A review into the popularity of sex and gender in public services has said that the federal government should require all public bodies to take a firmer line on recording the biological sex moderately than gender identity.
The suggestion follows numerous cases by which failure or refusal to take sex under consideration potentially placed members of the general public in danger.
Of these probably the most egregious is the failure of police forces to record the sex of those accused or found guilty of sexual offences.
The most high profile incident of this sort was Isla Bryson. Bryson is a biological male who was previously generally known as Adam and now identifies as a girl. In 2023 Bryson was found guilty of raping two women, although by this time Bryson had begun the means of “transitioning”.
Bryson was initially sent to a women’s prison before public concern led to relocation to a male facility.
The review into government practice on this area was led by Professor Alice Sullivan from the Social Research Institute and University College London. The review said the federal government should require all police forces to record the sex of offenders, moderately than their gender identity.
So far, the federal government has pledged to contemplate the reviews findings, but has stopped wanting saying it can implement them.
Another area of concern is the health service. The review has said that the NHS should stop issuing recent NHS numbers to individuals who self-identify as a recent gender.
There are “clear clinical risks” to this practice as it may possibly mean people is not going to be called up for sex-specific procedures, corresponding to smear tests or prostate examinations. The review also identified the risks of lab results for patients being misinterpreted with “potentially fatal consequences” if the patient’s biological sex is just not clear.
Across the board, public bodies were criticised for having inconsistent records of individuals’s sex or gender.
The report also noted that staff in public services were afraid to challenge the brand new fluid approach to sex and gender, with many feeling that their workplace was a “hostile environment” by which they might not raise concerns on questions of sex and gender.
