Maintain pressure on reforms to protect NHSPorn in IVF units criticised
Trusts have been criticised for supplying pornography in IVF facilities.
The think tank 2020health.org said the use of porn to help men produce sperm samples promoted “adultery of the mind”.
It surveyed 93 trusts that provide fertility services, of which 33 offer pornography in their IVF clinics.
Fifteen trusts got the material free of charge, as donations from patients or publishers, while 18 paid for material, which included DVDs and magazines.
These 18 trusts spent up to £100 each a year on porn, with the average spend on magazines being £21.32 per trust per year and a similar amount for DVDs.
All trusts used magazines and six clinics provided DVDs. Fifteen trusts purchased material from newsagents.
The cost of DVD equipment was generally not reported. However, one body - Royal Liverpool Women’s Foundation Trust - spent £7,350 on a media suite for its clinic for the viewing of pornography, the study claimed.
The think tank estimates the NHS spends £700 a year on porn, excluding the cost of viewing equipment.
Its director, Julia Manning, the report’s author, said two-thirds of NHS trusts surveyed did not supply porn, showing there was no genuine need for it.
“[A total of] 77% of the NHS workforce is female and they should never have to work in an environment that endorses pornography.
“That no-one allowed the demeaning impact on female staff to override any spurious claim that this material was necessary is an indictment of the managers of those fertility clinics.
“The public sector workplace should be a leading and inspiring example of a safe and healthy environment, which elevates the dignity and respect of both men and women. The presence of pornography compromises this.”
Ms Manning said NHS bosses were effectively telling men they they “should sexually objectify an unknown woman while producing a specimen, rather than think of a partner.”
View results 10 per page | 20 per page | 50 per page
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment.
Related images
PDF, size 0.8 MbOnline training units, written and reviewed by experts. Earn two hours' CPD and a personalised certificate for your portfolio.
Subscribers get five FREE learning units and non-subscribers can access each learning unit for £10 + VAT.
Share
Readers' comments (24)
Anonymous | 9-Sep-2010 12:31 pm
Dear oh dear oh dear, has this think tank nothing better to do, I hope it's not publically funded, if so could be earmarked for savings!
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 9-Sep-2010 1:20 pm
Has anyone noticed that 77% of the people IN pornographic material are women? I'm sure the academics at David Moore's are even now putting down their cans of Dandelion & Burdoch to free up their hands to do some -ahem- research.
Ms Manning really needs to rethink her remarks there, does she suggest that men take their partner in to help (many hands make light work etc) or perhaps that the donor takes in some images of their partner (who would check that is the case?)
I'm sure Ms Manning never intended to have her comments taken in such a way, and I'm sure that all Trusts will have carried out an Equality Impact Assessment to ensure that everyone's sensitivities are protected.
Presumably Ms Manning is also manning the ramparts over any aspect of sexual practices in the public eye.
A massive 300+ word story here proving once again through the NT journalists that sex sells.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 9-Sep-2010 1:22 pm
Adultery of the mind? Have they gone mad? Since when has thought been a crime?
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 9-Sep-2010 1:32 pm
Well said above anon - does anyone remember the good old days when we used to turn the taps on to help people give a urine sample - guess water meters mean that's not allowed now either.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 9-Sep-2010 3:03 pm
Has Ms Manning ever been to a fertility clinic? Having been in the unfortunate position of having to attend a fertility clinic for treatment I feel that she does not have a clue what she is talking about.
The pornography available is in a private room and is an aid to help men produce a sample. The last thing on a couples mind when the man enters that room is a feeling that he should be thinking of his partner and not the woman on the page/screen. They have other things on their minds like worry that the process will not work or his sperm will not be good enough etc.
The clinics where they do not supply helpful material the men probably take it in with them. At least the places that do supply the material are helping men who may be too shy or embarassed to go and take a magazine off the top shelf. Yes these men do exist.
I do not think that any female staff who work in a fertility clinic would find it demeaning that there is a magazine rack in a private room with pornography in it.
