I have written before about Blood Donor Organisations, of the ethics of certain unplanned ‘donations’, of the slightly hilarious visit to an Australian Blood Clinic, and of the Government’s intrusion into what should always be a very private and personal family decision. I have also seen comments regarding the real reluctance of homosexuals to accept the very real worries regarding their exclusion from donations, if they have had unprotected sex within the last three months, culminating in the authorities caving in to the bent communities call for this disbarment being removed.
But this is possibly the first time I have written or spoken about a man being barred from a NHS blood donor session because he did not agree that men can become pregnant. A Scotsman, Leslie Sinclair, 66 years of age, has donated a formidable 126 pints of blood to the NHS. He stated that, when last he went to the clinic, he was handed the usual questionnaire, which Mr. Sinclair has always scrupulously filled in because all the questions are relevant to safety. He scrutinised the form, but baulked when he found one question which just did not follow natural biology.
The form question asked “Are you pregnant, or have you been pregnant in the last six months?” As Mr. Sinclair knew that not only had he not been pregnant, he also knew that, being a Man, it was biologically impossible to become pregnant, so he told the Blood Bank staff that he could not in all honesty, in truth, answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to that question.
Mr. Sinclair stated:- “There is always a form to fill in and that’s fine – they tend to ask about medical conditions or diseases – and clearly that’s because the blood needs to be safe. This time around, there was a question I hadn’t seen before: ‘Are you pregnant, or have you been in the last six months?’ which required a yes or no answer. ‘
I pointed out to the staff that it was impossible for me to be in that position but I was told that I would need to answer, otherwise I couldn’t give blood.
‘I told them that was stupid and that if I had to leave, I wouldn’t be back, and that was it, I got on my bike and cycled away.
‘It is nonsensical and it makes me angry because there are vulnerable people waiting for blood, including children, and in desperate need of help. But they’ve been denied my blood because of the obligation to answer a question that can’t possibly be answered.’
It emerged last night that all potential donors are asked if they are pregnant to ‘promote inclusiveness’ and because pregnancy is ‘not always visually clear’.
Last night Professor Marc Turner, director of SNBTS, said: ‘We appreciate the support of each and every one of our donor community and thank Mr Sinclair for his commitment over a long number of years. Whilst pregnancy is only a relevant question to those whose biological sex or sex assigned at birth is female, sex assigned at birth is not always visually clear to staff.
‘As a public body we take cognisance of changes in society around how such questions may be asked without discrimination and have a duty to promote inclusiveness – therefore all donors are now asked the same questions.’
Now I have a fairly uncommon blood type, uncommon enough that when I was booked in for a major operation about , the hospital’s blood bank had to ensure that my needs were capable of being met. Are we seeing possible donors being turned away because the people in charge believe that if a man says he is now a woman, he is also capable of giving birth?
Are the LUNATICS in charge of the Blood Donor Service so shackled to being ‘INCLUSIVE’ that they would either force a person to fill a form’s answer which they instinctively know to be false, or do without that person’s blood donation; all in the sacred name of ‘INCLUSIVITY’?
Madness, sheer unbridled Madness!