What my NHS Trust have said about the Supreme Court verdict

[Opinionpolecat]

The NHS Trust I work at sent an e-mail to all staff yesterday talking about the Supreme Court ruling. They stated that the judges have said that “woman” in UK law is based on biological sex. They go on to say that they want to be clear the ruling does not change the fact that everyone is welcome in the Trust and that they are an inclusive organisation. They say everyone deserves respect and understanding including staff, patients and families. They understand that some staff members may feel they need support at this time and recommend the LGBT+ staff network where LGBT+ staff and allies can find support and advice.

It struck me that they think only LGBT+ plus staff and allies will need support and advice, and the reassurance that the trust is such an inclusive organisation. They say nothing about the fact their policies have discriminated against female staff and patients for many years. They don't even admit to it but say this wasn't their fault, it was due to NHS wide guidance and they offer no apology to female staff, patients and their allies about these years of discrimination. They say nothing about the fact that for many years some female staff and patients may not have felt welcome or included within the Trust. Have any other NHS staff had similar messages?

Not NHS, but perhaps indicative that private companies concerned about liability are responding positively:

Phoenix pensions company (a big fish, I’d say) has canned its contract with Global Butterfiles, who provide trans consulting based on Stonewall.
www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/05/01/pensions-giant-cuts-ties-trans-campaigner-defy-lavatory-ban/

This is a relief after a week of just hearing from people who oppose the SC ruling. Back in the real world people have been adapting their policy and hopefully the announcements are going to start coming out thick and fast 🤞🏻

Indeed.
but in the last 24 hours, Netball England and (finally) the FA have both concurred. What took them so long?

None want to go first?
who cares… the roll has started
”everyone is doing it” has just started running in the opposite direction suddenly

Morning all! Over on the NHS audit thread, some of our auditors are doing a deep dive into the source of “Annex B” which is the part of the NHS-wide “single sex accommodation” policy that allows for trans patients to use whatever accommodation they wish. One of our auditors is looking for some help:

GreenAllOver · Yesterday 18:18

I’ve been doing some digging on Annex B (which originally was Annex E). I’ve got as far back as 2009 (attached - its a CNO letter including Annex E, which in practice created a self ID exemption to the mixed sex accommodation rules), and have hit a bit of a brick wall on anything earlier. The guidance definitely predates Andrew Lansley, who was SofS for Health 6 May 2010 to 4 Sept 2012.
Could anyone with the right sort of expertise in digging out information from archived websites help? Logins for HSJ, Nursing Times and other related publications would also help, given what I’ve found on google but not been able to read.
** has very kindly set up a jotform, so it’s a question of digging out the relevant documents and adding them, and then using them to analyse what we need next.
At the moment, the things I’m struggling to find are
all the versions of the Mixed Sex Accommodation statistical return guidance and FAQs, dating back to the start of the collection in January 2004 (as referenced in the CNO bulletin for that month).
Any earlier data collections on the mixed sex accommodation (earlier ones may say ‘wards’), as that should lead us to the data definitions.
A copy of “Delivering same-sex accommodation – the story so far” published in Dec 2009.
A copy of the Nov 2008 NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement guidance on implementing Chief Nurse report May 2007 on eliminating mixed sex accommodation
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7cd02ced915d6b29fa8d19/CNO_note_dh_098893.pdf

If you can lend a hand, come over and give us a shout:

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5322494-nhs-policy-audit-working-party-thread-2

No wonder our NHS is such a mess. This should not be down to many different individuals within the NHS to each interpret separately. Surely the health minister or someone central should send out clear guidance on what must happen?

I hope some people with analytical minds and minds good at pin pointing details will come on to help.

And an update on what the Annex B digging has found (still more to uncover, if anyone on here has any relevant connections):

GreenAllOver · Today 09:50

If anyone is interested, this is the story so far (still got lots of gaps to fill) on mixed sex accommodation in the NHS.
NHS accommodation has been mixed sex since (at least) May 2009.
Blair came to power in 1997 promising to eliminate mixed sex wards. By January 2004 the target to eliminate mixed sex accommodation (not wards) in 95% of trusts had been met. The Government wanted 100% compliance, and set up annual monitoring. All seemed to be going well.
In May 2007 the Chief Nurse published a report on privacy and dignity, which didn’t mention single sex accommodation. In November 2008, the NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement published guidance on implementing this report, focusing on mixed sex accommodation. This could be where the guidance changed from biological sex to self identified gender (I’ve not yet found a copy). The month before DH had published a guide to trans healthcare written by a Christine Buns (TW), which told the NHS to go ‘beyond the law’, including guidance on including trans people in wards that suit their gender.
In January 2009, the then Secretary of State (Alan Johnson) announced a new push on eliminating mixed sex accommodation, possibly with the upcoming election in mind. In May of that year, guidance was published which gave trans patients to right to choose the accommodation that matched their gender identity. The data collected would not classify this as a ‘breach’, in the same way as a mixed sex ICU ward would not be a breach. At this point (if not before) NHS accommodation became mixed sex again. But nobody knew, because all the data returns showed the opposite.

