Woman's Hour - Lucy Chappell; Æthelgifu the Medieval Abbess; Women on Boards; Women and Festive TV.

Episode Date: December 16, 2021

During a recent Business Questions in parliament Jacob Rees Mogg took a moment to mark the feast of St Æthelgifu, and called the medieval abbess one of Britain’s leading saints. But was she? What do we really know about Æthelgifu and the other leading medieval women at this time? We talk to Florence Scott, a historian of early medieval England, studying for a PhD at Leeds University, and who runs the blog Aelfgif-who?A new survey shows that for the first time more women than men are sitting as non executive directors on boards. But at the same time nine out of ten executive directors are still men. We talk to Tessa Bamford from Spencer Stuart the organisation that conducted the research and also to Ann Cairns Executive Vice Chair of Mastercard who is also the lead non-executive board member of the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS).On Tuesday we talked about pregnant women getting jabbed, getting the booster and fears that some women have about how it will affect their fertility. All pregnant women have been able to get COVID-19 vaccines since April, when the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) advised they should be offered two vaccine doses at the same time as the rest of us based on their age and clinical risk group. Despite this, the government has come under fire for months for not encouraging enough pregnant women to get vaccinated, with many women concerned about what they see as mixed messages coming at them. So what needs to be done to get more pregnant women vaccinated and get the booster? Professor Lucy Chappell is the Chief Scientific Officer for the Department of Health and Social Care.The Christmas Radio Times is out and we now know what TV we can look forward to watching over the festive period. But can TV divide a household rather than unite it? Are women the gatekeepers of family TV? Or, do men rule the remote? Professor of Media and Communications, Catherine Johnson, has looked at the impact lockdown has had on our family TV watching styles. Journalist Emma Beddington tells us what she’ll be tuning into in her house.Picture of Æthelgifu courtesy of illustrator Pollie Scott.

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK. I'm Natalia Melman-Petrozzella, and from the BBC, this is Extreme Peak Danger. The most beautiful mountain in the world. If you die on the mountain, you stay on the mountain. This is the story of what happened when 11 climbers died on one of the world's deadliest mountains, K2, and of the risks we'll take to feel truly alive. If I tell all the details, you won't believe it anymore. Extreme, peak danger. Listen wherever you get your podcasts.

BBC Sounds. Music, radio, podcasts. Hello, I'm Emma Barnett and welcome to Woman's Hour from BBC Radio 4. Hello, welcome to today's programme where I hope we can answer some of your questions about right now. What to do, what not to do as the new COVID-19 variant Omicron continues to surge across the country. Who better to join us than Professor Lucy Chappell, the Chief Scientific Officer for the Department of Health and Social Care. One of the most senior women helping manage and attempt to control the outbreak of the latest variant. Your questions are very welcome, please. I can already see because we put this out on social media earlier that some of those have already come in.

But whether you've got questions from what you should be doing or shouldn't be doing, we've already got one of those, to visiting care homes, how to care for others, because we know women predominantly shoulder that particular burden and duty, to questions about schools, to fears around the booster, and what to think about fertility, pregnancy, long COVID, which has been shown in a new study out this morning to affect women more. And also anything else that you can think of, I'll try to put to Professor Chappell,

who is my first guest this morning. Those numbers that you need, you can text WOMEN'S HOUR on 84844. Text WILLBECHARGED at your standard message rate. On social media, it's at BBC WOMEN'S HOUR. Or email me your thoughts, your questions, your dilemmas via our website. Also on today's programme,

women from history we have forgotten, or perhaps got wrong, the story of a medieval abbess who came up in Parliament this week. A professor of criminology will also be on the programme, shedding light on women, motherhood, and extreme cruelty. And television, the great unifier or divider. Who

has control in your house if you live with people? Of course, things are changing at the moment. Plans are in a state of flux. But perhaps the one thing, the one source of entertainment and companionship you can rely on is your TV. We'll be getting into how lockdown and how this last 18 months, now 20 months or so, I must update myself, has changed our relationship with entertainment in our own homes. But first, without further ado, to Professor Lucy Chappell, the Chief Scientific Officer for the Department of Health and Social Care. Good morning. Good morning, and thank you very much for inviting me to be with you today.

Well, there are a lot of questions, and I'll do my best to get through what we get in from our listeners, but also some of the ones I know we do need to ask. And I actually thought, just to flag on Tuesday, and I know you want to talk about this, especially with your background in obstetrics. On Tuesday, we did do a special segment of the programme with Dr. Vicky Mayle about the evidence that exists to show not only are the jabs safe, the vaccinations, the COVID vaccinations safe for pregnant women, but also why you could trust are the jabs safe, the vaccinations, the COVID vaccinations safe for pregnant women, but also why you could trust that the booster is safe also for pregnant women and why it's incredibly important for women to have those. And pregnant women, I should say, in this particular instance, if people want to catch up on that discussion in full, they can do so on BBC Sounds

on Tuesday's programme. But there's been a development since then that I wanted to get us up to date with, which is that pregnant women who have taken that advice are reporting now queuing for hours at busy vaccination centres for their booster jab, despite being at greater risk from COVID-19 to get seriously ill if they were to get it. Can I ask your view or what the government's view is or what you're aware of the thinking is around potentially having different lines or different priority queues because that's what doctors are asking for. Thank you. We really recognise the concern that COVID-19 infection is for pregnant women and their babies and we really want to emphasise the message that we urge all pregnant women to come forward for their first dose or their second dose or their booster vaccine.

