🔦🔍💡 Consent in gynaecology: more than 8 out of 10 patients report at least one violation of their rights during an examination, with a direct impact on their mental health and follow-up.⚠️🩺 Obstetric and gynaecological violence: nearly 1 in 2 people report violence, and more than half of respondents describe situations that may involve sexual violence in a care context.
📌 📌For a midwife, a gynaecologist, a general practitioner or a social worker, this report objectifies the frequency of violations of consent, discrimination and obstetric and gynaecological violence in gynaecological consultations.It allows for the identification of practices contrary to recommendations (too early smears, imposed examinations, examinations continued despite pain) and measures their impact on mental health and refusal of care.The figures and concrete examples can be used to raise awareness among teams, revise welcome protocols, co-construct quality approaches centred on consent and the consideration of pain.The document also serves as a supporting argument to advocate, at the local level, for specific training and spaces for patients to speak.
📜🔗LINK to the source and LINK 2
1. Analytical summary
Context and issues: a massive and systemic phenomenon
The StopVOG survey is based on 10,152 complete questionnaires collected online between July and December 2025, distributed via social networks, associative, trade union and media relays.
It aims to measure, in light of the Kouchner law of 2002 and the criminal law of 2025 on sexual violence, the respect for information, free and informed consent, and the rights of patients during gynaecological consultations, across the whole of French territory.
Although not statistically representative, this corpus is currently one of the most important national materials on consent in gynaecology, and is part of the continuity of alerts from the High Council for Equality on obstetric and gynaecological violence.
The results show a largely hindered consent, a massive lack of information, practices contrary to recommendations (smears before 25 years, systematic intrusive examinations), frequent obstetric and gynaecological violence, and intersecting discrimination.
The survey also documents the continuum with sexist and sexual violence, highlighting the structural dimension of power relations, gender norms, and discriminatory biases in the caregiver–patient relationship.
Operational contributions: levers for change and public health issues
The report provides precise indicators (breaches of consent, sexual violence, psychological consequences and impact on follow-up) that can be directly integrated into territorial diagnostics, quality approaches and professional training.
It recalls the recommendations for good practices (age and indication for the smear test, justification for the pelvic examination, breast examination from the age of 25) and confronts them with reported practices, offering concrete support for revising protocols.
The analysis of the consequences (post-traumatic stress, depressive symptoms, renunciation of care) repositions VOG as a major public health issue, in line with the data from the National Perinatal Survey and the work on post-partum depression.
The recommendations from the respondents converge towards building a culture of consent: systematic and accessible information, initial and ongoing training, reporting mechanisms, control of practices and a comprehensive framework law on sexist and sexual violence in health.
For local actors, the document serves as a basis for developing prevention actions, identifying VOG and guidance, as well as for strengthening the role of patients and associations in the co-construction of health policies.
2. Key points of the document
Massive breaches of consent and intimacy (p.2–3)
The report shows that 80.95% of respondents report at least one breach of their consent during a gynaecological examination, and 88.57% mention a lack of respect for their intimacy during consultations.
Nearly 85% find it difficult to refuse a proposed examination, due to the asymmetry of the care relationship and a lack of information, which makes theoretical consent difficult to exercise in practice.
Systemic lack of information, particularly regarding examinations and contraception (p.3–4)
More than 8 out of 10 people report not having always been sufficiently informed about the purpose and process of an examination conducted for the first time, and only 36.77% received information on at least four contraceptive methods.
This lack of information limits the ability to consent freely, to ask questions, or to refuse, and contributes to the normalisation of unnecessary or early examinations, particularly among young people.
Practices contrary to recommendations and violations against minors (p.4–5)
Nearly 66.7% of respondents report having a first smear test before the age of 25, whereas French recommendations only advise this after 25 in the absence of risk factors.
The summary describes smears and intrusive examinations on virgin individuals, examinations imposed on children and adolescents without appropriate information or effective consent, in contradiction with best practices.
Obstetric and gynaecological violence and discrimination (p.2, 5–6)
Nearly one in two people (45.1%) report having experienced obstetric or gynaecological violence, with 28.7% experiencing gynaecological violence and 24.5% experiencing obstetric violence, confirming the systemic nature already described by the High Council for Equality.
Nearly 39.8% report at least one discrimination (sexism, sizeism, racism, LGBTphobias, disability, reproductive choices), which highlights the intertwining of VOG with other forms of structural violence.
Major consequences on health and access to care (p.7–8)
More than 70.5% of respondents have felt physically or psychologically unwell after a gynaecological consultation, and more than one in two (50.59%) describe at least one psychological disorder (anxiety, intrusive memories, sleep disorders, suicidal thoughts, etc.).
