Tara Hewitt Head of 'Equality Diversion & Inclusion' at Northern Care Alliance advising NHS leaders to ignore EHRCs recent guidance.

[happydappy2]

Tara Hewitt who holds a senior position within the NHS, is advising CEOs, Chief medical officers and others within the NHS to blatantly ignore new guidance from EHRC regarding single sex provision of services. Claiming it is transphobic. This will not end well...the NHS is there to serve all of us, not just males and their identities. The fact they feel emboldened to do this publicly on twitter is shocking.

Ms Hewitt is quite right. The latest 'guidance' from the EHRC is dangerous nonsense, not compliant with the EqA, or the Statutory Code of Conduct. Following it would risk service providers or employers acting unlawfully.

@RobinMoiraWhite I really enjoy the fact that you have linked an article to support your opinion, which just quotes you saying the same thing. I wish I had that kind of bulletproof self confidence.

Traditionally on MN, we like to make actual arguments, perhaps even cite evidence, to support our assertions.

Dare I ask why all the experts at the EHRC are wrong but you are right? I can't really see how this doesn't just state whats in the act already in plain English.

I must say there's a morbid fascination watching both the government and the general public go through the exact same process that the women have on here, Twitter, and everywhere else.

TRAs turning allies into enemies one after another with their behaviour.

Rage filled tantrums, fury and contempt for women, saying out loud that nothing short of 100% capitulation is acceptable. And, of course, the most spectacular shark jumping including desperately trying to get the EHRC stripped of its status, threatening Boris with pulling out of a conference unless he does what he's told, and now running all over the NHS telling them to ignore the law.

I almost can't bear to watch.

@RobinMoiraWhite I am also interested to know if you think women should never be allowed single sex facilities?

If you think they can have some facilities, which ones do you find acceptable?

Should transmen receive less attention than TW and if so, why?

I didn't know who Tara was so had to Google.

The NHS is in shit state and this is what the head of equality, diversity and inclusion is wittering on about- giving men the right to womens spaces. Makes me furious. Talking about equality why aren't they highlighting and pushing for change on the way women are treated in healthcare and the proven unfavourable outcomes if operated on by a man? The black women who die during childbirth at a rate of 5 x higher than white women? Those who for various reasons are hesitant to access healthcare or have had services suspended that they relied on? No, it's all me me me and not impartial at all; and we pay their wage.

@donquixotedelamancha

Ms Hewitt is quite right. The latest 'guidance' from the EHRC is dangerous nonsense, not compliant with the EqA, or the Statutory Code of Conduct. Following it would risk service providers or employers acting unlawfully.

@RobinMoiraWhite I really enjoy the fact that you have linked an article to support your opinion, which just quotes you saying the same thing. I wish I had that kind of bulletproof self confidence.

Traditionally on MN, we like to make actual arguments, perhaps even cite evidence, to support our assertions.

Dare I ask why all the experts at the EHRC are wrong but you are right? I can't really see how this doesn't just state whats in the act already in plain English.

Source: trust me, bro.

Seems that some “EDI professionals” believe themselves to have more knowledge of the law than legal experts, and more right to be followed in their interpretation of the law than the UK’s statutory regulator.

What qualifies them for this level of confidence when the only letters they have after their names appear to be pronouns?

Their language is so partisan: “We stand together” and “united for equality” - it’s just a protest movement that somehow persuaded the NHS to give it a salary.

Sack them if they’re not prepared to follow the law and take women’s rights seriously. They can make a living in some other way.

Talking about equality why aren't they highlighting and pushing for change on the way women are treated in healthcare and the proven unfavourable outcomes if operated on by a man? The black women who die during childbirth at a rate of 5 x higher than white women?

Wrong kind of women, innit?

@tabbycatstripy

Their language is so partisan: “We stand together” and “united for equality” - it’s just a protest movement that somehow persuaded the NHS to give it a salary.

Sack them if they’re not prepared to follow the law and take women’s rights seriously. They can make a living in some other way.

