During the Spring 2015 Liberal Democrat Conference, the LGBT+ Liberal Democrats moved an amendment aimed towards extending the Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy—which effectively prohibits the use of sexual orientation conversion therapy on the NHS—to transgender people. Originally, the amendment was a much larger policy motion, but after it fell at the Federal Conference Committee due to time concerns, the motion was repurposed into an amendment. The original mover of the amendment was LGBT+ Chair Dave Page, who switched with Sarah (Elizabeth) Brown to allow her to move the amendment, with the summation waived by Dave to me. The amendment passed without opposition, and my speech is, as always, below the cut.
Last month I wrote a post about the state of transgender health in the NHS in Leeds. However, I realise that the post, written from the perspective of a cisgender ally, misses out the most important aspect of all: the transgender perspective. I hence asked on the LUU LGBT Society’s group page for said perspective, which kind of confirmed what I thought: that the doctors at the student medical practice are really accepting of a person’s trans status, but it’s lagging in some areas: the lack of publicity and literature in the student practice, a lack of support groups, and a perceived slowness in the NHS (although that may just be the NHS’s inertia, and not just limited to transgender health).
That said, other than the lack of awareness of these issues, I’m left with a slightly higher opinion of how Leeds treats trans people. Anyone who knows me personally knows that I don’t shut up about LGBT issues, and, of the people I know (although, given the circles I associate with, this may be skewed), nearly all of them are trans-positive. Especially the university’s LGBT society, who are absolutely brilliant. I did go back to the GP the other day, though, and there isn’t any literature I could find on gender issues, but, again, it may just be inertia. I hope that, even with the NHS changes coming through, that trans people will get better treatment (as it does needs to improved), and not worse over time. I personally think it will.
Just a short post, based on something I came across today while waiting for an appointment at the GP’s today. As you would, while waiting for the appointment I had a flick through some of the leaflets on display, and one of the leaflets was rather conspicuous in what was – or was not – present: Continue reading “Transgender people and NHS Leeds”
I’m taking some cues of my friend over at Legal Fiction by doing a short blog on human rights, the bête noire of all of our so beloved right-wing newspapers. I’m going to not cover the minutae of things such as judicial review, because he’s done it already. And he knows it better than me.
It’s been a disastrous month for the European Court of Human Rights in British opinion. Not only did they have to deal with prisoner voting, but now there’s news about an impending case before the ECHR about prisoners in psychiatric units being given “pocket money” – or, as the Daily Mail put it so eloquently, “Killers and rapists go to European Court of Human Rights to win full state benefits“. It’s a perfect story for the Mail; they can rag on criminals, benefit claimants, the mentally ill, and Europe at the same time! I mean, factually, the headline is correct. But the intention of the article is to equate people who did these horrific acts because they were severely mentally ill (and thus, not responsible for their crimes) with those like, say, Ian Huntley or Harold Shipman. It’s bad for mental health awareness, but it’s absolutely terrible because these newspapers are using this as a way to score cheap political points. Continue reading “It’s me yuman rites, innit?”