We've seen new data from the UK Health Security Agency published at the end of November that really showed looking at the vaccinations in the first half of this year, that looking at outcomes that really emphasise the safety. And that was also balanced with data from the MHRA, our independent regulator, which has looked at all those reports. So it's hard to hear those stories, and I understand that. And we would like to work very closely with those involved in operations to see how we can improve the experience of pregnant women being vaccinated. And some of this can be done at a national level, but I also recognise that some of it is best done at a local level, where the arrangements are best suited to the vaccination centre. I'd like to think that all

vaccination centres can consider how to not have pregnant women queuing for three hours, because we know that we wouldn't expect that in normal circumstances. But we also recognise the challenge of trying to roll this booster out at speed and at pace. And therefore, rather than making a sort of single national diktat, we think that this is best considered both from the national and local perspective. There are the nature of the vaccination means that it is harder just to, you know, people might ask, why aren't we putting it into antenatal clinics? And we are exploring that, but it's not a sort of a magic bullet because we are trying to reach a very large proportion of the population with the booster. So work very much ongoing. How quickly could it be an antenatal clinic? So the difficulty is that the vaccine, because of the supply chain and how it's stored, cannot automatically be given in antenatal clinics.

We know that there are a few individual trusts, but I think it is worth thinking about how at individual maternity units, we hear of really good examples where the obstetricians and midwives are working with their hospital vaccination centre to get the most joined up approach to offering pregnant women the vaccination. I've already seen that in my own trust. So within trusts, that could be a move. But for anyone, I mean, for instance, there's a report on the BBC today, Jane, not her real name. She's 34 weeks pregnant with her first child. She's told the BBC she waited an hour and a half in Belfast to get her booster despite being obviously very visibly pregnant and stewards counting people waiting in line. She wasn't invited to move to the front. Are you now saying, as the chief scientific officer, that you should be moving pregnant

women to the front? So I'm not, I don't think that a one size fits all is going to be the right answer here. I think that both through NHSE and the devolved administrations, should consider whether they want to think about queue management. But I very much hope with the massively increasing number of clinics and slots that we can address this through increasing availability. I really recognise how positive it is that the public have come forward, but I hope that we won't be seeing three-hour queues. really recognise how positive it is that the public have come forward. But I hope that we won't be seeing three-hour queues. And I hope that the really ramped up, amazing work by both the vaccinators,

the volunteers and everyone will start to see much greater availability so that this is not sustained. Although I have to say, we've just had a message from Helen who says, that's great advice, but at eight months pregnant, I can't get a first vaccine anywhere. And she says she's in Shropshire. What should Helen do? I think with the with the I hope that we will see ever increasing availability of slots and that from the operation side at NHSE for the Shropshire case that we will. I'd ask her to keep on continuing to look at the options. What does that mean, refreshing her screen?

Refreshing that, I mean, there will be walk-in options, but I really understand as an obstetrician that that's not an easy ask. So I hope that it will be a combination of increasing slots, looking for opportunities when the queues are less. But I hope that, I know that so many people in the vaccinations programme are trying so hard. Really, if people can come forward to help volunteer, then that is so appreciated because we all want to get everyone boosted and we want to get make the options better for pregnant women. We now have some questions with regards to vaccinating children, as well as some social questions as well which I promised to get to because I'm going to be honest here Lucy Chappell you're sorting out some people's Christmases

even if you hadn't banked on that because people really don't know what to do. So let's get to those in just a minute. With regards to children it's my understanding that from Monday certainly in England 12 to 15 year olds are going to be offered the second jab. That's where they're up to in that. How's that going to be given out? How's that being organised? Because there has been a lot of criticism about how the first lot of that was done, if you were even done, because as of December the 10th in England, only 44% of 12 to 15 year olds in England have been vaccinated.

So as far as I'm aware, it's going to be a combination, as we've had through the school's immunisation programme and through the public one. So children are already able to go, have been vaccinated partly through the school's immunisation programme, and they've worked so hard since the announcement to offer it more widely. And we know that they will continue in the new year to be offering that service through schools. But is also possible to if schools are open yes and we you know we know how important it is to try and keep schools open we know that's a real push particularly but for children of all ages we really want to keep them in school for their education for their mental health. And so I know that everyone will be wanting to consider how we make that happen.

Obviously, with rising Omicron cases, that will be challenging both in terms of cases in children and cases in staff. And I think that reiterates why getting a booster now alongside lateral flow testing in many circumstances will help to to keep children in school. There is also again, if you can get a lateral flow test, I mean, there have been issues with supplies. I'm just trying to insert what I can see what's coming in. So it'll be a mixture for children 12 to 15 through schools and through local provision. Yes. Yes. And there is lateral flow testing on return to schools, which we know is being rolled out at the beginning of January.

Again, I know that we've seen a blip in lateral flow test availability, but there are lateral flow tests in the system. And I very much hope that we will see more even distribution of those so that people can access lateral flow test when they need them. If you're just joining us, you're listening to Professor Lucy Chappell, the Chief Scientific Officer for the Department of Health and Social Care. Where do you come out on the vaccination of five-year-olds? A decision on whether to vaccinate children as young as five could be made before Christmas. That's one of the government's top advisors on vaccines has said. This is a difficult decision and that is why I think it is a real strength that we have the independent JCVI, the Joint Committee on Vaccinations and Immunisations, together with our independent regulator. We have an infrastructure in the UK that means that this is not a political decision. This is a JCVI and a regulator decision and we absolutely anticipate that the government will wait for those two parts of the

