Redvers v NHS Sussex Integrated Care Board & Mr Adam Doyle Thread 3

[fanOfBen]

TT summary:

Dr Redvers, a named GP safeguarding lead, has a constructive dismissal case. Clinical concerns were raised about a specific doctor at WellBN, a Brighton GP practice. She claims that as a result of escalating those claims from 2020 onwards, she was constructively dismissed.

Her legal claim is discrimination on the grounds of her employer’s perception she had gender critical beliefs and on the grounds of her protected belief in evidence-based medicine (EBM). The respondent defends the latter claim by pleading that EBM is just an opinion.

Earlier coverage of this hearing can be found on TT's Substack at:
t.co/TwXeLCDnpt

TT report what they hear in good faith but do not provide a verbatim transcript of the hearing.

TT's list of abbreviations:

J - Judge Katherine Andrews (sitting alone)
DR/C - Doctor Sarah Redvers, claimant
CM/RB - Chris Milsom, claimant barrister
CE/RB - Charlotte Elves, Claimant Barrister
PD - Peter Daly, solicitor for the C

NHSSICB/R1 - NHS Sussex Integrated Care Board, first respondent
AD/R2 - Adam Doyle, second respondent, CEO of R1 2019-2025
Rs - collectively the respondents
RB/BW - Ben Williams, Respondent's barrister
EBM - Evidence-based medicine
SG - Safeguarding

WB - WellBN, Brighton based GP practice
GC - Gender Critical or sex realist beliefs
GI - Gender Identity belief
WS - Witness Statement
Ix - investigation
Gx - grievance
Cx - complaint

SH/DSH - Dr Sam Hall, GP at WellBN, Trustee - the Clare Project (TCP), Clinical Lead - Trans Health Hub, GIC Partner - Trans Health Improvement Board at R1, trans-identified female
DA - Dusty Amroliwala, ext consultant, investigated complaint filed by DSH against C
LB - Lola Banjoko, Exec Managing Director, chair of Trans Health Improvement Board, advised R1 on trans matters
NC - Nikky Cambridge, former trustee of TCP

AC - Allison Cannon, Chief Nursing Officer, R1, tasked w implementing the recommendations of the 1st grievance outcome
CCD - Dr Claire Cochrane-Dyet, Dep Medical Director for System Improvement & Professional Standards, NHSE, commissioned Warshafsky Report
HD - Dr Hannah Davies, Deputy Chief Medical Office, R1

SD - Samantha Durrant, Lay vice chair until July 2022, 1st grievance manager
NE - Naomi Ellis, dep director of Safeguarding, R1
MF - Dr Mary Flynn, Named GP for Safeguarding, also filed g/x in relation to Amroliwala Report
PF - Pennie Ford, Executive Managing Director, R1, 2nd grievance manager

EG - Dr Elizabeth Gill, Chief Medical Officer, R1
HH - Hannah Hamilton, Chief financial officer, R1, 2nd grievance appeal manager
BJ - Dr Becky Jarvis, clinical lead for mental health, R1
TM - Tom Micklewright, managing partner of Lime Tree Surgery

IM - Ian Mundy, HR Consultant, Your Consultancy, 1st grievance investigator
MP - Mark Power, interim Chief People Officer (until April 2022), R1, managed Amroliwala investigation
RR - Dr Rebecca Richards, GP partner, Lime Tree Surgery, raised concerns to C about SH
AR - Anne Robson, Interim Chief People Officer (April -August 2022), R1

DS - Dr Dinesh Sinha, Chief Medical Officer (June 2022 - April 2024), Chair of Trans Health Improvement Board (THIB)
MS - Mark Smith, Chief People Officer, R1 (Aug 2022 - Jan 2025) Acting CEO (Jan 2025 - June 2025) Deputy CEO & Director of Transition (June 2025 - present)
RW - Dr Robin Warshafsky, GP NHSE, Author of Warshafsky Report (WR)

Thread 1:
www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5586672-wellbn-brighton-gp-practice-do-not-believe-in-evidence-based-medicine-tt-at-employment-tribunal-tomorrow

Thread 2:
www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5588924-redvers-v-nhs-sussex-integrated-care-board-mr-adam-doyle-thread-2

Every time I think I've heard the worst from this God awful scandal, the more I'm wrong.
The first rule of NHS trans club is don't criticise pro-trans doctors.
The second rule of NHS trans club is don't criticise treatments for trans IDing teens.
The third rule of NHS trans club, and it's the one <really> not to get wrong, is don't criticise both together.
They'll shit on you from a great height and ensure your life is made absolute Hell, all on the taxpayer's dime.

I am a doctor. I posted a link to an article about this in the doctors Reddit earlier today. It was deleted and I got banned. The NHS trans club is extremely real.

I think I will migrate fully to Mumsnet now. Not a mum but am 14w pregnant so hopefully that counts 😂

There's a "doctors Reddit"?
I'm a physical therapist myself, private so non-NHS, only tangentially impinged by all this.
I can only imagine the strictures on staff within the NHS itself, such as yourself.
And of course we have the Conversion Ban bill yet to pass, things have another jump to ramp up/embed further.
Even now, those running things who are broadly pro-trans ideology will be looking simply to minimize reputational damage, somehow square the circle with this particular egregious doctor.
But the business model and eagerness to put aside "first do no harm" for maximum roll out of trans medicalisation will be attempted to continue unabated.
Vertical <and> horizontal transmission of a radicalised worldview in the NHS is a massive issue.

Good christ, that's shocking!

Welcome to Mumsnet. We harbour many Reddit refugees ...

