Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Yet more disgraceful NHS behaviour against nurses

297 replies

Soontobe60 · 23/03/2025 10:28

https://x.com/ripx4nutmeg/status/1903719814897586583?s=61&t=gKvvk-rWmOlYFGMZN8QVvQ
When a nurse with years of exemplary service is disciplined by the NHS for referring to a male prisoner brought into hospital in handcuffs as ‘Mister”, despite the same prisoner having to be restrained from attacking her and calling her n**r several times, then its clear the NHS is no longer fit for purpose.

https://x.com/ripx4nutmeg/status/1903719814897586583?s=61&t=gKvvk-rWmOlYFGMZN8QVvQ

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
ArabellaScott · 15/12/2025 11:20

'A spokesperson for Epsom and St Helier Hospitals NHS Trust said: “Racial abuse of our staff is never acceptable, nor is discussing a patient’s private medical information publicly. We are sorry that Miss Melle had this experience and we issued a written warning to this patient, but we expect all staff to maintain patient confidentiality at all times.”'

lcakethereforeIam · 15/12/2025 11:16

It seems the trust are now claiming to be going after her for patient confidentiality.

Chinny reckon?

Peregrina · 15/12/2025 09:02

I hope that her ET finds the position absurd; that Mrs Melle's belief in scientific fact, (that there are only two sexes), are also protected views under the Equalities legislation.

Events like this make me less and less sympathetic to trans identifying men - they have to be put on a pedestal but racist abuse is OK - just a mild slap on the wrist at most.

IwantToRetire · 15/12/2025 01:12

NHS Trust tells staff to recognise gender identity or be disciplined

Decision comes amid dispute between St Helier Hospital and nurse who ‘misgendered’ transgender paedophile patient

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/12/14/nhs-trust-recognise-gender-identity-or-be-disciplined/

and at https://archive.is/HbBUQ

MistyGreenAndBlue · 14/12/2025 23:58

RosesAndHellebores · 23/03/2025 15:11

@ramblingnamechanger, I believe it's covered by the Equality Act.

It's not.

MistyGreenAndBlue · 14/12/2025 23:53

Merrymouse · 23/03/2025 13:29

"The patient's conduct was reprehensible. However that doesn't alter the fact that the nurse could have referred to the patient as first name, last name "and they identify as female"."

Surely it's better to be clear when discussing medical treatment.

Show quote history

Except according to her, she didn't KNOW he identified as female at the time she made the call. His notes said he was male and she had been advised that he had come from a male prison. It was only AFTER the call that she was told he identified as female when the patient screamed it at her.

MistyGreenAndBlue · 14/12/2025 23:46

RosesAndHellebores · 23/03/2025 12:18

Hmm. The patient's conduct was reprehensible. However that doesn't alter the fact that the nurse could have referred to the patient as first name, last name "and they identify as female". That would have been correct and would have conveyed an accurate message. It would not have compromised the nurse's religious beliefs. From what I have read, it seems to me that the nurse was making a point and not doing it particularly respectfully.

This will not be as one sided as is being presented. I say that as an individual who has little time for the ingrained cultures and behaviours at this Trust which are far from optimal and often non co.pliant with the EA (2010).

Did you not read the X thread? When she arrived to assist she was told the patient was a sex offender from a male prison. The notes she checked said he was male - not trans or female - she had no way of knowing how he "identifed" until AFTER the phone call to the doctor when the patient screamed at her. So to say she was deliberately baiting him at this point is ridiculous. I'm aware she then told him she would not be referring to him as a female but she DID say she would use his chosen "feminine" name. So there is no reason to suppose she wouldn't have done this on the call had she been advised of his "trans status"
The fact is, we can't know what she would have said if she had known at that point- because she didn't.

Peregrina · 14/12/2025 22:00

Although I fail to see why it should matter if she did quite frankly. He IS a fucking "mister"

And since he was in for something to do with his urinary tract the fact that he has male parts is highly relevant. I also believe that he overheard her talking to a doctor who would also need to know that it was a male patient being treated.

So bollocks to objecting to being called mister or he.

MistyGreenAndBlue · 14/12/2025 21:03

ADreamIsAWishYourArseMakes · 23/03/2025 14:11

The patient was awful and I hope they get extra time for this.

If you deliberately, in earshot, opt not to respect someone's pronouns as their nurse I think this is disrespectful. The patient would have had probably 2 escorts and was in chains, it's not like she didn't know they could hear. If it was accidental it's a non issue but it sounds like it wasn't?

I'm totally for protecting women's spaces, but pronouns cost nothing.

Show quote history

On the contrary there are strong reasons to feel that calling dangerous men "she" comes at a high cost - look up the article "pronouns are rohypnol" to start you off.
Furthermore, I'm sure she said that when she was called in to assist, there was no indication in the notes that this man identified as a woman - she didn't know until he screamed at her after the call. So she didn't do that deliberately at all. Although I fail to see why it should matter if she did quite frankly. He IS a fucking "mister"

usernameinserthere · 11/12/2025 01:34

Likely response to recent political pressure

moto748e · 10/12/2025 22:51

lcakethereforeIam · 10/12/2025 22:00

So the hearing has been deferred, rather than cancelled completely?

