James Esses v Metanoia Institute
Settlement, with an apology to Esses.
https://x.com/jamesesses/status/1823642057669259573?s=61&t=NHDSDk1MaF98_GOtcuLi0Q
https://www.metanoia.ac.uk/about/litigation-with-james-esses/
'Litigation with James Esses
We are pleased to announce that we have reached settlement in the Employment Tribunal claim brought by James Esses against us.
Metanoia recognises that gender-critical beliefs are protected under the Equality Act 2010. These are the beliefs that sex is binary, immutable and biological and is fundamentally important. Whilst Metanoia specialises in professional training for those working in adult and not child psychotherapy it accepts as a matter of general principle the validity of the professional belief that children with gender dysphoria should be treated with explorative therapy, rather than being affirmed towards medical intervention. Discrimination against students because of these beliefs is unlawful.
Metanoia also acknowledges the changing policy landscape in this field, including the significant UKCP withdrawal from the 2017 Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy, on child safeguarding grounds, as well as the outcome of the Cass Review. We accept that Mr Esses’ advocacy on this subject-matter was motivated by a desire to protect children.
We also recognise the importance of freedom of speech within educational institutions and the steps taken by the government in this regard, including the recent introduction of the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023.
We accept that in our treatment of Mr Esses we were in breach of our own policies, when we summarily, and without due process, expelled him from his Masters’ course in Integrative Psychotherapy. Mr Esses was not afforded a hearing or an internal appeal.
We also apologise for publicising Mr Esses’ expulsion on social media and in other communications. We accept that the Institute’s public comment on social media contributed to Mr Esses receiving online abuse from third parties, which we condemn.
As a consequence of his expulsion, Mr Esses was barred from the opportunity of completing the additional two years of his studies and receiving his qualification with the Institute. Mr Esses passed every assessment undertaken which had been marked, had received positive feedback from his clinical placements and, at the time of his expulsion, had been signed off to set up in private practice by his supervisor, clinical placement and personal tutor. We apologise to him for the impact of his expulsion, both professional and personal.
Notwithstanding the fact that high-quality therapy is rooted in empathy, active listening and unconditional positive regard, we did not fulfil these values in our treatment of Mr Esses. For this we apologise fully.
We will seek to learn the lessons from this ordeal to ensure that this never happens to another student within our Institute and have already taken significant steps so as to improve quality in decision-making. We acknowledge the hurt that it has caused to Mr Esses and wish him well for the future.'