Spot on Tabby. I am really starting to understand infiltration now. Quite scary.

The NHS should tell its EDI staff to a) follow the law and b) concentrate on important issues such as the horrifying death rates of people with learning disabilities during the pandemic and their poorer outcomes generally, especially when downright neglect is involved as seen in several high-profile tragic cases.

I wonder what Tara Hewitt earns. I assume more than a nurse regularly working night shifts in a high pressure environment.

A friend working for the NHS was recently moaning about having to take part in equalities training run by their trust's ED&I person describing it as a session of being lectured to by a middle aged middle class white male. Not Tara in this instance, but the point still applies.

If we as individuals were to list the top 10 diversity issues facing the NHS, I doubt that gender identity issues of white men would be up there. With the honourable exception of Robin presumably.

I want to see a court case where someone tries to justify themselves taking Robin Moira White's view of how to implement services over the EHRC's.

Maybe Ben Cooper could go through Robin's historical success record of legal predictions and interpretations in this area.

(Maybe Robin is good at law in some other fields, but there appears to be a recurring problem with getting stuff correct in this particular women's rights area for some reason. )

Perhaps we can even get Robin's book reviews read out in court.

The strength of Robin’s arguments on Mumsnet over the years give me great hope for Allison Bailey’s court case.

“My Lord, I implore that the plaintiff’s claim is false, because I read something once that said it was false. The defence rests.”

A quote from RMW's link to RMW's opinion 'Some people don’t like the idea that they might be in a toilet cubical next to a trans person. It’s fine for an employer to provide a separate facility, but the least discriminatory way will be to provide that separate facility for anyone who wants an additional degree of privacy, not insisting on the trans person [using it].'

As it is men that women 'don't like the idea of', yes a separate facility is an excellent idea.

Lets do that, and call them 'female' toilets. Sorted.

I am also interested to know if you think women should never be allowed single sex facilities?

Robin has given her opinion on this before and it's very close to the stonewall interpretation of the EA: single sex spaces are theoretically possible but very hard to justify in practice because it must be done on an individual basis with evidence (Please correct me if I'm wrong).

In fairness I have a lot of sympathy for the idea (unpopular on FWR) that passing, post-op transsexuals should be treated the same as bio women in almost every situation. The problem is that by insisting that a bearded man can be just as much of a transwoman as a transsexual the Genderists have forced the law to draw the line very clearly indeed.

RobinMoiraWhite

The latest 'guidance' from the EHRC is dangerous nonsense, not compliant with the EqA

Considering female humans' needs, interests and access is 'dangerous nonsense' is it? Excluding female humans is ok is it?

The absolutely stark despising of women from people at the top of this debate who seem absolutely determined to control the law in a way that embeds the right to harm, exclude and override the consent of females continues to be just..... staggering to behold.

All this guidance says is that the interests of male people with the protected characteristic of gender identity must be balanced with the interests and needs of female people. That's it. That's all. And sometimes what those female people need will mean a boundary or alternative provision.

What's your alternative Robin? Women shut up and put up or deal with exclusion? You want that embedded in law?

@titchy

You know a publication has vigour when Robin and DofM show up on the thread and tell you why it's either wrong, or doesn't say what you think it says.

Yep!

As usual @RobinMoiraWhite you are spinning things to suit your agenda. You know you are wrong and all the wishing in the world will not change that.

That you think protecting the safety and dignity of women is dangerous and illegal reveals so very much about you.

Women have the right to say no. So no... and take your travesty of understanding with you!

@AlisonDonut

A quote from RMW's link to RMW's opinion 'Some people don’t like the idea that they might be in a toilet cubical next to a trans person. It’s fine for an employer to provide a separate facility, but the least discriminatory way will be to provide that separate facility for anyone who wants an additional degree of privacy, not insisting on the trans person [using it].'

As it is men that women 'don't like the idea of', yes a separate facility is an excellent idea.

Lets do that, and call them 'female' toilets. Sorted.