review and then follow that guidance. So we're waiting on that? You haven't got anything to say as of yet because of course people are worrying about younger children. Yes I can understand that and I've seen the case rates in those age groups but I think it will add to public confidence if they know that it's been through that scrutiny. And so it is definitely being reviewed by the JCVI and by the independent regulator. And I think that's completely the right approach. Okay. There's some questions here I said about, you know, sort of people's lives at the moment. Let's just do a few of them if we can. Imogen said, Hi Lucy, if I've tested positive for COVID early in the month

and I'm now out of my isolation period, can I assume that I am immune to COVID and go out to bars and restaurants and party like it's 1999, albeit and inevitably possibly on my own? So that's a good question. Yes, you will have some immunity, but it doesn't make it the right thing

just to go and party wildly. Partly because I think we all need to review how we are socialising, given the rising increase. And to consider it both, not just at an individual level, but at a societal level. So there is some immunity, but remembering that the immunity or previous vaccination or previous infection with Delta may not provide complete immunity from Omicron. And we are learning about how Omicron and Delta variants interact with each other. We're actually seeing a rise in Omicron cases over and on top of Delta cases. Because, of course, if you get diagnosed now or you get tested positive, I should say, you don't know which one you've got.

You don't initially. We are doing testing through PCR, followed by sequencing for a proportion of cases to understand what proportion is Omicron. We know that the proportion of cases of Omicron in London is rising very sharply, followed by Scotland and other areas of England. But we saw the very sharp increase in cases yesterday to 78,000. And we are well aware that this is rising. Imogen shouldn't be going out partying a lot or at all? I mean, you know, got to get this sorted for Imogen. Yeah. So I think we all need to look at our socialising and what we are going to choose to prioritise. Because for many of us, as it comes up to Christmas, we would like to prioritise a smaller number of contacts with the people who are really crucial to us

and that may be family around Christmas or other holidays. Have you cancelled some plans if you don't mind me asking? So I've looked at my plans and I'm choosing to prioritise the ones that really matter which are my close family And I'm making adjustments because I think we all have to do our part. So for instance, if you were going out, I've got a message here about going to a concert this weekend. One part of the family's vaccinated, the other part got their boosters in a few days time. Can they all still go? Would you still go? So every additional contact will increase the risk of transmission. And so everyone's going to have to make their own priorities. And it's not going to be a one size fits all for this concert or that party.

It's going to be how, what do I do to reduce my contacts at this time when the health service, you know, cases are rising and the health service is facing increasing pressures. We know how hard so many people are working, particularly in health and social care. I was going to say, and I've got a question from some people working in health and social care in a moment, but Susie in West Sussex says, Lucy, we have tickets for an indoors event

at a 3,000-seater venue on Saturday. My husband's had his booster, but the children and I haven't. We've all been looking forward to it for months and tickets were expensive. Should we go? We're also getting the train there and back. If you were Susie in West Sussex, would you go? It's very hard to speak for every individual.

And I think the message is think about testing and testing on whether you're going out to an area such as shopping or to any of these events. The COVID pass will ask for vaccination or test status. And if that is the one event that matters, then an individual might make the decision that that is what they're going to go to. But then they're going to have to look at the rest of their contacts

over this period to see how they can, again, reduce contact. The virus spreads by transmission clearly and so everyone considering what matters to them and where they want to spend their time is the most relevant. It wouldn't be possible for me to make individual decisions but to say these are the principles of it. Well it's good to hear the principles and you know you yourself have been making your own adjustments and people are trying to do accordingly. The health secretary has announced new restrictions on visitors to care homes to protect the most vulnerable from yesterday. Residents in care homes, as well as those receiving our home care, will be limited, I should say, in England to just three nominated visitors and their main carer.

Booster jabs and testing for staff also going to be expanded in social care. I recognise your brief comes from the Department of Health and Social Care. But in a report in The Guardian yesterday, one of the UK's largest private care providers has gone further and has banned resident families, residents families, excuse me, from making in-person visits unless they are chosen as essential caregivers. This is Barchester, whose facilities are home to around 11,000 people. Is that too far? So we recognise that residents in care homes were really impacted by the previous waves of COVID-19 and it's hard decisions both for the care homes

and for the residents and their families across this. We know that we really want to keep care home residents safe and that that's a balance between COVID and companionship. And so the government has given guidance that it currently permits three visitors and an essential carer. But I appreciate that care homes may need to do individual consideration of that, for example, relating to how prevalent COVID-19 is in their area. So the government provides that guidance. We are also increasing staff testing from two lateral flow to three lateral flow and a weekly PCR test. Other work around fully vaccinated residents who are visiting out. So we will continue to review those. We do recognise the extraordinary pressures that social care are under. And that's why we've introduced some new measures, particularly the booster programme. And we would urge everyone in the social care settings,

whether it's care homes or in domiciliary care, to ensure that they're up to date with boosters. And we've got special vaccination teams going out. And also the £300 million fund to recruit and really recognise the social care workforce in our society, because this has got to be a sort of a package, not an individual piecemeal consideration. A couple of questions, perhaps for shorter answers, if that's possible. Not that your answers aren't valuable, but more that I want to just get through a few while I have you, a few more, if I may. Lynn says, please answer my question now.

Imogen, going back to Hose, asking about going out after having COVID. Somebody else reflecting on the morality of that, Catherine. But what is the guidance regarding lateral flow tests after COVID? How soon should one take a lateral flow test after COVID? NHS website says no PCR test for 90 days, nothing about lateral flow test.

