Darlington nurse case flying under the radar

[hardstareglare]

Aibu to think that the Darlington nurse case in court right now has not had much press and that it is a very important case.

Who says:
Women must undress in front of anyone their manager deems appropriate. They must not complain.
A) NHS managers
B) A pimp

And let's not forget that when one of the nurses - who is a survivor of childhood sexual abuse - needed gynae surgery, the male she and others had complained about was scheduled to be present during her surgery:

But worse was to come for Karen. By, as she says, ‘an unhappy coincidence’, she was due to have a gynaecological operation at Darlington Memorial Hospital in August 2024.

To her horror, she discovered that Rose was scheduled to be involved.

The procedure would be part robotic, and Rose’s role would involve being at the bedside, passing tools to the surgeon.

“It is difficult to put into words how I felt,” Karen said, “I immediately knew this was ethically wrong and that my condition would be made worse and more painful with the stress it would cause.”

With a colleague, Karen approached the theatre manager and explained the situation, the legal case and how Rose’s involvement would be “completely inappropriate”, and that she wanted women involved in the operation.

Astonishingly the theatre manager said: “But Rose is a woman”.

She added that she thought Karen was being “prejudiced”.

She tried to explain that she was not singling Rose out, but that there was clearly a conflict of interest and because of her childhood trauma she wanted women involved in the procedure.

Regarding Rose being removed from the operating team, Karen was asked: “How do you think that would make Rose feel?”

She was given the choice of cancelling her surgery, trying to get it done at another hospital, or allowing Rose to be part of the operation. Any delays would prolong the pain she was in and had been for some time.

After putting her position in writing, the theatre manager wrote to her and said that her request could not be accommodated “due to clinical and staffing skill mix issues.”

With legal support and advice from the Christian Legal Centre, days before the operation, Karen went to the Patient Advisory and Liaison Service (PALS).

After outlining her situation, PALS swiftly made the decision that it was not appropriate for Rose to be involved.

Despite what the theatre manager had said, it appeared very possible to reallocate staff so that Rose was not involved in the operation.

“I believed this was purely vindictive and demonstrated how low they were prepared to go,” Karen said. “Gender identity was placed above patient and staff care. They tried to punish me for the legal case I was part of and for opposing gender identity policy within the hospital.”

And the NHS is on its knees yet they have unlimited money to defend themselves in this sort of madness

As tax payers we are all paying for it.

I read that the legal fees for the NHS Fife case were estimated to total around £1,000,000. And that's before any compensation. I wonder if this will cost a similar amount?

Such a tragic waste of NHS money that could be spent on saving lives.

One can't help but wonder why "Rose" chose that profession.

The 🍏doesn't 🍂far from the 🌳

Autogynephiliac being pandered to at the expense of women.

I'm surprised there hasn't been more press interest.

This was the first case of its kind that I looked into, on twitter originally, I think. And the interview with the four nurses in summer 2024 was what made me realise what is actually going on, and how it affects women in everyday jobs.

I must admit, I have previously been fascinated by Christan Concern cases for all the wrong reasons because they don't seem to win many cases and I have never been surprised by that (!) .

But in the Darlington case they seem to have instructed a solid legal team and I've followed the tribunal avidly.

BBC coverage of Jo Phoenix evidence today
not on the Health page
hidden well away
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckgk8gjkn3xo

The nurses had to bring in an expert witness to state that women don’t like to get undressed in front of men. Earlier in the tribunal the (male) head of HR for the trust had claimed, when questioned, that it was no worse for women to change in front of men than it would be for men to change in front of women.

(as per previous post)

Coverage of the evidence by 'Rose'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8dr0geyp1mo

Such a male perspective.

HR told the women to re educate themselves
after they complained about him
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdrz653dn45o

26 nurses complianed 😱

Did Rose not stop and think about his presence from a female perspective

Just a clarification - he wasn’t a dr he was a theatre technician.

Some of the women didn't know Rose by sight so seeing him in the women's changing rooms was shocking as they were walking into the changing room to be confronted by a man in holey boxer shorts and stubble.

They had no way to know that the man in front of them was the man who worked in theatres with the womanly feelings.

Not that it matters how he looked as he shouldn't have been allowed to access a female single sex space in the first place, for those imagining some feminine looking individual who passes and has had breast implants and his penis removed after years of hormones Rose had no breast implants, still has a penis and according to his witness statement only started taking hormones a few months ago.

The photos below show the biological man during the main time frame in question during which complaints by the women were made.

Nope. He admitted in his statement and on the stand that once he knew women were in distress about his presence in the changing room that he continued to use it.

Did Rose not stop and think about his presence from a female perspective

Of course not. The only time he would consider the women's perspective is in the hope they feel fear, perhaps a little disgust just for extra 'fodder'.

"Rose" only thinks about what he wants. Other people are just things to be used, in whatever way he sees fit, if he can get away with it. Some of those people were fawning enough to enable him.

The thing is, even if a bio male has taken steps (whatever those steps may be) to look more womanly they are still male. Women deserve better than to be told how to feel and what their boundaries should be with the opposite sex.

It's odd we are telling young girls that they have bodily autonomy and no is no then this!!

It’s a bloody disgrace these women were put through this. Shameful.

It's male entitlement pure and simple.

And that a man is simply a large woman.

WTF?

It honestly baffles me how any manager, let alone someone in HR, could think for a nanosecond that it was acceptable to force women to strip in front of men as a condition of their job. I mean can these people hear themselves?

We know the BBC is completely on the side of the males.

@Igmum

I find it unbelievable that women with HR would not understand.

A big woman, really?

I believe he also said there was no difference between “rose” and a tall woman