Allison Bailey sues TRA vets

I am very interested in seeing the outcome of this story as I struggle a lot to comprehend how many of my profession are believers.

Also the supply chain. I'm not saying Elanco are or aren't believers at a top level but they are an example of the type of a large UK (I think) company with global reach that could hold influence in individual vetinary practices e.g. determining what constitutes an acceptable customer.

I’m a vet.
Story has been doing minor rounds in vet social media. I can’t decipher what has actually happened.
Unfortunately some clients can be arseholes and occasionally practices will sack a client - this is legitimate if done correctly.
Unfortunately some gender critical people can be arseholes.
Unfortunately some gender ideologues can be arseholes and I suspect could allow their ideological beliefs to outweigh their professionalism.
I am very interested in seeing the outcome of this story as I struggle a lot to comprehend how many of my profession are believers.

I can't see any evidence in the article that the vets are "TRAs" and it seems like Alison had caused problems previously in the practice with her demeanour towards staff.

This seems like projection from her, just as it was when she accused TRAs of trying to poison her dogs by throwing a wispa bar into her garden. It turned out a neighbours child had simply thrown it in there.

She needs to provide some evidence of the discrimination, at which point my opinion may change!

I’m gender critical. My daughter is more a fence sitter and works as a vet. It’s rare to ban a customer unless they threaten violence or are unacceptably rude or aggressive. I can’t imagine Allison doing that.

I wonder if Allison ‘misgendered’ someone or they just wanted rid of her and used her complaint as an excuse to do so.

We've still got Allison's appeal against Stonewall to look forward to. I don’t believe there's a court date yet but I think it was expected to be later this year

In the Wings over Scotland case the accountant had admitted that it was about gender critical views in a series of emails. So there was proof. Maybe similar here?

She lost against Stonewall. Twice. Happy to clarify.

Anyway to sue a vet or anyone else the onus is on her to prove it was because of "her beliefs" not the other way round.

I read a different article about this and it said that her views were opposed by Dr. Liz Munroe at the clinic, so I assume there is some context there if they have named a specific person.

It sounds like there was a minor disagreement about some medication not being available for her dog, and she was removed from the clinic after that. But there was no precedent for this as other people weren't removed for similar interactions. I have no idea of the merit of the case.

Is there even any evidence the vet staff knew of her beliefs and disagreed? Do agree this seems like a case that could backfire.

Hopefully they're not barking up the wrong tree.

See what you did there. 😆

The incident(s) was two and a half years ago. I wonder why it's taken so long to get this far.

It's all good publicity though as hopefully businesses will think twice before asking clients to leave. Wings over Scotland won damages last week from his accountant over similar treatment. These businesses are making illegal decisions without any understanding of the law.

I suspect this is more racism / misogyny than about GC beliefs. She is a black woman who stands up for herself.

Hm, we obviously don't have all the facts from the article but this doesn't seem a great first test case for JK's fund. How can you prove the practice discriminated for a particular reason unless there's a smoking email trail?

I think the topic will attract a lot of puns/hilarity - it just seems a bit trivial in the grand scheme of things to me, but interested to know what others think.

Hopefully they're not barking up the wrong tree.