Most fertility clinics employ female staff. By the pure nature of the environment they are working in they are aware that men are giving samples either by their partners giving them a "helping hand" or by them looking at porn.
Maybe Ms Manning should talk to people who work and who have had to attend such clinics before making such crazy comments.
Adultry of the mind??? where the hell did that come from?
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 9-Sep-2010 4:50 pm
Anonymous | 9-Sep-2010 1:22 pm
The bible!
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 10-Sep-2010 7:53 am
My husand was in the unfortunate position having to practically "sterilise" himself before he could get to the task "in hand", there was no such material available and partners/wives were not allowed into these cubicles. it was a miracle he managed to provide his sample at all - such material would have greatly helped. Adultery of the mind, is that not what fantasies are?
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 10-Sep-2010 8:07 am
Isn't fertility and obstetrics a speciality entirely based upon sexual activity?
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 10-Sep-2010 8:31 am
How far do we go here people? Pornography incorporates not just graphic sexual images of women, but children and sex with animals. Years ago pornography was publicly scorned upon not just for it's anti religious conotations but it was viewed as invasive to marriages and relationships. It is also highly addictive, hence as with all things which potentially can produce addicts the government (which ever one you like) usually won't take the stand or responsibility to say no to things which the public want, so therefore submit to demand regardless of it's harmful potential. Just look at the moral decline in our society due to allowing whatever the public want. We live in a demand supply society, which is not always good for our society. That's why we have a government to govern, but they tend to put the onis on the people so they don't then have to take resposibility for the rot which is subtly permeates our society, or our IVF clinics. We have to draw the line somewhere and say no!
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 10-Sep-2010 9:53 am
I agree with anonymous above. If the majority of clinics can achieve the same result without pornographic material how is it's use justified. GET REAL .... Money spent on this material is actively promoting the pornographic industry which does include images and acts of sexual violence towards women and children and often falls into the hands of young boys. Yes, women are the main players in porn, and a substantail amount of women are also viewers, but lets be honest porn is humiliating and undignified and portrays women as 24/7 nymphomaniacs. Is this how you want us represented? I certainly don't.
I'm sure there is a more dignified way to helping men through this difficult task.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 10-Sep-2010 10:01 am
Well I'm glad my tax pound is going towards these people in these so called 'think tanks'. I have to disagree with the two previous posters but please come into the 21st century. Porn has existed for a long time and will continue to do so. If men don't want to watch it, they're not sat down in these clinics and ritualistically forced to watch porn. They have a choice whether to do so or not. Would you consider that going through a very difficult time like this would be made even more difficult by going into a cold, sterile clinical environment without anyone showing an ounce of being human? I know which one I'd prefer.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 10-Sep-2010 12:50 pm
To anon 10th Sep 08.31, what a stupid comment to make about animals and children, these would be illegal materials you surely dont think the fertility clinics would be suplying those! Personally I think its acceptable to supply magasines to help men produce specimens under pressure in very difficult circumstances. You also critise Governments for 'allowing people to have what they want' -give me freedom of choice anyday, I would not want to live in a society without it, If the female staff at these clinics are morally outraged they dont need to work there.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 10-Sep-2010 3:39 pm
I've always found that imagination to be much more powerful than pornography. I must be old-fashioned!
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 10-Sep-2010 4:17 pm
I imagine Ms. Manning is a big hairy panel beater brought up by the Plymouth brethren.
Alas not
http://www.livestream.com/conservatives/video?clipId=flv_46ba987a-e09d-4ea3-87b6-d2068a3fed52
2020health.org are a quasi conservative think tank. NT glad your still going after these stories yourselves like real journalists instead of printing whatever the press office send you.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 10-Sep-2010 5:30 pm
Having also needed the help of fertility services, I think that supplying porn is essential. Most men come into the small clinical room to watch their partners have egg retrieval, which is stressful and painful and are then asked to go and get on with it and provide a sample. How stressful would that be?
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 11-Sep-2010 6:14 pm
why do these people get paid lots of money to mess in things they know nothing about!!!
I am a fertility nurse specialist and it is my job to get women pregnant. to do this you need a good egg and a good sperm to make a good embryo.