An exploratory indicator shows that 5.44% of individuals who have experienced VOG present a profile compatible with post-traumatic stress disorder, and 53% report an impact on their follow-up (abandonment, disruption, fear of consulting), making it a major public health issue.
3. Action points for local actors
Integrate consent indicators into practice audits (p.2–3, 7–8)
Structures (health centres, private practices, maternity wards, CPEF) can integrate the key questions from the report into their satisfaction questionnaires or internal audits: prior information, possibility to refuse, consideration of pain, respect for privacy, psychological consequences after the consultation.
This allows for regular measurement of consent violations, tracking the evolution of practices, and objectifying the training needs of teams.
Review the protocols for gynaecological examinations and screening (p.3–5)
Teams can revisit their protocols to explicitly align with the recommendations: no routine smears before the age of 25, pelvic examination only if medically justified and explained, breast examination from the age of 25.
For minors and virgins, the focus should be on non-intrusive examinations, adapting information to age, and ensuring genuine consent, allowing the possibility to refuse without consequences on the quality of care.
Organise targeted training on consent, pain, and discrimination (p.3–6, 9)
Those in charge can implement multidisciplinary training focused on free, informed, specific, prior, ongoing, and revocable consent, relying on the legal benchmarks of 2025 and the testimonies from the report.
Training should include recognition of VOG, identification of discrimination (sizeism, racism, LGBTphobia, ableism), and systematic consideration of menstrual pain or pain related to examinations, with strategies for analgesia and adaptation.
Create local systems for identification, guidance, and reporting (p.6–8, 9–10)
Frontline professionals (general practitioners, midwives, psychologists, social workers) can formalise procedures to identify patients who have experienced VOG, listen to them, and direct them to specialised resources (psychotrauma, associations, complaint or mediation systems).
Establishments can strengthen or create accessible internal reporting channels (violence referent, ethics unit, complaint procedure) and work with professional orders and associations to ensure the protection of patients and whistleblowers.
Involve patients and associations in local governance (p.7–9, 10)
Local bodies (CPTS, CLS, user committees, establishment boards) can include representatives of patients and associations (including StopVOG or local collectives) in the development of protocols, quality indicators and prevention actions.
The aim is to build a care culture centred on rights, lived experience and co-decision, rather than on professional insularity, in accordance with the report's call for a genuine health democracy.
4. Additional references
🔍➕ For more information, see the articles referenced by "Health Practices"
Inserm / University of Paris Cité – "One in four mothers affected by disrespectful care in maternity" (2025)
Popular science article presenting results on the association between disrespectful care in maternity and postpartum depression, with detailed methodology and statistical data.
URL : One in four mothers affected by disrespectful care in maternity – University of Paris Cité.
High Council for Equality – "Sexist acts during gynaecological and obstetric follow-up: recognising and putting an end to long-ignored violence" (update 2024, ongoing dissemination)
Methodological and political report proposing 26 recommendations to recognise, prevent, and sanction sexist acts during gynaecological and obstetric follow-up, with a framework for training and reporting mechanisms.
URL : Sexist acts during gynaecological and obstetric follow-up – HCE.
5. Frequently asked questions (FAQ)
Who responded to this survey and how were the data collected? (p.1–2)
Between 30 July and 31 December 2025, 10,152 people responded to an online questionnaire distributed via social media, associative, trade union, and media networks.
After eliminating incomplete questionnaires, 10,152 responses were analysed quantitatively (Typeform statistics and specific indicators) and qualitatively (inductive thematic analysis of open questions).
Are the results representative of all gynaecological consultations in France? (p.2)
The authors specify that the results are based on statements and do not claim to be representative of all gynaecological consultations.
The corpus, however, constitutes one of the largest collected on consent in gynaecology in France and allows for the identification of trends and structural issues.
What are the most frequently reported violations of consent? (p.2–3, 6)
More than 80% of respondents report at least one violation of their consent, including examinations conducted without warning, accepted under pressure, continued despite pain, or performed despite an explicit refusal.
More than 56.3% report at least one situation that may involve sexual violence in a care context, with notably 51.3% of examinations continuing despite pain and requests to stop.
What practices are explicitly contrary to the cited medical recommendations? (p.4–5)
The report highlights the frequency of cervical smears performed before the age of 25 (66.7% of respondents), whereas French recommendations only advocate them after 25 in the absence of risk factors.
It also points out systematic pelvic and intrusive examinations during first consultations, examinations before any penetrative intercourse, and smears in virgins, in contradiction with the good practices recalled in the document.
How do obstetric and gynaecological violence impact mental health? (p.7–8)
More than half of the respondents (50.59%) describe at least one psychological disorder after a poorly experienced consultation: intrusive memories, feelings of shame, anxiety, sleep disturbances, suicidal thoughts.