Please answer now. Thank you. I will look at clarifying that advice on the website rather than jumping to an answer because I think it is rapidly changing in Omicron times. And so before I jump to, I'd rather give more consideration to that answer. I think it raises a really important point and I take that away. With the uncertainties of Omicron, we may not have all the answers instantly, but I

take that on. Okay. Well, that's good. We'll hopefully get an answer and some clarification and that will be publicised. Thank you for looking at that for one of our listeners. Could you please ask Lucy, says Gail, if we have data, in what ways Omicron is more transmissible, please? Obviously still airborne, but does it take less contact time to pass it on or smaller viral load? Yeah, those are really good questions. So we are still understanding a lot about how Omicron is being transmitted. So the most noticeable thing is that there is a massive shortening in the doubling time. So the doubling time is less than two days. The other aspect of this is, for example, with a household contact, we are seeing a higher proportion of household contacts test positive, all suggesting this transmissibility.

But very much work ongoing. And I think we've seen how engaged the public are with our sort of data coming out. But in a rapidly changing situation, new data are emerging all the time. Sian says, thank you for that. I've invited a friend to stay between Christmas and New Year, will be with my parents and brother who have ongoing underlying health concerns four of us are vaccinated and boosted my friend has not been vaccinated but recently had Covid should I cancel my friend? So that needs to come back to an individual discussion and you can get vaccinated after Covid after a period we are reviewing that that it is worth looking at exactly what that period of time is, because we've been reviewing guidance on that.

I would urge your friend to consider vaccination depending on the time period since they had it. Of course, infection does provide some immunity, but we know that better protection comes from a combination of infection. And for someone who's had infection with a subsequent vaccination or booster. These are conversations we've never quite had to have before. You know, you say to your friend, please go and get something medical to be able to come to my house. You're right. And I think we've seen, generally speaking, we've seen very good public engagement with all of the uncertainties involved. We, you know, I don't, I've never been in this sort of situation in my medical career

of such rapidly changing scientific and health arena. And I think we are, so many of our researchers are working at pace, but also understanding how the public are responding to that. The public have been part of

this. A huge number of the public have taken part in the research that really starts to give us the answers. And I recognise that. So, so many people have volunteered, for example, for the studies. Of course. And Sian, I hope that helps. Final question. There's a new study out today about long COVID, which shows fewer than a third of patients show much improvement 12 months after discharge. And only one in three participants felt fully recovered at one year. And it does affect more women and those who are obese. That's what long COVID shows. I've spoken to many individuals with long COVID, especially, and I know this programme has, women who are suffering. Do you think the long COVID clinics are good enough? Long COVID clinics are, you know, we've opened 90 long COVID assessment centres and we've also got specialist regional services for children.

So the long COVID clinics are, I know, doing a job where they are really working at pace to understand this disease. And this is particularly relevant to women, to understanding why certain groups of people, such as women, those from deprived areas, those from working in health and social care, those with other underlying conditions, may be more predisposed. This isn't just long COVID. We've known this, for example, through chronic fatigue syndrome or other autoimmune diseases where we see a preponderance of women affected. So the long COVID clinics both through clinical practice and guidance and through their research are working hard to understand how they help patients like this best, what the constellation of symptoms are, whether there's different types of long COVID, which is definitely what we're seeing, and how you tailor the treatment best. So I think the best way is for patients to find

their way to the long COVID clinics, and we're doing our best to make that happen. And then to work with the healthcare professionals and the researchers so that we can rapidly understand this condition better to get better treatments and outcomes. Well, you know, some reporting that they've done that and it's still not satisfactory. But I recognise the challenge you've just highlighted. I do really want to ask this final question. I'm sorry, just because you mentioned something there, which made me go back to this. And I saw it right at the beginning from the Leicester Asian Doctors Society, which says our members, senior clinicians from black, Asian, minority ethnic backgrounds,

are worried that they have their third dose of vaccination in September. Lucy, should they now be having their fourth dose because of some with comorbidities? And that's from the chairman. We are actively looking at exactly that research to tell us whether we need a fourth research booster dose. And we expect we're commissioning that research so that we will get a rapid readout in the next couple of months. It's a really good question and one that is very much on our minds. Professor Lucy Chappell, thank you very much indeed the Chief Scientific Officer for the Department of Health and Social Care. Thank you for going across so many different areas today and especially women's concerns here on Women's Hour. I wish you Merry Christmas when you get there

and of course it's many days in between I suppose suppose, to go. But it's a fast moving picture and we appreciate your time and expertise. Thank you, Emma. All the best. Right. More questions, I'm sure, will come in or more comments off the back of that. Please do share. But just to bring you up to date with a new survey in something else completely, which shows for the first time more women than men are sitting as non-executive directors on boards but at the same time nine out of ten executive directors executive directors are still men non-exec are the ones who work part-time while the exec jobs are salaried and involved in the day-to-day running of an organization so seen as having more power more influence i'm joined now

by tessa bamford from spencer stewart the executive recruitment company which conducted that research and also ann Cairns, vice president of Mastercard and the lead non-executive board member for the Department for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy. Welcome to you both. Tessa, good news and bad news in that report.

