A council’s policy of placing vulnerable women in mixed-gender (sic) accommodation has been successfully challenged.

[gardenbird48]

I've just seen this although it happened last week apparently.

The case was brought by a woman who had a history of domestic violence and trauma. Upon becoming homeless, she contacted the Camden Council, who accommodated her in a mixed-gender hostel. Relying on evidence from medical practitioners and various organisations, it was argued that this form of accommodation would be detrimental for any survivor of gender-based violence, due to the risk of triggering trauma.
The case settled before trial, with Camden Council agreeing to pay compensation. The council also agreed to review its procedures in relation to its emergency homeless accommodation provision. This commitment to review included an agreement to hear representations from the interested parties about the provision. The Public Interest Legal Centre (PILC), who represented the woman, made three recommendations in order for the Council to ensure that it complied with the Equality Act.

Well this is a relief and a court case that I wasn't aware of. A shame that Camden's council's policy has already caused damage to many women and even though the compensation was obviously due to that lady, the council should never have put itself in that position in the first place by not created suitable provision.

I haven't heard of the Public Interest Legal Centre before but good on them for taking this case and winning.

Good. Another significant step.

Interesting, thanks Garden

oops, I forgot the full article link. I was quite shocked to stumble across it!

www.thejusticegap.com/successful-challenge-to-mixed-gender-housing-policy-for-women-fleeing-abuse/

Sanity prevails, let's hope other councils take note...

That article is really significant. For years we've been speaking about the harm done to women who are the subject of rape, sexual abuse and domestic violence from men being forced to use mixed sex facilities and have been hand waved away by all tedious anti women groups and individuals.
To see this case written up so starkly is amazing - as is the suggestion that this could have implications for housing policy generally.
This is incredible!!!

thanks persistent for being so erm, persistent! on behalf of others who are too bloody knackered to do more.

Yes, thank you persistentwoman 🙏

I think it's gardenbird48 who needs the thanks for spotting and sharing this.

sorry to be the bearer of more news but the use of 'gender' in the above article may be significant. I think that maybe their definition of men when considering housing vulnerable female victims of dv might not correspond with our definition

At least they made a step in the right direction.

From their website:
Sarah, Nicola, Bibaa and Blessing’s cases are emblematic of a deep-rooted culture of violence against women, a pandemic in and of itself. Our calls for safety must acknowledge this wider picture and must elevate the voices of women of colour, migrant women and trans women, who are often at even greater risk on our streets, and whose cases the police routinely fail to investigate. As these events and those on Saturday night illustrate, the police cannot be trusted to defend the rights of women.

Thanks for this. No time to read in full. But something positive to end the day on?

Yes, the use of gender in these circumstances should be stopped. Gender is irrelevant to single sex spaces.

If they are to comply with the Equality act then they must consider sex not gender. There is no basis within the Equality Act for single gender accommodation.

Sarah, nicola, bibaa abs blessing were all women.

Transwomen are happily at very low risk of murder.

Abs = and

Good news but this should never have happened in the first place.

Vulnerable people should not have to go to court to fight for this stuff.
Fucks sake.

Thank you for the good news (or partial good news) Garden. With so much bad news, it's easy to forget the good things happening and progress. really amazed this didn't get picked up. Perhaps it's as it was a local council level? feels like a follow-up campaign of all councils is needed.

Surprised this didn't get picked up more, it seems quite significant.

Thank you for sharing, OP.

I do have a feeling that many councils/organisations have ran with the whole “mixed gender” nonsense, because it saves them money. Single sex provision obviously costs more to provide. I’m so pleased this case was won and hope it’s a warning to other councils.

The low profile of the case, I would suggest, is because it was settled. The trouble with settlement is that it doesn't ensure that all LA will have to act. It does suggest they should, but authorities would have to know of the case. Unless this is widely circulated, each Council will only act either when they know, or ignore until they have a case to deal with.

Would the Local Government Minister Robert Jenrick have this on his list?

@NiceGerbil

Good news but this should never have happened in the first place.

Vulnerable people should not have to go to court to fight for this stuff.
Fucks sake.

Agree

This does need widely publicising - it's like the CPS withdrwing their schools guidance, it stays under the radar. I'm surprised I haven't heard anything about it.

Good. I feel very much for the poor brave woman that had to push this through and endure the process, but she's helped many other women by doing it.

If it's proven that mixed sex accommodations are not acceptable as the sole option available to women, and that this is not in some (many) vulnerable women's best interests, then it helps across the board. Because the reality is that gender based spaces are mixed sex, this is a fact, and that there is no subjective difference for a woman who cannot cope with mixed sex spaces that can be predicated on how the male born person in the situation identifies.

Women need to be given a choice and different options to have one that meets their needs, as do TW, NB and other people who are not suited by sex based provisions.