The NMC pay Stonewall to give advice on EDI issues. Since joining in 2011, language in policy has changed to known Stonewall terms, that will see organisations climb their rankings. For example, the NMC now gather data on what their registrants gender is (but not sex), assume all registrants have a gender identity in their data collection, use gender to describe sex, and use the term “sex assigned at birth”.
FOI’s to the NMC seeking to better understand the influence of Stonewall have been largely unsuccessful. What it has told us, is that there are areas of concern alongside matters of contention, such as the assertion that “Stonewalls guidance is based on the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC)’s Equality Act Code of Practice. However, Stonewall are currently in conflict with the EHRC.
The NMC’s income comes almost solely from the fees paid by registrants, who have to pay said fees to practice. Questions about whether us as the financiers have some influence on what the NMC use our fees to purchase have gone unanswered.
What influence do Stonewall and the rankings have on nursing and midwifery policy? The NMC declined to answer this in a recent FOI. A lobby group who endorse unsafe practice in healthcare, have no place influencing our profession, which prides itself on being the most trusted by the public.
The NMC assert that Stonewall influence their actions as an employer only. Why then, is the CNO being involved over their recent response to a letter asking them withdraw from Stonewall, signed by over 700 registrants? Why are we seeing the language within nursing standards change?
There are wider issues with nursing and women. The NMC currently pay four organisations with regard to EDI: Stonewall amongst others. There are no listed women’s groups, despite nursing being a majority female profession and the NMC being a majority female employer. Though offers have been made to address this, as per the invite on their website, these have not been accepted.
There is an increasing pattern when perusing fitness to practice hearings, which is the process a registrant goes through when they breach the NMC Code of Conduct. Despite nursing being almost 90% female, men are over over represented in hearings, and also in striking off orders- which suggests that the breaches of the code are more serious. Recent hearings with those appearing to be male (sex is not included in individual hearings) cite
disturbing breaches of the Code. There are countless cases of sexual violence, abuse of women, and convictions for paedophilia. Men are overwhelmingly the perpetrators.
One recent case saw a nurse who had been convicted of a sexual offence, suspended for only 6 months. Does this person inspire public trust? Should they be working with vulnerable women?
Registrants have questions to ask our regulator on its track record of women’s issue. We deserve a fair hearing and answers.