Let's start with the good. Let's do that. More women than men are now in non-exec positions on company boards. And in terms of the pay and the sort of benefits of that, tell us about that. Well, certainly for the first time ever in our research, we discovered that 51% of all non-executive directors are female,

a majority which is terrific. And in fact, 36% of all directors are female, which is up from only 12% 10 years ago. So absolutely, there is good progress. But as you said, Emma, in your introduction, there is a far lower percentage of women who occupy senior executive roles. Only 14% of executive directors in the companies we surveyed, which was the top 150 quoted companies in the UK broadly. So that's a really paltry figure. And that means there's a ratio of nine to one in favour of men. And we need to, we are making progress,

but a lot more needs to be done. And as I talked about the pay being there, the power potentially being there, why is it not changing? I mean, of course, I'm well aware people listening may be thinking, well, this is all about the most powerful and the people with the top jobs in society. But of course, the sort of bigger argument around that is about the pipeline and how women are able to climb up. Absolutely. And I think we really need to start um back in school um you know it's not it's not when you start working that we need to think about um women progressing in in uh senior executive roles i think at school children should be explaining the opportunities there are in

business and after all um the output from our universities is about 50-50, men and women. But what happens in sort of mid-career is, particularly with women, is they have to juggle their work-life balance, whether it's children or parents. And why should all that be landed on women's shoulders? I think, you know, as a result of which sometimes women are less mobile. And I think there are real biases within businesses, which needs to be absolutely pressed. And it's ironic, you know, on the one hand, if women are asked for promotions and pay rises and things like that, they're seen as aggressive or pushy, you know, whereas men, you know, expect that. Or equally, on the other side, they're seen as less ambitious or have a lack of self confidence. And absolutely, we need to directly dismantle these barriers and remove the biases that exist.

And I think firms, companies and businesses are doing a lot more. But all of us, society generally, not just women, women and men and everyone, need to work really actively and take deliberate actions to create a better balance in the workforce. Anne, we've been hearing this for a very long time. And, you know, lest I sound tired of it, I do present a programme called Water, but, you know, yes, I recognise a lot of the things, I'm sure many people will, that Tessa was saying, but it's not shifting, is it, as much as one would hope in the way in the bits that matter well it's not moving as fast as it should be inside companies but as you said at the beginning we have many more women board members which means that and boards sit at the top of companies and

try and cause change so that's a good thing but uh you know not the non-execs not the execs yeah the non-execs but i think you know at the exec execs, not the execs. Yeah, the non execs. But I think, you know, at the exec level, I completely agree it has to start at school. I think girls have to look up and see role models, you know, role models, maybe like Lucy. I want to be this chief scientific officer or or, you know, Emma Walmsley, who is the CEO of GlaxoSmithKline. But also, I think that this middle level is where women fall behind. And it's not all connected with having families, but it is, you know, there are many things that change when you become a parent. And I think firms are looking at this, certainly my company, Mastercard, we give global maternity and paternity leave, four months full paid leave everywhere in the world. How's the exec board at Mastercard? The exec board at Mastercard is about 20% women.

That's not good, is it? It could be a lot better. I mean, you know, I'm not here to do an advert against or for here, but, you know, this is what we're talking about. And I have to say, I'm going to quibble with something you've said because, you know, there's a lot of studies to show there's not an ambition deficit with girls at school, that they do now know this generation have grown up with a lot

of being, you know, told you can't be what you can't see, with people to look up to, more and more and more. It is exactly what you were then going on to say about what actually happens to you when you hit a certain point. And I suppose, do you actually think businesses just need to start saying, maybe we can't get to 50-50 because actually this isn't us, this is to do with childcare, this is to do with structural issues? I think that certainly the businesses shouldn't give up because look everyone in business recognizes that it's ridiculous to

have half the human race represented at the top of business it's bad for business it makes sense to have more diversity it does take time and there are inherent biases in the process that need to be fixed you can't fix them when it's still a majority of men making the decisions though because even if well i think you can because men are recognizing that they have to represent um the whole of the human race they have to represent the customers they serve um you know we're not in a situation now in business though we just care about our stock price. We care about stakeholders, we care about our customers, and we need to reflect the whole of society in our business world.

You may be able to say that, especially as part of a vice president, I should say, as part of a big company like Mastercard. But Tessa, to come back to you, we're in a pandemic. We're only talking yesterday about record levels of inflation and real people's lives right now are massively affected by the pandemic, the job situation. Is this just a sort of luxury almost right now to be even thinking about this?

No, I don't think so. I think you look across the executive search sector, not just at Spencer Stewart, but throughout other firms as well. We have been active in the recruitment of senior leaders throughout the pandemic. So I don't think it's a pandemic thing. But I agree with Anne. This is not just a problem about women. I think we're getting more and more men also engaged in really pushing for equality because it has to come from everyone. And I think it has to be, you know, systematically in the companies. And even increasingly, what you are seeing is that senior executives bonuses are, you know, partly being dependent on achieving certain metrics in

terms of equality across the workforce. So I think things are being done, but it cannot happen overnight. And we do need to speed it up. And it's inherent on all of us to remove these biases throughout companies so that women can progress. And hopefully in a few years time, our service will show

much better balance. Absolutely. And I think, you know, this idea, look, everyone started measuring their gender pay gap. Tessa's writing that it's now being linked to executive pay. So if that gap widens, then the people at the top of companies are going to be paid less.

Also, you know, while it's a paltry number, we are seeing some great women step into CEO roles, like Alison Rose, the head of NatWest, and, you know, Poppy Gustafson, who's just launched Darktrace last year, internet entrepreneur. So things are changing. It's not fast enough. But companies recognize this. And I think there's a real willingness in industry to change it. That's why I'm chair of the 30% Club. Men are at the top. Men have to want the change. And that's why we work with almost 1200 CEOs and chairs around the world to say, how can we change it in your company and get them to commit to have at least 30% women on their executive committee with a view that that's not enough.

