a female patient is not pregnant, regardless of how unlikely they think it would be. But it still is ridiculous to extend that to asking male patients if they could be pregnant - they categorically CANNOT be pregnant.

 

[Metaphor]

That is what Arctish expressed.

Oh come off it, Met. Arctish's response wasn't perfectly worded, but it is pretty clear what she was saying. Don't twist it around. Your stuff gets twisted all the time, and I know it bugs the hell out of you. So don't do the same thing.

I asked Arctish:

So, when young boys or men are teased about gynecomastia, your advice would be 'you being upset about this is a sign that you have sexist thinking that demeans women'?

Her response started with 'yes'. She specifically said a victim of bullying was upset not because he was bullied but because he was sexist.

Then she felt the need to mention twice for the bullied victim to stop hanging around the people who are bullying him - betraying an incredible ignorance of how bullying operates.

If Arctish did not mean to convey those sentiments, she has yet to apologise for her appalling post.

As a child I was bullied on multiple fronts. I simply cannot believe Arctish has any subjective understanding of bullies and bullying.

Yes.

I would advise him to learn about gynecomastia and other biological quirks that result in some people not conforming to society's gender expectations, like hirsutism in women or intersex conditions. I would tell him that there's nothing wrong with having male characteristics, female characteristics, intersex or asexual characteristics, but that sexism is deeply entrenched in our society so he'll probably have to deal with sex-based prejudice a lot, and I would urge him to seek out people who don't judge the worth of others based on their bodies.

And since the people harassing him are displaying very sexist thinking and trying to demean him, I would also advise him to avoid hanging out with them or buying into their bullshit.

 

[laughing dog]

No one called you a dictator. Please stop misrepresenting the views of others. While you are very good at it, it provides the basis for your persistent false accusations.

Hint: if you don't want me to think you called me a dictator, don't accuse me of 'wanting to dictate' policy

I forgot my audience was pedantic and obtuse.

The words you use in the OP and in your responses convey that you think the policy is wrong, should not have been enacted and should be abandonned. You are injecting your political tastes - a clear example of a double standard.

The policy is bad policy because it is a solution in search of a problem.

Irrelevant to the point I made.

First, you are in no position to know all the influences that drove this policy. Second, regardless of the intent, this policy also injects another layer of medical safety.

We will have to see if the number of pregnant people imaged in error goes up or down. However, since the policy change was not the result of any pregnant person imaged in error, I wager the previous figure was zero, and it's very hard to go down from there.

I didn't realize that the UK Trust employed consultants from Australia to help then devise policy. Unless you were involved and had all the information, you are, once again, pulling responses out of your ass.

 

[Arctish]

Yes.

I would advise him to learn about gynecomastia and other biological quirks that result in some people not conforming to society's gender expectations, like hirsutism in women or intersex conditions. I would tell him that there's nothing wrong with having male characteristics, female characteristics, intersex or asexual characteristics, but that sexism is deeply entrenched in our society so he'll probably have to deal with sex-based prejudice a lot, and I would urge him to seek out people who don't judge the worth of others based on their bodies.

And since the people harassing him are displaying very sexist thinking and trying to demean him, I would also advise him to avoid hanging out with them or buying into their bullshit.

I'd say there should be no shame attached to having a medical condition... but telling someone that there's nothing wrong can be quite misleading. Several CCSDs introduce increased likelihoods for cancers and other complications that actually do need awareness. For most CCSDs, at a minimum, there is a risk of sterility.

Learning about gyencomastia should include making the boy aware that he will be at increased risk of breast cancer, even if he has that breast tissue removed.

Honestly, this is one of the cases where the Trans activists latching on to CCSDs to make a point about gender does an immense disservice to people who actually have CCSDs. Those conditions are legitimate medical conditions that often have harmful effects on people. I don't think it's even remotely sexist to make sure that a boy with gynecomastia is aware that him having "female characteristics" like breasts DOES come with a risk.

He shouldn't be subjected to harassment or bullying, he shouldn't feel ashamed of it, certainly not. But "there's nothing wrong with it" is actually medically false.

My male friend had breast cancer. He did not have gynecomastia. So I think the advice about the possibility of developing breast cancer should be given to everyone. There's nothing wrong with a human being having breast tissue but sometimes cancer can develop there.

And anyway, my advice regarding learning about gynecomastia would include learning about increased risks of harmful medical conditions.

 

[Arctish]

Really. I think you must not have read her post 336. Or her post 338.

I hope you do read them and perhaps offer an apology.

I responded to her original post where her advice to the bullied child is 'you feel that way because you are sexist', and to instruct the child to get better friends.

I accept her backtracking, though I firmly believe Arctish cannot ever have been bullied given the advice she thought was reasonable.

I didn't backtrack. I clarified.

Sometimes I forget that I have to be really, really wordy in my posts. I often have to keep re-stating my point in ever increasing detail when if I'd just created a wall-o-text in the first one, I'd be done already.