Among those reporting obstetric and gynaecological violence, 73.64% report at least one psychological manifestation related to post-traumatic stress, and 5.44% present a profile compatible with post-traumatic stress disorder according to an indicator inspired by the PCL-5.
What are the consequences for gynaecological follow-up and access to care? (p.2, 7–8)
One in two (53%) reports that their follow-up has been affected by a poorly experienced consultation: fear of returning, giving up consultations, or stopping all gynaecological follow-up.
Among people reporting VOG, this proportion rises to 72.75%, which exposes them to delays in diagnosis and management for various conditions (cervical cancer, endometriosis, STIs, etc.).
What concrete recommendations are made to improve the situation? (p.8–9)
Respondents call for a culture of consent based on clear information, explicit and reversible consent at every stage, better consideration of pain, and systems for prevention, reporting, and control.
StopVOG advocates for a comprehensive framework law against sexist and sexual violence that would include health-related violence, particularly obstetric and gynaecological, in order to make respect for consent truly enforceable for adults and children.
6. Rewriting in Easy-to-Read Language
Title
Consent in Gynaecology
Easy-to-Read Summary
Easy-to-Read Summary – context
Many people often visit a gynaecologist in their lives.
StopVOG asked questions to over 10,000 people in France.
The aim was to find out if patients are well informed and if their agreement is respected for each examination.
The responses show that this respect is not always present.
Easy-to-Read Summary – what the survey shows
More than 8 out of 10 people have experienced an examination without true consent.
Many say it is difficult to say no to an examination.
Often, doctors do not explain enough why they are conducting an examination.
Examinations are done too early or without a clear reason, especially among young people.
Many people say they have experienced violence or hurtful words.
Key points FALC
Difficult consent
Saying yes or no to an examination is not simple for patients.
The doctor–patient relationship is unbalanced: the doctor has more power.
Lack of information
Patients do not always understand the purpose of the examination.
They do not know all the possible contraception methods.
Examinations done too early or poorly adapted
Smears are done before 25 years old when it is not recommended.
Intrusive examinations are done on virgin or very young people.
Violence and discrimination
Many patients recount humiliating or violent gestures or words.
Some experience sexism, racism, sizeism, or anti-LGBT remarks.
Severe consequences
After these consultations, many people are afraid to return.
Some have nightmares, anxiety, or think about suicide.
What needs to change
Always clearly explain each examination and ask for consent.
Respect the pain, intimacy, and choice of the person.
Allow saying no without being judged or punished.
Better train healthcare providers and listen to the voices of patients and associations.
7. Cross-sectional analysis — values of health practices
Literacy: The document proposes a fairly accessible language and explanatory boxes, but remains dense; it can serve as a basis for simplified materials intended for audiences unfamiliar with medical vocabulary.
Empowerment: The testimonies and recommendations emphasise the ability of patients to understand, choose, refuse or interrupt a procedure, and to contribute to the improvement of practices.
Participation: The report values the voices of users and recommends involving them in the recommendations for best practices, but does not yet describe formalised mechanisms for local co-construction.
Community health: The survey is part of a collective approach to VOG, linked to feminist movements and associations, and calls for public health responses rather than solely individual ones.
Ethics: The text clearly identifies power biases, practices contrary to recommendations, and consent deficiencies, qualifying them as sexist or sexual violence when the criteria are met.
Human rights: The report recalls the legal framework of consent, the dimensions of dignity, integrity, and equality of access to care, and calls for a framework law to protect adults and children.
Intersectorality: The document shows the joint role of associations, parliamentarians, researchers, professional orders, and health structures in the fight against VOG, but does not yet detail the operational mechanisms.
Partnership: The public presentation at the National Assembly illustrates a partnership approach between StopVOG, elected officials, trauma experts, and feminist associations.
Fight against discrimination: The report documents discrimination (sexism, racism, sizeism, LGBTQI+phobias, disability, reproductive choices) and links it to health violence, emphasising non-judgement and the diversity of situations.
8. Assessment of the reliability of the resource
Scientific relevance: the report is based on a large sample (10,152 respondents) and clearly describes its methodology (online questionnaire, quantitative and qualitative analyses, indicators inspired by validated tools such as the PCL-5).
It clarifies its limitations (non-representative sample) and articulates its results with robust external data (High Council for Equality, National Perinatal Survey, surveys on post-partum depression), which strengthens the overall coherence.
Operational relevance: the resource is directly usable for training, facilitating team discussions, revising protocols, and local or national advocacy on VOG and consent in health.
The presence of key figures, testimonies, a legal framework, and recommendations makes it a concrete tool for professionals and volunteers, complementing more detailed guides on best clinical practices.