It is a research based fact that a better sample is produced when the male is mentally aroused. We are expecting these men to masturbate in an unfamiliar setting with the pressure of knowing their partner has been through drugs and invasive procedures, but their part depends on what they can get on the day. If porn gets them a better sample we OFFER it and most men use it. It is discreetly placed in the room in a plain black file box and we say there are magazines if you want them. It is not offensive to anyone and quite simply any nurse working in this setting that is, is in the wrong job!
The fact that 2/3 of the clinics dont offer it does not mean it is not necessary and a waste of £700 for those that do. Its more likely that these clinic are forced to spend their funds on essentials like the sperm pots and simply dont have the resources to provide it!
This is a ridiculous and insulting piece of work by someone that has never had the misfortune to undergo fertility treatment. The last things these staff and patients are promoting or thinking of is adultery - be it of the mind or any other form!
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 12-Sep-2010 10:27 pm
I recommend reading the PDF leaflet. It wouldn't get a D for carefully argued thesis as a first year undergraduate essay.
Hardly the most difficult task you've ever faced though boys, is it?
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 13-Sep-2010 11:05 am
Anonymous | 11-Sep-2010 6:14 pm
you make a heartfelt plea for understanding here and yet it doesn't balance my abhorence of the porn industry and the unchallenged assumption that porn is required for men to produce their valuable sample.
I think you've bought into the using of certain people in your need/want to help others you think more deserving.
I'm interested in how you might feel if it was your daughter, sister or mother in those magazines?
It also prompts questions of how to collect these samples and alternatives, eg. that morning at home before arriving? sidesteps the question of aldultery mind or otherwise, respects everyone all round and doesn't bring the man's pleasurable experience to produce into such obvious conflict with the woman's painful procedure.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Steve Williams | 13-Sep-2010 8:19 pm
Dear Ms Julia Manning
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law as interpreted by the UK's right-wing Christian tea-bagging organisation called '2020health.org.'
Thanks to your exemplary (nearly) five-page document “Who said pornography was acceptable in the workplace?”
http://www.2020health.org/export/sites/2020/pdf/porn-3.pdf
and the enormous amount of quantitative and qualitative research work that you obviously carried out in preparing it for publication, It is indeed a burning question that the NHS really needs to address at this particular point in time!
Thanks to you, I now fully understand the moral dangers of pornography and of course the little known, until now, mortal sin of 'mental adultery.'
I have learned a great deal from your document, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend “spilling seed,” and its enormous cost to the NHS, for example, I will simply remind him that Genesis 38:9 clearly states it to be an expensive abomination. End of debate.
When people remark about women ultimately being “objectified” into prostitution – I merely point out that Jesus hung out with an ex-prostitute – Mary Magdalene. End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.
a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
e) I have a neighbour (a Nurse) who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?
f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than 'mental adultery?” I don't agree. Can you settle this?
g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?
h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?
i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
I know you and 2020health.org have studied these matters extensively, so I am confident you can help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging and also, in the process, saving the NHS millions of unnecessarily wasted pounds of the taxpayers' money.
P.S. Are you by any chance related to that charismatic and extensively educated lady Sarah Palin from the United States of America? You both sound very similar in your reasoning and political insight.
P.P.S. Concerning your apposite inclusion of 'mental adultery' as written in Matthew chapter 5 (NLT) where Jesus says to the disciples... Verses...
(27) "You have heard that the law of Moses says, 'Do not commit adultery.'
(28) But I say, anyone who even looks at a woman with lust in his eye has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
(29) So if your eye - even if it is your good eye - causes you to lust, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.
(30) And if your hand - even if it is your 'stronger' hand - causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.
My question is this... Wouldn't the repairing by the NHS of all this eye-gouging and self-amputation cause even more expense to the ConDem's UK economic recovery than the cost of providing a few “glopping” magazines in the privacy of a fertility clinic?
Your devoted disciple and adoring fan.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 14-Sep-2010 3:03 pm
I saw that one on the internet too Steve!
Unsuitable or offensive?