Wes Streeting is listening to the Darlington nurses

[Lovelyview]

https://www.gbnews.com/news/trans-nhs-womens-changing-rooms-single-space-guidelines-darlington

I have so much admiration for the Darlington nurses and am really impressed that Wes Streeting has clearly listened to them. Fingers crossed that the NHS is going to recognise that sex is a protected characteristic under the Equality Act from now on.

The article has got it wrong in that trans identified women presumably wouldn't be banned from women's changing rooms. So it's trans identified men who would be banned not 'trans people'.

The transgenderuk subreddit is an interesting read on this....

Oh, that's wonderful. It will help with the court case too, I imagine.
Not that it should ever be in doubt.

Those nurses are awesome.

Well that's going to be interesting with the Supreme Court case if it rules that legal sex always wins not biological sex!

And it's going to be interesting for all those leisure centres etc that have already thrown women and girls under the bus.

I wonder what it means for god awful unisex toilet facilities...

Hopefully sanity is returning and women's rights will stop being trampled.

All singing from the usual hymnsheet, with not one poster mentioning the inconvenient truth that the "transwoman" in question had a regular male body, was not taking hormones because he was trying to get his gf pregnant, and who watched the nurses, making comments like, "Aren't you going to get changed?"

The women's rights under Article 3 of the Human Rights Act may be being breached by men being allowed into women's changing spaces. It's the bit about being forced to undress in front of members of the opposite sex being cruel or unusual punishment.

Of course it all depends on what we mean by sex ...

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/healthcare/article/badenoch-backs-nurses-forced-to-change-in-front-of-male-colleague-xhnf53kp0

Coutinho said that the nurses had been “articulate and courageous advocates for women’s safety” as she backed the call for new NHS guidance.
She added: “There are many more women who share their concerns, but fear speaking out because of the potential for a backlash that could put their jobs at risk.

“The Conservatives called for the Equality Act to clarify that sex means biological sex when it comes to single-sex spaces. For the sake of women’s privacy, dignity and safety, all NHS trusts must make sure their guidance reflects that.”

The ET has been moved from June to October (the respondents said they needed more time) and is now 4 weeks rather than the initial 3 as 30 witnesses are expected to give evidence.

Judge Robinson said the issues being discussed were ‘complex’.

Are women required by law to undress and provide their body to special men without the right to say no?

Yes. Very complex.

Wonder if the other Judge is swearing quietly having hoped this Judge and case would provide some fig leaf support.

Just reading an article on this case. I liked their statement a lot.

Ahead of the hearing, nurse Bethany Hutchison said outside court: “We are nurses who love our jobs and our patients and only want to be afforded the dignity of getting dressed and undressed for work without a man present.

“I would like to remind everyone that we are doing this for the safety and dignity of every woman and girl across society and that we will continue to fight these unlawful policies.

“Thank you again to our many supporters.

“We see you and hear you and are delighted to stand with you.”

I love how clear and unequivocal that is.

30 witnesses instead of 3? Is that the trust driving it? Have they taken advice from the Open University? Why do they need so much extra time? A cynic might posit that there's an awful lot of coaching that they need to do.

And this cynic might be wondering if it's been delayed because a) the Supreme Court is expected to have ruled by then (I don't know this, but the legal world might do) on the FWS case, or b) the man believed to be Henderson's father is in court in June, so not looking too good for their family - spread the bad stuff a bit thinner.

That's a good call! All fingers and toes and whatever else crossed for a rational result in the SC case.

I’m pleased to see that the NHS’s request for witness anonymity was booted out.

Did anybody else spot some rumours that the Supreme Court judgment was imminent?

If the hearing isn’t until October, that gives the EHRC plenty of time in which to intervene. Or Wes, for that matter.

Also, an article in the Times today said that the judges bench book is going to have to be amended due to the increasing disturbance caused by the presence of 'emotional support animals' in court.

Couldn't find The Times article but I did find this:

Emotional support dogs causing chaos in courts
Defendants must be stopped from bringing untrained pets to cases, judges told after animals defecate in courtrooms and ‘attack’ witnesses
The Telegraph 2 April 2025

Should be no paywall with this link: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/f98172d81b2a763d

And these 😂just imagining a court room with dogs, pigs, rabbits and seven tigers!

Therapy animals: From dogs to pigs - what are emotional support animals?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/50389274

12 Reasons Rabbits Are the Ultimate Emotional Support Animals
https://pawdown.com/12-reasons-rabbits-are-the-ultimate-emotional-support-animals/

Nevada man says seven seized tigers were emotional 'support animals'
https://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2025/04/03/emotional-support-tigers-Pahrump-Nevada/7951743699375/

As DP just said, you have to applaud the top trolling of the person mentioned in the article who brought an emotional support alligator into a courtroom in the US.

Alternatively it could be a clever strategy. “Oh no, you say Al has eaten the chief witness for the prosecution?”

Roll on October

Surely this can’t possibly go to court now?

Guess that depends upon how much tax payers money the NHS wants to waste

I see all of the parties are jumping on the bandwagon.