Big update on Rape Crisis legal challenge

[IamSarah]

I know many of you have been waiting for an update so first of all thank you for your patience and the many messages of support.

I am suing Survivors Network, the Sussex Rape Crisis service, as it refused to offer a single sex women’s group in addition to the mixed sex women’s groups. By mixed sex I mean inclusive of any males who identify as women.

I’ve been granted anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the case and it was submitted to Brighton County Court today.

I am being represented by law firm Didlaw and my Barrister is Naomi Cunningham (Chair of Sex Matters). So far they have acted pro bono which I am incredibly grateful for as it has taken a lot of time. The team are confident I have a good case but this is unchartered territory for women’s rights.

Many of you have very kindly offered to be involved and help with gardening. I don’t think I’m allowed to share details on here so please go to my Twitter page http://twitter.com/SarahSurviving/ which has all the info in a pinned post.

Of you’re not on Twitter feel free to send me a DM for more information on how you can help the case. Any publicity you can give the crowd funder would really help.

Thank you everyone.

Sarah x

You’re so brave Sarah I shall donate as soon as I get paid 😊

Hi Sarah. I planted a little flower for you. I'm sorry I can't plant more at the moment. I've shared the link and hope some of my friends will plant some flowers too. Thank you for standing up for women.

Thank you so, so much gardeners every little flower helps.

I have Karon Monaghan QC on board now which is brilliant - she's a top equality lawyer.

My legal team are all female. The legal team working pro bono for Survivors Network are all male. Interesting that SN couldn't find female lawyers to fight a case opposing women's rights. Just an observation.

I see the garden is half full - I've added a little more. All the very best to you Sarah.

The garden has really bloomed today

Thank you so much everyone.

Good luck! I've given your garden a shout out on Ovarit too (Activism page or circle as they call them).

Someone has written a brilliant Twitter thread about my case - please share if you can:

twitter.com/drd0gg/status/1527668847599177733?s=21&t=moRG17wM1lKehcq5V6p5yg

An excellent and sad summary in that thread, thank you for sharing it!

Someone said yesterday on another thread, it's the Billy Goats Gruff syndrome. You don't want to eat me , go and eat my sister, she's much worse than I am.

Karon Monaghan? I've never seen her in court, so I've no idea what she's like there, but I've seen her giving evidence to select committees on several occasions, and have always found her to be incredibly impressive. Really knows her stuff, and is clear that the interaction between the GRA and the Equality Act causes issues that haven't been properly addressed as yet. If I had to choose a QC to take on this kind of case it would definitely be her.

A good reminder to plant some more flowers for you.

I'm so pleased that you have Karon Monaghan, I agree with everyone who has mentioned how impressive she is.

I'm looking to contribute more bio grow on my next payday.

It's brilliant that you have Karon Monaghan.

You might have said elsewhere, but are you planning to sue a funder eg the council or nhs alongside the charity? It strikes me that a provider like SN doesn't have an overview of services in a geographical area. They do their work the way they do it and funders either fund it or don't. But the council or whoever commissions the work has a responsibility to make sure the services they outsource meet the needs of the whole population.

For example if a council commissioned a service, but only contracted a provider that specialised in a subset of the community, it wouldn't be the provider's fault that the rest of the community was not catered for. That's basically what's happened here. The power lies in the service specifications.

I expect it depends how the work is provided. Did SN bid to fulfil a contract through a tender process? Or is it more ad hoc than that?

All strength to you. Do are doing a fantastic thing.

@Manderleyagain no I'm not suing the council. I'm not a lawyer so I'm taking the advice of my legal team. They have done a lot of research on the merits of my case.

Yes excellent KM is on board, I haven't met her yet but I hope to.

Thank you for answering! I'm glad you've got such good legal advisors. I will keep my fingers crossed and keep following your case. Best of luck.

Considering almost every female only refuge in the UK has been forced to go mixed sex in order to gain council funding on the grounds of not being sufficiently 'inclusive' otherwise, this is very much an own goal from the commissioners.

What has happened is that by stealth, inclusion has become something that females aren't included in, particularly vulnerable groups of females. And because no one ever foresaw that things would go insane enough that bids for women's services would have to be inclusive of, you know, female people and their diverse populations, as opposed to male centred and mixed sex, it's not in the paperwork.

This is one of the cases that is likely to force commission councils to have to rebalance this and to face that inconvenient females are still legally entitled to inclusion and equality too. A council that has funded a group to provide ALL its services but neglected to notice that several protected groups of females are not only not catered for but are actively discriminated against and rejected out of any provision is on a highly sticky wicket.

The answer of course is going to be, as it should have been from the start, the provision of female only services which will be led by those passionate about and informed about the specific needs of that unique population and its diversity. AND also provision of mixed sex service which will be led by those very passionate about the specific needs of TQ+ people and its diversity. The current group providing the mixed sex service that excludes all inconvenient females should emphatically not be providing the female only service even if they wished to bid for it.

They are wholly disinterested and uninformed about this group, and their political bias and prejudice against this group even being permitted help unless it is politically compliant and male-centric renders them people who should be nowhere near traumatised females in need of help.

And this is another crucial political point that commissioning councils are going to have to face: those with these political views are not able to be inclusive or balanced in their view of females and what they will permit females. This political position is not compatible with many of the duties that are required of those who choose to work in public service positions.

Brilliant post @Artichokeleaves

I want you on my legal team!

some flowers planted for you Sarah. 🌻

Thank you so much you lovely gardeners

Just passed the £30k mark which is amazing. Still have another £20k to raise ...

I've just done a bit more gardening on this.

Hi Sarah,

I have just donated to your campaign and shared your page on another site.

Bumping this for you.

A tiny bit of gardening from me. Good luck xxx

Very close to target!

Another bump for this, have just done some gardening - Sarah's so close to her target!

Just bumping this as Sarah needs about £4k by lunch time tomorrow for her legal case.

If anyone is able to donate or share, I’m sure Sarah would be most grateful.

Donated 😊