That's just the tipping point. We actually want parity. The diversity, though, of those women and of men is also not there. You know, it's nowhere near where it should be. And, you know, there's some evidence, basically, if you look at, for instance, the latest tally of female directorships at Stock 600 companies, that's the listing for the top companies in Europe, of which the UK is also included. It suggests it's a small group of women moving from one board to another. So just the same women moving around. I mean, how do you deal with that? Well, first of all, that's not as prevalent in

Britain as it is in the rest of Europe. But I think that that is a bad idea. And the pool of talent of women out there is plenty deep enough but I thought you were going to go on to the topic of women of colour and you know well no it's inherent it's inherent in that that if it's the same group of women moving around and we know they're not diverse but carry on yeah um and again you know there are groups working towards actually making this very visible and saying 30 percent club has sailed. We want at least one board director who's a person of color. We'd like 50 percent of those seats to go to women because we've got a woman's lens on it. A friend of mine, Sharon Bowden, has just become the chair of the New York Stock Exchange. Not only is she

the first woman to do that, she's the first black person to do that. And I think really being aware of the intersectional issues is something that we're all waking up to. Certainly Mastercard's done a study with London School of Economics about this. And this idea of inclusion and having the best talent, no matter what your background is, is going to be a hot topic for the years to come. Can I read you both two messages we just got in?

Denise says there's no ambition deficit in women. The pipeline is full to overflowing with competent, capable women. They just don't get picked. Bias in the selection process is a huge issue and this needs to be solved first.

And Heather has got particular. She says, there is outright sexism in the finance sector, which is still rampant and not about what makes financial sense or about childcare, but about how men can stay on top. If you won't talk about that, nothing will change. Well, I like to be challenged about the things that apparently we're not going to talk about that nothing will change well i like to be uh challenged about the things that apparently we're not going to talk about to try and talk about them uh and what would you say to that and then i'll come to tessa i would say yes and yes right i you know i agree with you and by the way as i said you've got to fix the system this is not a level playing field i do think there are many ambitions ambitious women out there and uh and i think if you're not going to have balanced slates, if you're not going to have targets about how many people you want to rise through your company, if you're, from the public, but also the regulators. The regulators

are now looking at this, the Bank of England, the Financial Conduct Authority, and so on. And if anything... Is anyone quaking in their boots? Is anyone quaking in their boots? You know, you're talking as a leading non-exec board member of the department for business. I mean, do you think there should be punishments and repercussions i think that what will happen is that um people will stop investing in companies that don't diversify just as people will stop investing in companies that don't have purpose or don't make impact we're not in an age where it's just good enough to generate profits anymore. People expect you to be thinking of a much more holistic way

to run your business. Well, you think that would be punishment enough? Well, that has to happen, I suppose. And I think, I don't know, the context of the pandemic again comes up. Wanda says, Sai, discussion of women on boards, non-execs, all about the private sector.

Can we have some discussion of charities? There are amazing women in our sector, leading organisations and on boards. Wanda, thank you for that. Final word to you, Tessa, and we will keep going with that and we will leading organisations and on boards. Wanda, thank you for that. Final word to you, Tessa, and we will keep going with that and we will take you up on that. Tessa, to those messages we received, what would you like to say? Briefly, I would largely agree with Anne. I think absolutely much more needs to be done. And I think

that the sort of carrot and stick approach will work and I think people are changing I think on a more positive note if you look at new non-executive directors over the time of our study 43 percent of those new non-executive directors were women and 25 percent of them came from they were people from an ethnic minority background. So I think things are changing. And the more you get, as Anne says, role leaders, role models at the top, the better it will be. And the more people are accountable, equally, the speedier change will happen. I like accountability.

It's just the question that's coming in is, is it enough right now? The carrot and the stick approach, maybe more stick is needed. But, you know, also I'm an impatient woman. I'm sure you both are for change, but you're seeing some of it. Tessa Bamford, Anne Cairns, thank you to both of you. And Sam wanted to say this, and, you know, in no way was meant to undo or denigrate the role of a non-exec, but it was more to show the difference between the exec

and the non-exec and where women are. Sam says, there seems to be a misunderstanding of the importance and significance of the non-exec role. It is really important to realise non-exec and where women are. Sam says there seems to be a misunderstanding of the importance and significance of the non-exec role. It is really important to realise non-exec directors do sit at board level and are involved in the decision making process. And also Sam wants to say being a non-exec is often part of a flexible portfolio of jobs and gives the kind of work-life balance that many women and increasingly men are looking for in their lives. Sam, thank you very much indeed for that. Many messages coming in. It is great to be able to read so many of them out and share your thoughts while we're

discussing this. Now, of course, if you have been reading the news in the past few days, you cannot but have noticed the details of the brutal murder of 16-month-old Star Hobson, which have shocked the nation. Her short life was marked by neglect, cruelty and injury, the judge said yesterday, who sentenced the partner of Star's mother, Savannah Brockhill, to a minimum of 25 years in prison. Star's mother, Frankie Smith, was sentenced to eight years for causing or allowing the child's death last year. Those verdicts came in the wake of widespread condemnation and shock over the abuse and murder of six-year-old Arthur Labinjo Hughes, who also died last year after being subjected to months of abuse.

Another woman, Arthur's stepmother, Emma Tustin, was convicted of Arthur's mother and sentenced to a minimum term of 29 years, whilst the father, Thomas Hughes, was found guilty of his manslaughter and jailed for 21 years. What do we know then about women who commit such terrible crimes, especially against children? And is the shock factor still perhaps greater when women are involved? Well, Lizzie Seal is a professor of criminology at the University of Sussex and has written about also the representations of women who kill. Good morning. Lizzie, what do we know? I know not to specifically talk about these two cases, but what do we know about women who commit

such terrible crimes against children and how common it is? It's not common, basically. So women account for under 10% of people who commit homicide in this country. When women do kill someone, the most likely victim is their own child, although frequently they won't be cases that are like the ones that you've mentioned this morning. But even so, even of child killing cases, women still only account for around a third of those. So women's kind of perpetration of homicide is unusual.