Yes it's called doctorsUK, have been posting there for about 10 years as that's how long I've been a doctor! Despite this apparently being "gender critical" (I prefer the term biological realist) makes me persona non grata though.

I'd say I'm shocked but we're living in a time where an actual doctor stood up in court under oath and said biological sex does not exist...

I've just watched an old 70s episode of sit-com Doctor In The House where at a meeting all the doctors were informed if they even mentioned alternative medicine, they'd be struck off.
Just 50 years later, Dr. Upton is lauded for defending a belief less substantial than the Earth is flat, your fate is decided by planetary alignment, water molecules have memory, and dinosaurs existed at the same time as the first humans.

I voted "stay" in the last Brexit vote but I would 100% vote "stay out" if there were another vote purely because of the EU buy in to Trans ideology.

Ditto, Róisín Michaux and her Peaked Substack is the woman to follow re the car crash that is GI in the EU.

@eileanacheo welcome and congratulations on the baby.

I am keen to hear your thoughts on the Sam Hall situation. We as sex realists have collectively been conditioned to understand we need to ‘educate’ ourselves and ‘be kind’. Collectively we are told we are bigots and need to understand gender.

Collectively we have seen first hand the destruction of good people who believe in reality.

As a mother when I bought books for my kids I definitely tried to ensure they saw books about different cultures and people. Did they need to see ‘ My first Pride’? Bondage etc? Absolutely not.

Publishers have a lot to answer for. Especially children’s publishing. YA absolutely we need to learn through reading age appropriate books.

Personally I think some of the big children’s publishers need to ensure the children’s teams are rigorously educated in what safeguarding actually means.

As it is they seem to be rigorously indoctrinated in LGBTQIA+ and trans information but nothing to add safeguarding children from red flags such as doctors like Sam Hall prescribing as she did. Possibly recruited from a white middle class group of young women - probably private school educated who see ‘be kind’ as their mantra. They have no idea how the vulnerable kids ‘treated’ by Sam Hall had a life a million miles away from their own comfortable home life.

Sorry for the rant. I am so angry this has happened and so disappointed at the level of toxicity in the NHS towards decent staff like Sarah R.

Same.

Welcome and congratulations!

Thank you 💓

Me too.

Wow that you were deleted and banned.

(you don't have to be a Mum to post here, all women welcome).

Welcome to full-time FWR @eileanacheo 😊
Did you get any explanation for why they banned you?

@Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g when you say that Dr Hall has zero insight into other people and is utterly obsessed by gender, seeing everything through the lens of her own transition this also applies to just about every trans person (apart from a rare few) and certainly to every parent who applauds, facilitates or initiates the transition of their child.

Edited to add that it’s not just seeing everything through the lens of her own transition but a mix of validating her own transition along with the addictive euphoria of being loved for granting every gender dysphoric child’s wish.

In essence, it’s all about her and she is seemingly incapable of seeing others as separate individuals with their own unique needs and issues. It’s all quite breathtakingly self referential.

Yes, I'm pretty certain I would too. I voted Remain.

I am counting on Nick Wallace to do the same with this as he did with the Post Office.

I'm not religious in any meaningful way, but I'll be praying for that.
People I know who are mildly GC or agnostic and know me very well ask why I get so angry about this whole area.
I've just sent a few of them the Times article.
They better not ask me "why?" again, lol.

I don't try to explain anymore.

I've copied the moderator message they sent me below (for context, the "framing" they refer to is that I said the situation was "shocking" and that Dr Redvers was "victimised" by NHSE and I fully stand by that given they wrote a 400 page vexatious complaint/investigation about her!). Ridiculous given the forum is literally aimed at people with a medical degree who are doubtlessly capable of reading the BBC article I linked to and making up their own mind.

Hi, we have decided to remove this post for a range of reasons. Firstly, as you outlined the comment section was already proving to be combative and unproductive. It is also noted that your initial posts was heavily editorialised, framing the discussion in terms which I’m sure you believe to be a fair representation in summary, but deviating very substantially from the proven facts of the case and even from the assertions made by various parties within the body of the article. In principle we agree that there is merit in the discussion, but a sincere attempt at conversation needs to begin from a point of factual neutrality as the scaffold upon which stated opinions are built, rather than framing your conclusion as representative of the article at the outset.

In principle we agree that there is merit in the discussion, but a sincere attempt at conversation needs to begin from a point of factual neutrality as the scaffold upon which stated opinions are built, rather than framing your conclusion as representative of the article at the outset.

When I acknowledged the moderator censorship in another separate thread, I was banned, presumably as they don't like being held to account.

^In principle we agree that there is merit in the discussion, but a sincere attempt at conversation needs to begin from a point of factual neutrality as the scaffold upon which stated opinions are built, rather than framing your conclusion as representative of the article at the outset.^

Condescending twats.

I believe in the primary and immutability of biological sex. I don't believe it's possible to change sex and I abhor the idea of children being taught they can be "born in the wrong body" when said body is perfectly healthy. I have never met a doctor in real life who believes it's possible to change sex but sadly none of us feel safe to speak these opinions at work.

The Redvers and Hall case speaks to a larger problem with NHS ideology being forced on us all from the top down. It's yet another case of a manager behaving completely unacceptably (how many of us have met someone as unique as Dr Hall multiple times in the last few months and then completely "forgot" about it?) and getting away with it scot-free. Then you have the hounding and persecution of a whistleblower. It's all too familiar.

"factual neutrality" and GI cannot exist in the same universe let alone earthly forum.

If the article is there for everyone to read, then one is under no obligation to begin from a point of 'factual neutrality' in a discussion.

Such a fragile ideology.