"Darlington Nurses" vs County Durham and Darlington NHS Trust Tribunal Thread 7

[ThreeWordHarpy]

Thread 1, 7-Oct to 23-Oct; pre-hearing discussion, KD (day 1 of evidence) and BH (day 2).
Thread 2, 23-Oct to 28-Oct; BH (day 2), CH, JP, MG (day 3&4), TH, SS, ST, LL (day 4), JS, AT (day 5)
Thread 3, 28-Oct to 29-Oct; AT (day 5&6), TA (day 6&7)
Thread 4, 29-Oct to 31-Oct; TA, AM (day 7) JB (day 8)
Thread 5, 31-Oct to 04-Nov; JB (day 8), SW, CG, JR (day 9)
Thread 6, 04-Nov to 05-Nov; RH (day 10), SW (day 11)

Five nurses working at Darlington Memorial Hospital have filed a legal case suing their employer, an NHS trust, for sexual harassment and sex discrimination. The nurses object to sharing the women’s changing facilities with a male colleague, Rose, who identifies as female. The hearing started on October 20th, with evidence starting on October 22nd and is scheduled to last 3 weeks. To view the hearing online requests for access had to be made by October 17th. The hearing is being live tweeted by Tribunal Tweets who have background to this case on their substack. An alternative to X is to use Nitter: nitter.net/tribunaltweets or nitter.poast.org/tribunaltweets

The Judge made clear at the start of the public hearing on Day 1 that only TT or press have permission to tweet. If online observers see/hear something in the court that isn’t reported by TT, we don’t mention it until the next time there’s a break. This is a very cautious approach to avoid any accusations of “live reporting” on MN. Commentary on the content of TT tweets is fine as soon as they’re posted on X.

Key people:
C/Ns - Claimants, the Darlington nurses
R/T/Trust - Respondent, County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust
J/EJ – Judge/Employment Judge Seamus Sweeney
NF - Niazi Fetto KC, barrister for claimants
SC - Simon Cheetham, KC, barrister for respondents
RH - Rose Henderson, trans identifying nurse
CG – Clare Gregory, NHS ward manager
SW - Sue Williams, NHS Trust HR
KD – Karen Danson, first claimant to give evidence.
BH – Bethany Hutchison, claimant
AH – Alistair Hutchison, husband of Bethany
CH – Carly Hoy, claimant
JP – Jane Peveller, claimant
MG – Mary Anne (aka Annice) Grundy, claimant
TH – Tracy Hooper, claimant
SS – Siobhan Sinclair, witness for the claimants, retired from Trust
ST – Sharron Trevarrow, witness for the claimants, retired from Trust, former housekeeper and wellbeing officer
LL – Lisa Lockey, claimant
JP – Professor Jo Phoenix, expert witness
JS – Jane Shields, witness for the claimants
AT - Andrew Thacker, NHS trust Head of HR
TA – Tracy Atkinson, NHS trust HR.
AM – Andrew Moore, NHS Head of Workforce Experience
JB – Jillian Bailey, NHS Workforce Experience Manager
AT – Anna Telfer, NHS Deputy Director of Nursing
SW – Sandra Watson, Matron for General and Elective Surgery
JR – Jodie Robinson, manager of Rose

I always knew DW and I were classless. We are completely inconsistent in this matter.

I haven’t read all the thread but the fucking soft focus photo

Harsh media glare for the women - but men must now be soft focus

Excuse my language but that’s awful

Ooh so pleased to see you have popped into the thread. I enjoyed this morning so much, I forgot all about the thread and everything else and just sat back and listened. It was like being back in Uni, but with bonus legal professionals getting schooled at the front of the lecture hall.

The J is quite a character, as evidenced by a 2022 tribunal concerning the same department in the same hospital. I cannot wait to read his commentary on your expert evidence.

Judge Sweeney asked the professor if there had been any research on the experiences of women "in the presence of biological males who identify as female".
Prof Phoenix said she could not think of any, but people, including herself, were now asking if gender identity "overrides sex-based patterns of social behaviour".

Jo I know it wasn't your remit and you were right not to say anything, but I so wished you could have answered that with 'No because anyone proposing such research in academia would swiftly find themselves out of a job'. Cos TWAW innit?

Yes. I would have e liked to say that but every time I added the judge held up his hand and anyway I wanted to keep strictly to script for obvious reasons

Plenty of boys are highly embarrassed about their bodies, body hair included, particularly at puberty when such things as unexpected and unwanted erections occur at very inconvenient times. I think there is a degree of inaccurate stereotyping going on. Even a boy's voice breaking can be embarrassing and can result in unwanted attention. And there are a lot of shy boys who are embarrassed about their awakening sexual interest. I do get that it's often much more difficult for girls, and that boys' behaviour is often somewhere on the scale between naïvely inappropriate and horrendous.

unless the judge and his compadres live in a bubble i am sure he will be well aware of the heat and yours and Kathleen’s experiences.

Thank you for what you did today Jo, I hope it makes things even more obvious for the judge.

I'm sad though that it's necessary to have to prove the discomfort, fear, embarrassment and danger women face when a man invades our spaces.

Am I the only one wondering whether an equivalent to the “Bat Alarm” went up across MN HQ to summons Jo?