It's unusual, but when it does happen, the most likely victim is their own child. Or what do we know about that? Yes, that's right. So women's homicides are largely domestic. Women commit very few non-domestic homicides. And so the kinds of killings that women commit are related to their everyday lives, family roles and so forth. And so, yes, most likely victims are children and followed by that male partners. And I know you've looked into monstrous motherhood. What do you mean by that? So monstrous motherhood refers to the way that women, when their mothers are portrayed, if they have committed crimes or

acts that are seen as very contrary to the ideal version of motherhood, which obviously killing a child is, for example. And using the word monstrous refers to the types of portrayals that might appear in the media, for example, which often directly use terms like monstrous or perhaps evil and things like that. I mean, but of course, when a man does it and it is against their child, I suppose that similar terms are used or you see a difference there? I think similar terms can be used in the sense that you probably would see words like evil used as well in relation to men. I think that certain cases where women are involved become higher profile and of more interest and fascination because women

are involved. So that's kind of one difference between kind of men and women and the way cases might be reported and responded to. And then, of course, people do not in any way kind of approve of or excuse men's killing. But in terms of how people understand kind of what the spectrum of masculine behaviour is and what the spectrum of feminine behaviour is, extreme acts of violence are seen as part of the spectrum of masculine behaviour. Even, of course, yes, to be disapproved of, but are not seen as part of the spectrum of feminine behaviour. And so because of that, that's why these portrayals that kind of emphasise monstrousness can be kind of more emphasised in relation to women.

And do you think that should change? I mean, I suppose what I'm trying to understand is if it is rarer, and it is so much rarer, then of course you do have that natural, perhaps response, not natural, but you know what I mean? You sort of, you write about it or present it in a more shocked way because it isn't the norm.

So are you saying that that should be changed or altered in some way to reflect what? I suppose I would say that sort of portrayals which are focused on emphasising, let's say, somebody's monstrosity or evilness don't really advance our understanding of particular cases. Instead, they perpetuate stereotypes about womanhood. So none of that is to excuse or downplay or minimise, you know, when terrible crimes have happened. But that ultimately, I think those portrayals are more about kind of creating narratives, creating stereotypes, than they are allowing us to understand actual situations that have happened. And you think that it's important to understand because of course you know there could be not no reason but there might not be that much almost to say

um oh do you mean in terms of understanding why they did what they did yes um yes i mean that obviously opens up a whole different set of issues and ones that pertain probably more to psychology, for example, but also to social issues, too, of course, and the details of people's lives. So, yes, of course, I would say we need to understand those things. I'm just wondering if it's unrealistic, that's all. You don't want the stereotypes to be played about womanhood, but perhaps it's in lieu of that. What else is there? Just to say, and I know we're not going to talk about the specifics of this case and what happened to poor Star Hobson,

but there have been reports or concerns that actually the two women involved used stereotypes about being women and their femininity, as it's been described by some, to manipulate the authorities. So, you know, it can work both ways, potentially. Yes. I mean, obviously, in relation to this particular case, I don't know. I only know what's been reported in the news media. To talk more generally, I guess the wider question is, can certain

understandings of femininity be portrayed in a certain way that kind of minimizes women's responsibility for violence, let's say? And yes, that can happen. And certain women, I think, can be more able sometimes to mobilize assumptions about not being violent and so forth. I don't in any way mean that to suggest there's a sort of epidemic of hidden violence among women or anything like that. But just can such portrayals be used to sort of minimize agency let's say minimize responsibility um yes they can but i think that is probably further back to why stereotypical portrayals aren't helpful or not useful yes well it brings to mind um an interview i did a few weeks ago which people can can listen to if they missed on bbc sounds with amanda knox and you know what what happens within in in cases where there are false allegations and then how stereotypes are then used about the individual to drive a certain narrative and how stereotypes are weaponised in that way about women.

And her reflections on that, of which she's had many years to reflect, not least four years in prison, wrongfully so, as was cleared and shown by a court of appeal in Italy, do show. So it's a kind of very fertile area for this sort of discussion and one that we wanted to make sure we reflected today on the programme in light of these recent cases, which, as I say, have shocked and appalled so many. Lizzie Seal, thank you very much for coming onto the programme today, a professor of criminology at the University of Sussex, who's looked into the representations of and descriptions of women who kill and also how common that is. Well, I did mention to you that we were going to reflect on a certain woman

who came up at a recent session of business questions in Parliament because the leader of the House of Commons and Conservative MP, Jacob Rees-Mogg, took a moment from discussing corruption laws in Britain to talk about Britain's saints. Have a listen. It is also the feast day of St Ethel Gaffoo, who was the daughter of Alfred the Great and became an abbess. And I'm more tempted to offer a debate to celebrate the virtues of one of England's leading saints. What are those virtues? And was she one of Britain's leading saints? Florence Scott, a historian of early medieval England studying for a PhD at Leeds University, is on hand Florence. Is Jacob Rees-Mogg correct? I would say generally no. I think he gets some of the broad statements that he makes about her a little bit wrong.

Firstly, we don't really know much about Athel Giffu. What we do know is that she was the daughter of King Alfred. And we pretty much only have one contemporary medieval source that tells us anything about her life, which is a single sentence in the biography of her father, which simply says that her father built a monastery and appointed her as the abbess, so as the overseer of that monastery. Apart from that, we really have very little evidence. So to kind of call her a leading sin or to overstate her particular virtues, it's not really, it can't really be substantiated. Might need to correct the parliamentary record there, Hansard, where it's all written down. Florence, I need to get you in there. You've called her the medieval Ivanka Trump.