Following on from the separate thread on males carrying out mammograms - how would someone go about confirming if this might suddenly have arisen because there are TIMs working as mammographers? There must be GC people in Trusts who can confirm?

My NHS Trust have sent out a very similar email to the OP's. It was sent yesterday - unsure why it took them so long to signal that they (still) don't support their female patients, visitors and staff!

What is the MRA flag? They need laces. And lanyards. Someone's missed a marketing trick there.

Jeez, I emailed my local hospital to ask for their response to the supreme court judgement last week.

No response received so I emailed them again. I didn't get the automatic response to acknowledge my email. I'm guessing this means they've blocked me!!!

How am I supposed to feel safe in their care???

Yup, our Trust received more or less the same text, just yesterday aswell.

I've been chasing a response for NHS England's internal policies following the Supreme Court judgement. We don't seem to have had anything circulated internally formally yet, but I have had a response to my persistent queries saying that they are reviewing our internal policies as a priority.

I heard Maya Forstater talking on a podcast this week https://thisisntworkingpodcast.co.uk/

She said she is starting to think that the only way to get change will be if groups of GC people band together for support and each lodge complaints about their Trust policies and "hostile working environment". I expect they would need to give specific examples relevant to their own personal case and not a generic letter. Given how difficult it is to speak up, is that sort of mass action likely to be possible?

I think some losses in court generally will focus them. I agree women should take them to court for sexual harassment/creating a hostile environment for women.

The example Maya cited as a parallel was the large class action suits over equal pay in retail. How could something like this get under way for GC staff and patients in the NHS?

Two such noisy class action cases were Next (who lost, said they can’t afford to equalise the pay and are appealing ), and Asda (who are losing, but have rejected the judgement so far and are putting up further defence.)

Without union support to organise and fund, I wonder if class action suits for staff against employers will get off the ground? (GMB union were heavily involved in supporting the cashiers at Asda. Think there was also a union involved supporting the store workers at Next. )

Most NHS related unions are currently pro gender self-id and pro trans. E.g. Unison, BMA, GMB, and we know even the RCN did not support Sandie Peggie. So unless they change their tune, they are not going to help on GC related harassment and discrimination cases.

The other organisations experienced in orchestrating class action suits are law companies. Firms like Leigh Day, Harcus Parker, Mishcon de Reya etc. Do we need one of them to show interest?

Maybe we need an FWR Union - we need a safe pathway where people can reveal their employer/nhs trust/whatever so they can be put in touch with one another. Importantly though, they would need to be verified, otherwise it potentially just opens up individuals to further abuse and employment risk. I don’t know how that would be possible, although maybe eg sex matters (with appropriate volunteer/funding support) could provide a conduit?

As the legal advice on a different thread noted, being in the right doesn’t guarantee you get to keep your job. Being in the right and part of a large enough group probably does!

I know MBM are in Scotland but they’d be a solid bet? Also a Scottish class action wouldnt be blocked by Labouras it would in England ?

Wouldn’t Scot gov try to block anything in Scotland?

Agree MBM is big plus.

@DragonRunor yes. Is this effectively what the Darlington Nurses Union is? I don’t know much about it, but would guess it is a fledgling organisation which prob does not yet have the critical mass, nor the infrastructure to help organise a large class action suit.

Also the limited publicity I have seen about it suggests they are accumulating members from across the UK. I think a class action suit would need all participants to work for the same NHS Trust.

Oh, I didn’t know about that, but I’ll look it up. Thankyou

When unions back the wrong horse, shouldn't they pay? e.g. local authorities' pay rates (and any resulting direct or indirect sex discrimination) are whatever the unions have demanded and approved, so why are council tax payers, not union funds nor union insurance nor union bosses, expected to pay compensation?

Currently, the civil service union is demanding strikes if men are not allowed into single sex women-only workplace facilities. This, so soon after the Supreme Court ruling, is effectively insisting that government employees strike so that some of their male members can break the law which protects the female workforce. The next incident of a hidden camera, upskirting, or attack in a civil service workplace will result in a legal claim. Should that claim be against the taxpayers? Or, against the union?

Any Norfolk staff or patients here that have seen the front page of the EDP today?

“Norfolk hospitals to defy Supreme Court ruling in trans care”

To my knowledge we haven’t had anything in internal comms to confirm or deny what the article says:

Prof Dwyer, chief executive of the Norfolk and Waveney University Hospitals Group - the new organisation running the Norfolk and Norwich, James Paget and Queen Elizabeth hospitals - said this would continue, despite the ruling.
"We treat people as they identify and will continue to do that, treating them with respect and with dignity," she said.
"We provide health care, not political statements, and our clinicians determine where all our patients are best cared for."

Sex Matters have commented on this in the article, but I can’t find any more information online and I haven’t bought a copy, just saw the paper on the newsstand this afternoon.

Can you link to an online version please?