Yet more disgraceful NHS behaviour against nurses

[Soontobe60]

https://x.com/ripx4nutmeg/status/1903719814897586583?s=61&t=gKvvk-rWmOlYFGMZN8QVvQ
When a nurse with years of exemplary service is disciplined by the NHS for referring to a male prisoner brought into hospital in handcuffs as ‘Mister”, despite the same prisoner having to be restrained from attacking her and calling her n**r several times, then its clear the NHS is no longer fit for purpose.

I found the emphasis on her religious belief, quite interesting, though perhaps it's because the case has been taken on by the Christian Legal Centre. After all, gender-critical belief is itself a protected characteristic, do they don't need to claim discrimination on grounds of religion. In fact, lots of Christians of the modern woolly Church of England variety seem fully on board with gender idiocy, but no doubt this woman's Christianity is of a more traditional variety.

In an NHS setting anyone treating a prisoner will not be aware of the sentence or even what crime the prisoner committed. Prison officers accompanying the prisoner will not divulge this personal information & it would be wildly inappropriate to directly ask the prisoner as that information has no relevance to his healthcare.
It must only be retrospectively when the nurse's team Googled on the name of Patient X that they found why the prisoner had been sentenced.

As you appear ignorant of the word please, may I gently suggest that you find the legislation, associated case law and read it.

You were on thin ice with your argument's before, but this has just sunk you.

I imagine, the version of Christianity is fundamenalist. It is often forgotten that what is regarded as "modern" worship is often evangelical and very fundamentalist.

Fundamentalism invokes its own concerns.

The New Testament is largely around forgiveness and traditional, high, Anglicanism is generally very Liberal and is the antithesis of evangelism.

As you appear to be ignorant of the word please of backing up your assertions with evidence, may I gently suggest that you find the legislation, associated case law and read it.

Edited to improve your sentence.

@FlowchartRequired Ah, I see you still don't comprehend the need to use the word please when asking for something. Such a shame.

Do you want something?

Yes or no?

If no, it ends there, if yes, remember to use the word please.

If you can visualise the flowchart, you may find it will help you.

Thank you.

The nurse is on Free Speech Nation tonight.

I am pretty sure there is no mention of preferred pronouns in the EA2010.

People without a GRC but with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment may not be discriminated against on this basis (so should not be given worse treatment than somebody without this characteristic), but it is not discriminatory to treat them as another person of their sex.

The comparator for a trans women with a GRC is sometimes another woman - so I assume that would cover pronouns - but there are many situations where a GRC can or must be disregarded and the rights of others also have to be taken into account.

I don't think the patient's GRC status has been revealed, but I assume this will all be covered in the court case.

Why would you assume anything?

I should be most grateful if you would please quote the legislation that says people must use preferred pronouns . Thank you in advance

TBH, anybody familiar with life in the neighbouring borough who goes there is shocked by the level of racism exhibited on a daily basis. Depending upon the site, you'd either get off the 157 into the 1970s or walk from the station to find yourself in 1957.

Here you go

With link

Public Sector Equality Duty

The way to exercise her religious right here would be to flag to her manager she feels unable to call this person anything other than a man, not to crack on and use pronouns of her choosing. There was a way of doing this that would have avoided upset.

The patient still shouldn't have abused her, I'm not defending that.

Thankfully, I don't want anything from you.

It it quite amusing how someone can scold someone for not using 'please' repeatedly and come across so rude while doing so.

If you want to assert that the Equality Act 2010 says something specific, you should back it up. It is not up to others to do that work for you. You can use my not using 'please' as an excuse to not back your assertions up. I can conclude that you can't back that assertion up.

Warning to everyone: don't post a reply to this poster in a hurry. They take umbrage if you don't mind your Ps and Qs.

Could you please quote the part that requires a person to use preferred pronouns.

Also not relevant to the nurse as she is not a public authority

I checked, but can't find anything about pronouns on that page.

It seems to be about reporting and monitoring, not guidance on pronouns.

Nursing is hard enough why do we have to put up with this shit!

I find it easy to believe that NHS staff have been told that they must use preferred pronouns.

However, from the NHS Fife case, and the enquiry by the EHRC that followed the hearing, I also suspect that training may have misrepresented the law.

In response to her claims, NHS lawyers have said that Christian beliefs Mis holds, that we are born male and female, are ‘not worthy of respect in a democratic society.’

Ooops have they not heard of the Forstater Judgement?

I sincerely hope we are not going to find out that this violent male was placed on a ward with women.

Thanks for the link. I have followed it and, sadly, I cannot find anywhere where it says that a failure to use preferred pronouns is a breach of EqA2010. Please can you help me?

Well you are wrong in your belief. There is NO law enacted and on the Statute in the UK that requires the use of preferred or incorrect sex pronouns.

RosesAndHellebores · Today 14:38

Also, that code of conduct was broken before the abuse and racist comments were used so they cannot be used to mitigate the sanction.

Employer's codes of conduct cannot trump national legislation, nor precedents settled as case law.

In this case, the precedent is Maya Forstater's Employment Tribunal Appeal, in which, the judge ruled that using the correct sex of a trans person, or not using the pronouns they want is both legal and Worthy of Respect in a Democratic Society.

Until the case gets to court, nobody has all the details of the circumstances, but if resources are limited, is it really better to not treat the patient, even if that could lead to a deterioration in their health or prolonged pain?