At the very outset I’d like to state that the New Zealand Association of General Surgeons believes strongly in the concept of gender equality. It is unfortunate that this was not clearly reflected in the choice of speakers invited to talk at the recent Annual Scientific Meeting in Paihia.

It should be noted that there were female speakers within the programme. Four out of the total 12 speakers in the free-paper session were women surgeons, which equates to a third of the free papers. I recognise that these speakers were not visible in the provisional programme which advertised the scientific programme and the invited speakers. A further four female trainees had poster presentations. All the general surgeons in the Northland DHB surgical department, which includes two female surgeons, had a role in deciding the theme of the conference, including the invited speakers. The organising committee consisted of three surgeons, one of whom is a woman. I have spoken to all three of the conveners, and they all state that the speakers were chosen based on their expertise within their fields. At that point in time no thought was given to their gender. As the theme for the conference was the ‘History of New Zealand Surgery’, it transpired that most of the invited speakers were older surgeons. The conveners also extended invitations to other organisations to provide speakers. These included the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, EGGNZ, CADENZA, Southern Cross Insurance and Health Workforce NZ. The speakers were provided by these organisations without input from the organising committee. Each of these speakers transpired to be men.

It is well recognised that in the past the majority of surgeons have been male. This reflects the cultural norm of a generation past. However, there has been a significant effort made in the last two decades to redress this balance, and this is reflected in the fact that currently 40% of our surgical trainees are female. Twenty-four percent of the new fellows qualifying in 2017 were female, and women make up nearly a quarter of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, Councilors and committee members. NZAGS has only recently become responsible for selecting surgical trainees, but the figures that I have access to between 2010 and 2016 show that there has been significant progress in gender equality. In this six-year time-period there have been 167 applicants to the New Zealand General Surgery Training Programme (102 male and 65 female). That equates to female applicants making up 39% of the total number applying. Fifty-six candidates have been selected in that six-year period, of which 59% were male and 41% female. This represents a success rate of 35.4 % overall for female candidates and a 32.4% success rate for male candidates. Allowing for the sample size, this would seem to suggest that male and female applicants have an equal chance of being selected. I think this should be seen as a very positive step towards the “truly gender-neutral meritocracy” that Ms Rudland is advocating for.

Ms Rudland’s letter is quite wide-ranging, and touches on many aspects of gender equality in surgery. I note that only one of the papers referenced relates specifically to New Zealand. I am hopeful that New Zealand may have a better track record for working towards gender equality than perhaps some of the countries from which this research emanates. I am happy to report that the NZAGS CEO is a woman. In my position as President of NZAGS I can only reply to Ms Rudland’s concerns regarding the lack of invited female speakers at our recent Annual Scientific Meeting. Ms Rudland described the choice of presenters as “disrespectful and discriminatory” and suggested that the conveners were at best lazily “falling back on the ‘old boy’ network” and that at worst this was “deliberate, blatant sexism”. I am disappointed in the overall tone of the letter. The use of emotive terms such as “pale male” and “hardened misogynistic man” only serve to distract from what is otherwise an important issue. In defense of our organising committee, I would like to reiterate that there was no intent to exclude female speakers. Speakers were selected on their expertise, without thought given to gender or creed. But this is a timely reminder that future conference conveners need to make positive steps to ensure that there is gender parity. I am told by Philippa Mercer, the conference convener for the 2019 NZAGS ASM in Christchurch, that there are a good number of invited female speakers from across New Zealand on the programme.

The New Zealand Association of General Surgeons has many female members, and will continue to strive toward gender equality. Indeed, we support diversity and equality throughout our membership.

Nãku noa, nã

‍

At the very outset I’d like to state that the New Zealand Association of General Surgeons believes strongly in the concept of gender equality. It is unfortunate that this was not clearly reflected in the choice of speakers invited to talk at the recent Annual Scientific Meeting in Paihia.

It should be noted that there were female speakers within the programme. Four out of the total 12 speakers in the free-paper session were women surgeons, which equates to a third of the free papers. I recognise that these speakers were not visible in the provisional programme which advertised the scientific programme and the invited speakers. A further four female trainees had poster presentations. All the general surgeons in the Northland DHB surgical department, which includes two female surgeons, had a role in deciding the theme of the conference, including the invited speakers. The organising committee consisted of three surgeons, one of whom is a woman. I have spoken to all three of the conveners, and they all state that the speakers were chosen based on their expertise within their fields. At that point in time no thought was given to their gender. As the theme for the conference was the ‘History of New Zealand Surgery’, it transpired that most of the invited speakers were older surgeons. The conveners also extended invitations to other organisations to provide speakers. These included the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, EGGNZ, CADENZA, Southern Cross Insurance and Health Workforce NZ. The speakers were provided by these organisations without input from the organising committee. Each of these speakers transpired to be men.

It is well recognised that in the past the majority of surgeons have been male. This reflects the cultural norm of a generation past. However, there has been a significant effort made in the last two decades to redress this balance, and this is reflected in the fact that currently 40% of our surgical trainees are female. Twenty-four percent of the new fellows qualifying in 2017 were female, and women make up nearly a quarter of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, Councilors and committee members. NZAGS has only recently become responsible for selecting surgical trainees, but the figures that I have access to between 2010 and 2016 show that there has been significant progress in gender equality. In this six-year time-period there have been 167 applicants to the New Zealand General Surgery Training Programme (102 male and 65 female). That equates to female applicants making up 39% of the total number applying. Fifty-six candidates have been selected in that six-year period, of which 59% were male and 41% female. This represents a success rate of 35.4 % overall for female candidates and a 32.4% success rate for male candidates. Allowing for the sample size, this would seem to suggest that male and female applicants have an equal chance of being selected. I think this should be seen as a very positive step towards the “truly gender-neutral meritocracy” that Ms Rudland is advocating for.

Ms Rudland’s letter is quite wide-ranging, and touches on many aspects of gender equality in surgery. I note that only one of the papers referenced relates specifically to New Zealand. I am hopeful that New Zealand may have a better track record for working towards gender equality than perhaps some of the countries from which this research emanates. I am happy to report that the NZAGS CEO is a woman. In my position as President of NZAGS I can only reply to Ms Rudland’s concerns regarding the lack of invited female speakers at our recent Annual Scientific Meeting. Ms Rudland described the choice of presenters as “disrespectful and discriminatory” and suggested that the conveners were at best lazily “falling back on the ‘old boy’ network” and that at worst this was “deliberate, blatant sexism”. I am disappointed in the overall tone of the letter. The use of emotive terms such as “pale male” and “hardened misogynistic man” only serve to distract from what is otherwise an important issue. In defense of our organising committee, I would like to reiterate that there was no intent to exclude female speakers. Speakers were selected on their expertise, without thought given to gender or creed. But this is a timely reminder that future conference conveners need to make positive steps to ensure that there is gender parity. I am told by Philippa Mercer, the conference convener for the 2019 NZAGS ASM in Christchurch, that there are a good number of invited female speakers from across New Zealand on the programme.

The New Zealand Association of General Surgeons has many female members, and will continue to strive toward gender equality. Indeed, we support diversity and equality throughout our membership.

Nãku noa, nã

‍