When Pain Is Ignored: One Woman’s Fight Against Medical Misogyny

Initial Discovery and Escalating Discomfort

During a routine colonoscopy undertaken for an unrelated health issue, clinicians noticed an unexpected indentation in Rachel’s abdomen. At that point she was already experiencing intermittent discomfort, but the situation rapidly deteriorated when a pronounced swelling—described by Rachel as a “great big mound”—began to protrude visibly on her abdominal wall.

Concerned about the sudden change, Rachel’s husband escorted her to the local hospital. There, a computed tomography (CT) scan revealed the presence of free fluid within the abdominal cavity, a finding that suggested an underlying pathology. Rachel hypothesised that the indentation might represent an ovarian cyst, and while a doctor acknowledged this possibility, no concrete diagnostic steps were taken.

First Hospital Discharge and Worsening Symptoms

Following the initial assessment, Rachel was discharged from the hospital. Over the subsequent hours, the pain intensified dramatically and she began to develop a feverish condition, indicating a possible infection or inflammatory response.

She returned to the emergency department, reiterating her concerns about a potential ovarian cyst. A doctor attempted to refer her to the gynaecological team, but the referral was redirected, with the patient being sent instead to the general surgery department.

Repeated Reassignments and the “Not Anyone’s Patient” Experience

After an overnight stay in hospital, Rachel’s condition failed to improve. New gastrointestinal symptoms, including diarrhoea, emerged, and she was provisionally diagnosed with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The gastroenterology department, however, dismissed this diagnosis upon further review.

Rachel recalls the bewildering sequence of messages she received: “You’re not an emergency patient, you’re not a gastro‑patient, you’re not a surgical patient.” This relentless reclassification left her feeling as though she occupied no defined place within the healthcare system.

She was subsequently discharged with a course of antibiotics, despite persistent abdominal pain and an unclear underlying cause.

Self‑Investigation and Uncovering Oversights

Back at home, Rachel undertook a thorough review of her medical records. Her analysis highlighted two significant discrepancies in the radiology reports. The first CT scan, she noted, had failed to provide an assessment of the reproductive organs entirely. The second scan described a “global mild stranding of the mesenteric fat,” a phrase that signifies widespread inflammation throughout the abdominal lining.

These observations contradicted the clinicians’ earlier statements that the scans were normal, suggesting a missed opportunity for earlier intervention.

Continued Dismissal and the Search for Answers

During a subsequent appointment at another hospital, clinicians entertained the possibility of food poisoning as an explanation for Rachel’s symptoms. “You’re not listening to me,” she asserted, highlighting a pattern of being spoken over and having her primary concern—her reproductive health—systematically ignored.

Frustrated by the continual redirection of her case, Rachel expressed her inability to endure the endless cycle of dismissal and misattribution. “I just can’t cope with the constant dismissal and reassigning my pain and my perception of the problem to causes that I don’t believe are true,” she said.

Private Diagnosis and the Reality of Adenomyosis

After exhausting NHS avenues, Rachel sought private medical care. The private specialist diagnosed her with adenomyosis, a condition in which the lining of the womb, known as the endometrium, grows into the muscular wall of the uterus, causing severe pelvic pain and heavy menstrual bleeding.

Rachel’s experience resonated with many women she consulted. The overwhelming response was a shared sense of having been unheard: “I’ve had this kind of issue, they haven’t listened.” This anecdotal evidence underscores a broader pattern of women’s gynaecological concerns being minimised or overlooked.

Political Advocacy and Institutional Response

Determined to bring systemic change, Rachel approached her local Member of Parliament, Labour representative Josh Dean. Dean raised the matter in Parliament, prompting a formal question to the Department of Health and a meeting with Health Secretary Wes Streeting.

Rachel praised Wes Streeting’s readiness to address the issue, stating, “Wes Streeting doesn’t need convincing of this issue. I think he’s doing the right things by challenging the cultural issues and establishing more pathways and structures to enable women to get the care they need for these gynaecological conditions.”

The Department of Health acknowledged the criticism, conceding that the NHS had “let women and girls down for too long.” A spokesperson for the Department of Health and Social Care added that the renewed Women’s Health Strategy aims to give women a genuine voice and greater power over their own health decisions.

Broader Implications and the Need for Cultural Shift

Rachel argues that the problem extends beyond the confines of hospitals and clinics, permeating societal attitudes toward women’s health. She observes that the moment menstrual bleeding is mentioned, the prevailing response often becomes, “Oh, it’s all right, then get on with it.” This dismissive mindset, she contends, must be challenged to ensure that women receive appropriate, timely, and respectful medical care.

Her narrative illustrates how a combination of systemic inertia, gender bias, and fragmented referral pathways can leave patients in prolonged pain, while also highlighting the importance of patient advocacy, both individually and through political channels.