One of the reasons this guidance that female humans must be permitted some basic consideration and it cannot be all about male people's wishes and needs all the time regardless, is because of situations like Brighton Rape Crisis. Where male service users had three options of service, female users had one which was mixed sex.

The service refused to provide a single sex service to be accessible to females who could not access the mixed sex service, even if it was in another building in another part of the town not to upset the male users. Why? Because the sheer existence of it was too offensive to those male users.

Defend that, Robin. Please. Go on. Set it out there.

Why are raped women not to be permitted help, by males, on the sheer dog in the manger grounds that even though those male people's needs are met by multiple choices of sensitive options, the mere existence of a female only resource somewhere in the town is just too much to expect male people to tolerate?

And that's fine, but guidance saying female humans need consideration too and accessibility too is 'dangerous'? Ffs!

As for the idea that females excluded from the women's provision by the inclusion of males should have to fight for a third space...

a) male people will refuse to allow it, we've seen that multiple times
b) it would be a target for said male people
c) the first job of female provision - and let's face it that was the intention when setting up 'women's single sex provision' is to be inclusive of all female people.

including males excludes females. This is not ok.

It is not ok for male people to have more choice at the expense of some female people being excluded from anything at all. This is just flat out - well misogyny is too mild a word. It's male supremacism. The belief that a male person just matters more and should have entitlements that they don't permit females.

But the evidence that yes, this is absolutely the case and the attitude that female people are having inflicted on them in this 'debate' is very, very helpful to have.

@Hoardasurass

Does anyone know who we should/could complain to about this

After reading the details: www.england.nhs.uk/contact-us/complaint/

I think we should go to NHS England, rather than the local complaints at the Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust where Hewitt works. it doesn't fit neatly into either, but commissioner has more leway.

I suggest two complaints.

1 - advising NHS staff to break Equalities Act is clearly illegal and unprofessional.
2 - Hewitt has broken purdah by committing on a political matter currently undergoing massive debate during the Local Government elections period.
nhsproviders.org/media/693326/nhs-providers-pre-election-briefing-2022.pdf

Maybe legally minded folks can provide appropriate wording.

Also I suggest going to local press.

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/

Remember mixed sex care in NHS leads to murder and rape. We know this from long experience. Report back in

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/woman-dies-after-attack-in-mixed-sex-psychiatric-ward-lmkzggkb6sp

@Patchbatch

The NHS is in shit state and this is what the head of equality, diversity and inclusion is wittering on about- giving men the right to womens spaces. Makes me furious. Talking about equality why aren't they highlighting and pushing for change on the way women are treated in healthcare and the proven unfavourable outcomes if operated on by a man? The black women who die during childbirth at a rate of 5 x higher than white women? Those who for various reasons are hesitant to access healthcare or have had services suspended that they relied on? No, it's all me me me and not impartial at all; and we pay their wage.

Yes, and I don't even think it's about trans patients - it's about allowing male trans staff to have access to women who would prefer female staff.

@Alltheprettyseahorses

The NHS should tell its EDI staff to a) follow the law and b) concentrate on important issues such as the horrifying death rates of people with learning disabilities during the pandemic and their poorer outcomes generally, especially when downright neglect is involved as seen in several high-profile tragic cases.

Yes, absolutely this. How does TH get away with campaigning purely for issues that affect TH personally? Literally just seems to be propaganda promoting TH's own campaigning issues. That's not EDI.

@NotBadConsidering

The strength of Robin’s arguments on Mumsnet over the years give me great hope for Allison Bailey’s court case.

“My Lord, I implore that the plaintiff’s claim is false, because I read something once that said it was false. The defence rests.”

"And that thing you read that said it was false - did you write it yourself?" :)

Defend that, Robin. Please. Go on. Set it out there.

We cannot express just how little women's rights matter to men.

If anyone doesn't think this is a Men's Rights Movement, then think again people.

They hate us. They don't give two shits about our welfare, or safety.

We are just props in their lives, for sex, childbearing and clearing up their shit.