NHS patients to be interrogated about sexuality

[Rum]

From the article - amazing how two pages can appear with nobody much having actually read the fucking thing.

----------

"Paul Martin, chief executive of Manchester's LGBT Foundation, which worked with NHS England and others to develop sexual orientation monitoring, said he was "so proud" of the new standard.
He said earlier this week: "If we're not counted, we don't count."

The launch of sexual orientation monitoring was a "hugely important step in the right direction" towards addressing LGB inequality in health and social care, he said.
However, the foundation's good practice guide for healthcare professionals concedes that "some people will feel uncomfortable asking or being asked" about their sexuality.
It warns: "It would not be appropriate to ask someone's sexual orientation out loud in a busy reception area."

If a patient does not want to disclose their sexuality, "not stated" would be recorded as their response.

The guidance also says patients who are not able to declare their sexual orientation, for example if they require specialist mental capacity care, would be recorded as "not known".

Former Conservative education secretary Nicky Morgan said that "what looks good on paper... actually when translated into real life becomes very intrusive".

She told ITV's Peston on Sunday: "Could it be appropriate in some circumstances about some conditions or problems that people come to see their doctors about?
"But clearly (for) the majority you wonder why on earth they need to know.""

[Brian Peacock]

I'm sure the god-fearing Ms Morgan sees no problem with asking people about their religious affiliation even though the majority of us wonder why on earth they need to know.

[JimC]

The interrogation should involve lots of leather straps and feathers to tickle various things...

[Brian Peacock]

"Nursie needs to know if you've been a naughty boy..... (thwack!)."

[Scot Dutchy]

I dont live in Britain. Thank fuck.

I never know from one week to the next who am I. Even at 68 I still never know. What a load of bollocks.

[Brian Peacock]

I dont live in Britain.

Thank fuck.

[PsychoSerenity]

I've read a fair bit on this now and got some answers by going right back to the source. While in some places it has been presented as (and may only be used as) data collection for anonymous demographic analysis, the info may also be connected to your medical records so that every healthcare professional can see it before you even meet them. The intention of this seems to be to help start discussion on sexual orientation related issues or so doctors can offer more specific advice or treatment based on your category, in an attempt to reduce the inequalities in healthcare outcomes between different groups. This is despite the fact that many lgbt+ people do experience discrimination from (I would hope a small minority of) healthcare professionals when they do discuss matters relating to their sexual orientations. And it's questionable how useful the data alone would even be for assumptions of treatment options - for example as I saw brought up in the comments of the article in PinkNews, a substantial number of men who have sex with men still identify as straight anyway.

However good the intentions are, it really does not seem like a good idea to disclose your orientation to the system. Hopefully one day there will be less discrimination and it'll be easier to talk about these things. But if you need to discuss sexual health I think it would be better to do it anonymously at a GUM clinic where they'll likely to be very experienced with lgbt+ people, or for other sexuality related issues find a doctor you trust to deal with lgbt issues and tell only them. More genuinely anonymised surveys relating to specific conditions and sexual activities/orientations seem like a better way to monitor outcomes - these are how we know of the inequalities in the first place.

And as I said before, get qualified professionals actively working on the ground to help challenge discrimination where it occurs.

[Hermit]

"In the right context" it may be useful, just for medical purposes, and to prevent discrimination, mind, to ask people what their religion is, whether they are vegans, and a great number of other things, and add all those details to their profile. It is a well known fact that databases are never leaked, hacked or in any way used for purposes they were not originally intended for.

I regard the proposed measure as bureaucratic overreach. That said, I also don't think much of Crumple's substitution of the emotionally negatively charged "interrogate" for "asked". In the past I have not seen much value in his opinions. Now I see less value in him as a person.

[cronus]

"In the right context" it may be useful, just for medical purposes, and to prevent discrimination, mind, to ask people what their religion is, whether they are vegans, and a great number of other things, and add all those details to their profile. It is a well known fact that databases are never leaked, hacked or in any way used for purposes they were not originally intended for.

I regard the proposed measure as bureaucratic overreach. That said, I also don't think much of Crumple's substitution of the emotionally negatively charged "interrogate" for "asked". In the past I have not seen much value in his opinions. Now I see less value in him as a person.

I'm not a person. Crumple is the shadow of a person, a dream of a shadow of smoke. Most of my opinions here are for entertainment purposes only. You can add or subtract all the traits you want but it is you and your imagination doing this. You haven't experienced the health professionals at my local clinic, either.

[Hermit]

"In the right context" it may be useful, just for medical purposes, and to prevent discrimination, mind, to ask people what their religion is, whether they are vegans, and a great number of other things, and add all those details to their profile. It is a well known fact that databases are never leaked, hacked or in any way used for purposes they were not originally intended for.

I regard the proposed measure as bureaucratic overreach. That said, I also don't think much of Crumple's substitution of the emotionally negatively charged "interrogate" for "asked". In the past I have not seen much value in his opinions. Now I see less value in him as a person.

I'm not a person. Crumple is the shadow of a person, a dream of a shadow of smoke. Most of my opinions here are for entertainment purposes only. You can add or subtract all the traits you want but it is you and your imagination doing this. You haven't experienced the health professionals at my local clinic, either.

Your attempt to distance yourself from the shit you post does not work. All such attempts do is to reveal cowardice.

[Brian Peacock]

OMG. Crumple has invoked the Galaxianism of the third person, and you never see them posting to the same thread at the same time do you? Crumple IS Galaxian FACT - all attempts at denial are clearly a false flag intended to dupe the sheeple.