Yes, that doesn't seem to be very clear?

lcakethereforeIam · 10/12/2025 22:00

So the hearing has been deferred, rather than cancelled completely?

usernameinserthere · 10/12/2025 21:50

A nurse who was suspended after refusing to use a transgender patient’s preferred pronouns has had her disciplinary hearing ‘abruptly cancelled’.
Jeniffer Melle was scheduled to face a hearing at Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust this week, but was told it could not go ahead due to “unforeseen circumstances” and the unavailability of a panel member.
Melle has worked for the hospital for 12 years and was suspended in April 2025 after she spoke to the media about an experience of being racially abused by a transgender patient and then being investigated by her employer.
The patient, a convicted paedophile who was born male but identifies as a woman, called Melle the N-word several times, she told the interviewer. This was in response to being called ‘Mr X’, and he needed to be restrained by guards.
... it is dragging Jennifer through months of uncertainty. We will continue to hold the Trust to account and ensure that nothing is done in the dark. Transparency is essential, and this case will set a precedent for how the NHS handles conflicts between gender ideology and biological reality.”
https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/nhs-misgendering-case-jennifer-melle/

EdithStourton · 11/05/2025 21:08

RedToothBrush · 11/05/2025 10:35

Men are default human. Women are a lesser invisible creature.

Again, 10 years ago I would have taken issue with this statement.

Now I think, Yep, I think that is probably how things work.

It's so fucking depressing. And it can be so hard to get people, even sensible people, to see it.

RedToothBrush · 11/05/2025 10:35

Men are default human. Women are a lesser invisible creature.

TheOtherRaven · 11/05/2025 10:32

EdithStourton · 11/05/2025 08:03

Ten years ago I would have said that male dominance was on its way out in the West.

How bloody wrong, how baselessly optimitistic, I was.

If this last decade has taught me anything, it's that men are MUCH more important than women. Any men, over any women.

Edited
Show quote history

I would go further and say the evidence is there over and over again that even one man outweighs all women; all those women in a space, all those impacted, all those who ever might enter that space or service, there is no need anywhere in that entire half of the population that outweighs the apparently appalling risk of that man being distressed by a limit to his freedom in access to and use of those women.

It is related to the entrenched belief that you see so easily in men and in women, you can find it there in AIBU threads and relationship threads often: the belief that Men Have Needs, and women have no right to refuse their body to a man's use. It's why marital rape was not outlawed until the 90s. It's why incelism has such a foothold. It's there in the rhetoric from the GI lobby, women 'gatekeeping their vaginas' ffs.

When 'respecting a man' involves enforcing his right of access to a non consenting woman's exposed vagina while she suffers surgery - when he is a man who has already breached her boundaries in not only requiring to be present while she undresses but repeatedly asking her to start getting her clothes off - it has passed through batshit and just gone to plain abuse. If 'loving trans people' means abusing women, any person involved with a shred of sense should start to ask themselves some very, very serious questions.

And we should wonder, yet again, where are the shocked voices of the GI lobby and all those who 'just want to live in peace' going wtaf are you doing to that woman, that is wrong, wholly unacceptable, that is NOT in our name?

Datun · 11/05/2025 08:10

EdithStourton · 11/05/2025 08:03

Ten years ago I would have said that male dominance was on its way out in the West.

How bloody wrong, how baselessly optimitistic, I was.

If this last decade has taught me anything, it's that men are MUCH more important than women. Any men, over any women.

Edited
Show quote history

Yes, and there was an article recently about how this specific issue is recruiting more women to feminism. Because suddenly, oh my God, it's all so clear. And scary.

it's one thing noting that men talk over women in a meeting, it's quite another watching the authorities give convicted rapists access to female prisoners who can't escape.

EdithStourton · 11/05/2025 08:03

Hairyesterdaygonetoday · 23/03/2025 10:40

Transgenderism has always relied on male privilege to subdue women and break down women’s boundaries. It takes balls to be a real laydeee.

And as we all know, soothing a male ego, even that of a racist paedophile, is much more important than providing good patient care etc.

Edited

Ten years ago I would have said that male dominance was on its way out in the West.

How bloody wrong, how baselessly optimitistic, I was.

If this last decade has taught me anything, it's that men are MUCH more important than women. Any men, over any women.

TheMovieFlopped · 11/05/2025 07:01

The NHS is a disgrace. It’s full of incompetent, corrupt management and needs a complete overhaul.

The world has gone mad with all this bullshit about assigned gender at birth. NHS staff signing their emails with their preferred pronouns is laughable and no one should be expected to conform with that.

Fingers crossed that Jennifer Melle wins her case and it costs the NHS a hell of a lot of money. Perhaps then lessons really will be learned!

KnottyAuty · 30/04/2025 19:12

Cailleach1 · 30/04/2025 13:20

It is really concerning, isn’t it? However, as she was also suspended without pay (which was only corrected when Christian Concern set her up with legal representation) they seem to be acting in somewhat a questionable (I won’t say dodgy) manner.

The reference in the Standard article may be in reference to NHS lawyers arguing to biological reality not being WORIADS in a previous case.

thecritic.co.uk/the-evils-of-obligatory-lying/

Extract:
“Dr Mackereth took his case to the Employment Tribunal, supported by Christian Concern and the Christian Legal Centre. The Tribunal initially ruled that belief in Genesis 1:27 is “not worthy of respect in a democratic society” and is “incompatible with human dignity.” In the Employment Appeal Tribunal, this aspect of the judgment was overturned, ruling that Christian Biblical beliefs on gender are worthy of respect in a democratic society and are compatible with human dignity, and further that they are protected under the Equality Act. The judgment failed to vindicate Dr Mackereth, however, since it ruled that Christians cannot express these beliefs in the workplace without fear of losing their jobs.”

Surely, the claim that people don’t have an immutable sex when they are born is the WORIADS question. Certainly when it is being foisted on people, and disbelief in that claim appears to be a firing offence. And, those in thrall so terribly righteous and indignant about non believers too.

Yes I understood that the case you quote was about a man who refused to use preferred pronouns at all. He lost.

But the NHS will lose if they try to overturn Forstater and the Supreme Court. They should have known about the former when putting their defence together but obvs the SC ruling came after. So they’re probably reconsidering if they have any sense… so probably sticking with the indefensible based on past performance!