A reply to “Addressing gender imbalance in intensive care”

Abstract

© The Author(s) 2021. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http:// creat iveco mmons. org/ licen ses/ by/4. 0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http:// creat iveco mmons. org/ publi cdoma in/ zero/1. 0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. Dear Editors, As an intensive care physician, a researcher, a woman, and a mother of two small children, I read with great interest the viewpoint by Professor J.L. Vincent and colleagues, entitled “Addressing gender imbalance in intensive care” [1]. I completely agree on the fact that balancing medicine and family is a challenge, and the perception of “needing to choose” between work or family is still strong for female intensivists. Breastfeeding facilities, childcare policies, and institutions that promote flexibility are still lacking in many parts of the world and, as noted, are essential for reaching gender equity [2]. However, I think that strategies such as “giving grants and awards alternately to a male and female intensivist” and “ensuring gender balance in committees and as speakers at conferences and scientific events (applying quota if deemed appropriate)” are far from what we need to achieve gender balance in the workplace. Awards and grants should be given to those who deserve them, and speakers should be chosen on their scientific merits and abilities, and not on their gender. I would find it offensive to know I have been chosen for a role just for my gender, and I believe many of my colleagues, both male and female, share this point of view. What we really need is a cultural change. I think that we will achieve a true gender balance in intensive care when parenthood will become a responsibility that is shared equally between both parents. An important step for reaching this goal is requiring men to take paternity leave, as you suggested, but I believe that a shift in the language we regularly use is no less important. For example, the authors suggest that a method to improve gender balance could be to “provide conditions like maternity leave and in‐hospital nursery schools in order to facilitate female intensivists during their early motherhood period”. I think that if we truly wish to reach our goal, in the future this should be reworded as “provide conditions like maternity or paternity leave and in‐hospital nursery schools in order to facilitate intensivists during their early parenthood period”. I wish to thank the authors for reflecting on this very important aspect and hope that a true gender balance in intensive care is not far from becoming reality.