Thank you for doing what you did. It must have been hard to do so, so soon after your hideous ET experience.

I do feel there is a research project for somebody, somewhere, to investigate the changing nature of English(?) teen store changing rooms.

Was it shoplifting? Was it adding menswear? Was it the profit line?

I remember talk at school about it being so easy to pinch stuff out of Chelsea Girl, and that was in the late 60s!

Been out all day, so posting behind. Would JPs evidence have included, for example, the supporting data to the Times report from 3-5 years ago that showed an increased number of sexual assaults to W&G in mixed changing spaces? I think possibly swimming pools/gyms.

She was asked a very specific question which was about how women would be effected by being forced to change clothes in front of men.

so her report was restricted to that.

@JoPhoenix - isn’t it beautiful to come full circle. Re-reading threads here as you went through your own trial - and now here you are being a beautifully articulate advocate in person for other women in your former position. You are a light in the darkness.

You were a superb expert witness and for someone whose only 1st was in Criminology a long time ago - a s’hero!

It looks like they are going strong. The King is dead, long live the king - sucking in vast amounts of money from all sorts of established charities too.

Bows down in worship - thank you so much

Re shoplifting

I raise you all

Biba

Well Biba was so dark it's a wonder that the entire stock wasn't nicked!

Just dipping in very late after today's activity. V sad to miss it and many thanks to the usual stalwarts for leaving the commentary for me to catch up on. I had to actually go to work - the cheek of it!
Anyway, I thoroughly agree with your statements @BigGirlBoxers . I'm the only female in a house full of males, and it is very very hard (almost impossible) for me to relax when they are at home. I'm just too aware of where they all are, what they're all up to, should they have got out today and seen some sunlight, when will they need to eat next. And if by some miracle I do find a quiet corner to chill in, you can guarantee that one will come and want something from me.
Yes, for true relaxation I have to be alone. Whereas DH can just plonk himself in front of the TV amidst the chaos (and that's not a criticism, I just envy it)
ETA - Chelsea Girl??!!! That's a place I hadn't thought of in a loooooong time.

another revelation for me about the permanent alertness to others needs is that it never leaves you.

so as a grandmother i am attuned to my adult children’s needs and also my grandchildren, and their interplay and how i can help (or not)

and sometimes not knowing what is wanted or needed, and feeling guilty if i did not know what is wanted

This thread has been visited by the Royal @JoPhoenix AND @RovingPublicEnquiry - truly, truly the only place to be on MN.

I think there's a typo at the top of page 5...

The instead of they?

Will go back to reading....

The questions Prof Phoenix answered so well were so specific. The lack of academic research in this field is obvious because how can you compare scenarios that would have previously been so niche and improbable?

It made me laugh when reading Tribunal Tweets. It sounded like the Judge really was adverse to hear much about periods! It was a good illustration that I hope he will reflect upon.

Obviously my speciality is toilet door gaps (!) and how they are needed for health and safety, and that’s big reasons why we need single sex toilets. They are the only ones that are allowed door gaps. So there’s an adjacent line of research. I was thinking a lot about this today and male and female behavioural differences.

It is only men who have been jailed for voyeurism according to the academic in this Guardian article.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/may/27/secret-spy-cameras-voyeurism-uk
Sex in public toilets is illegal but when the clause in the Sexual Offences Act was going through parliament, there were men arguing that it would be discriminatory towards men.

When you look at toilet design, you can see the effects men’s behaviour has had on women’s toilets in design, even down to the size of the cubicle and what times they were open. Even when women got public toilets, we had to ‘spend a penny’ to use them but the blokes didn’t for the urinals so there was no financial barrier. This was to encourage them to stop pissing on buildings. Many buildings have urine deflectors on them, to stop men. Women don’t tend to urinate in public like men do. If they really have to they are usually much more discrete and it has been shown they can put themselves in vulnerable situations by finding an isolated spot. Conversely, when it’s really dangerous, like in refugee camps, aid agencies have found women would rather go on their tent floor, rather than risk going to newly built toilets in case of attack.

It Is Good as Long as We Do Not Get Caught
is the tag line for one of the academic articles on voyeurism. This is greatly aided if facilities are mixed sex, whether it be toilets or changing rooms.

This frankly looks ridiculous- full on blurring and soft focus! It's laughable and so so blatant.

Lawyers for the County Durham and Darlington NHS Trust said Prof Phoenix was "gender critical", meaning she believed sex was "immutable", which could colour her "independence".

I actually feel a bit for SC, this is humiliating for him too.....

I would have enjoyed hearing SC's answer to "OK then, so do you believe sex is mutable? How does that work?" But of course only they ask the questions.

To be fair SC didn’t do much for the money he’ll have got.

He asked all the 8 claimants - are you a liar and were you really harassed by a letter for a few days. And then Netto had to do all
the hard work showing the hand delivered letters by senior management, updated reports going to their sexual harasser on who HR intimidated to withdraw from the letter and have Rose confirm that not one single person spoke to him about an alternative solution that would have avoided him sexually intimidating up to 300 female nurses.

So I don’t feel too bad for SC. He’s well paid and hey ho this clients lose, no skin off his nose. I do resent how he inferred Karen Danson was a liar.