Is that due to, and I should say, you've got a whole blog about her. Is that right? No, so I have a blog about women in this period in general. Oh, sorry. And she features. Okay. Because it's great to get the facts from someone who's looked at this. Medieval Ivanka Trump, is this because of the inheritance you just discussed? Yeah, it's because as well as Abbas is having a religious role, they also have a very political role in this period. So an Abbas would oversee a monastery,

a huge amount of land that that monastery might own. She would be kind of in contact and discussing the issues of the day with people around the country. So the Ivanka Trump comparison was, you know, they have a lot of similarities. They were both born into privilege. They were both given political appointments by their fathers. So that was what that reference was. As power was transferred and for some still is, how many female saints do we have in Britain? It's very difficult to count them. And the reason for that is that in this period,

there isn't really an official way of declaring someone a saint, of canonising somebody. So in the early Middle Ages, anybody who developed a cult who had, you know, after their death, miracles were reported about them could be considered a saint. We also have the issue that there are some saints that if you look into the historical evidence, were actually legendary figures and they weren't, you know, historical figures. So I would say from this period, you know, this kind of pre-conquest period in England, definitely dozens. But, you know, it's very difficult to define who is and isn't a saint or who was and wasn't considered one at the time. This is why we've got you on, Florence. Hannah says, my undergrad was medieval studies, but I've not indulged in far too long. Give me the good stuff, Florence, which is what you're helping us do today. Why this area of Yes. My undergrad was medieval studies, but I've not indulged in far too long. Give me the good stuff, Florence, which is what you're helping us do today.

Why this area of study for you? I think I find medieval women really compelling. And the reason is that we often have this idea that women in the past couldn't hold power and couldn't have influence. And I think women in the period that I study particularly, they are occupying some of the most important political roles in the country. You know, they are the politicians, they're influential. And, you know, unfortunately, a lot of the source material is very male focused. So we have to kind of pick out the strands where we can see this power reflected. But I think also what's interesting is the complexity of these figures because, you know, I'm not one to look back

on these women and say, oh, well, they were powerful. So we need to look up to them. We need to idolize them because, you know, they were, you know, complicit with this unequal and violent society in which they lived. So women in these elite positions, and, you know, it kind of lends into

what you were talking about earlier with the women CEOs and board members. You know, they are working to uphold inequality. They are working to, you know, work on behalf of the male established elite so there is this kind of well that's your view i mean that's not what a lot of them i'm sure would say if they were here to speak for themselves but you you're not they're not changing the system from within enough exactly yes so what i mean is that they're they're not pushing for structural

change they're pushing for um the you know to to be in positions that are kind of available to them in a patriarchal society. Yes, it's a working within with that. But, you know, some would also say perhaps that's better than nothing. And also perhaps you can only change it when you've got critical mass and make those changes. Just going back to Jacob Rees-Mogg and this comment, it must have been quite a surprise for you to perhaps hear that mentioned. And I wondered what your reaction was to that. And are you going to tell Mr. Rees-Mogg that he's got his history wrong? Yeah, well, I think it's a problem that's a bit more complicated than just getting your history wrong. You know, I'm not a pedant. I'm not here to kind of...

Oh, you can be, you can be. You're on the right radio station for it. I think it's, you know, it is complicated. A lot of these women have very, very similar names. And even I get mixed up, you know, half the time. I think it's not the case that he got it wrong. It's that I think people are fed up with politicians misusing history. And, you know, we have to ask why a politician like Jacob Rees-Mogg might want to name drop a historical figure like Apple Giffey. It could be that he admires her, but I kind of

doubt that if he has the basic facts wrong. I think, you know, when upper class privately educated politicians drop references to classical and medieval history, it's kind of like they're trying to assert themselves as intellectual gatekeepers of that history. So I think that history should be kind of as inclusive as possible. And I think that, you know, if you're going to talk about somebody as being a great figure in history, you need to get your facts right. I think you should have that chat. You should get that in. You know, I know we've got to prioritise certain social things before Christmas, but, you know, cheeky Zoom call with Jacob and his mom to talk about if he got his women mixed up from the medieval times. I'd pay money to watch that.

Florence Scott, thank you very much. Thank you very much. Indeed. And very interesting to think about medieval history being as inclusive as possible. And some of the women we don't know or perhaps are confused and you know it's one of those things that if you can't bring it up and talk about it at length and try and get it right here on Women's Out where can you so thank you very much indeed and do

let us know how you get on with getting a date in the diary with Jacob Rees-Mogg and that particular conversation. Our conversation today has been filled with many questions and many comments and many reactions and another one here just saying just listening to your piece on stereotypes of describing female child abusers or murderers as monsters and how it doesn't help us understand the situation. In my opinion, anyone who harms a child is a monster, male or female.

It's not sexist or stereotyping to say so. And indeed, a debate and conversation we were coming to. Thank you so much for your company. We'll be back tomorrow at 10. That's all for today's Woman's Hour. Thank you so much for your company. We'll be back tomorrow at 10. That's all for today's Woman's Hour. Thank you so much for your time. Join us again for the next one. Sideways is back for another season

with stories of incredible feats of endurance. Mountain climbers, we plod onward through avalanches and snowstorms and occasional yetis. I'm Matthew Side and in Sideways you'll hear stories of bold thinkers and amazing lives. Stories of seeing the world differently. Subscribe to Sideways on BBC Sounds. Faking pregnancies. I started like warning everybody. Every doula that I know. It was fake. No pregnancy. And the deeper I dig, the more questions I unearth. How long has she been doing this?

What does she have to gain from this? From CBC and the BBC World Service, The Con, Caitlin's Baby. It's a long story, settle in. Available now.