An NHS trust has come under fire from the Health Secretary after issuing a trans inclusiveness policy ordering staff to apologise if they use the “wrong” pronouns for patients (GB News, Mail, Telegraph).
Senior managers at Lewisham and Greenwich NHS Trust signed-off on the 18-page diversity and inclusion policy, which forces medics to accept patients’ personal pronouns.
The trust’s trans policy, which came into effect in February last year and is not due for renewal until November 2026, requires staff to say sorry to patients if they make mistakes relating to their pronouns, while also making a “commitment to try harder” next time.
Other sections of the policy state that staff should not confront patients who use single-sex facilities regardless of their appearance and that “trans men and non-binary individuals can become pregnant and should be treated with dignity while using maternity services”.
It is understood Lewisham and Greenwich Trust reviewed its policy in light of the landmark Cass Review but concluded that the document did not need updating.
The compulsory use of pronouns, mandated even for individuals who do not share a belief in gender identity ideology, is an untested point of law. But a court might well decide that insisting someone with gender critical beliefs use a trans or non-binary person’s preferred pronouns is a form of unlawful discrimination.
It might also conclude it amounts to a breach of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In Lee v Ashers Baking Company, the Supreme Court concluded that Article 10 rights include the right not to express a particular opinion.
A spokesman for the Trust said it is “committed to being an anti-discriminatory organisation, ensuring that we provide an inclusive, safe environment and equitable care for all our patients in line with the Equality Act 2010.
“We are proud of our trans policy, which ensures that we treat trans patients… with the same high level of dignity and respect offered to all patients,” the spokesman added.
However, the Trust’s stance has been met with a wave of criticism.
Victoria Atkins, the Health Secretary, condemned the policy, saying the NHS needed to recognise the essential differences between men and women.
“I am crystal clear: biological sex matters, and the language used by the NHS needs to recognise the different biological needs of men and women,” Ms Atkins said, adding: “Illnesses and conditions that we know impact men and women differently should be communicated in a clear and accurate way.”
Heather Binning, of the Women’s Rights Network, said: “The policy incorrectly interprets UK law and places staff and patients in extraordinarily difficult positions.
“The coercion and bullying of NHS staff through these unlawful policies is clearly evident… Comply or be damned. Where’s the dignity and respect for women who are uncomfortable accepting men in their spaces?”
Baroness Nicholson, the Lib Dem peer, said that the Trust appeared to be ignoring existing government guidelines that sex must come before self-declared gender identity in order to safeguard patients’ own well-being.
“This NHS trust seems to be deliberately ignoring the Health Secretary whose guidance declares that sex overrules gender in all medical matters,” she said.
“The NHS seems determined to follow its own unscientifically proven agenda; does this trust not recognise that male and female health profoundly differs? And that calling a man ‘her’ may so easily result in a nurse handing out the wrong medicines for the patient’s condition?”
The policy’s existence has come to light in the wake of last year’s pledge from the then Health Secretary, Steve Barclay, to end the use of gender-neutral language on NHS advice pages for female-only conditions.
Mr Barclay detailed the move in a speech at the Tory Party conference last year, as he claimed that sex-specific language has now been “fully restored” across the NHS.
It was “vital”, he said, “that women’s voices are heard” and the “privacy, dignity and safety of all patients are protected”.
Health experts have repeatedly warned that such de-sexing in the NHS is dangerous because it can overcomplicate vital health messaging for women.
As part of his speech in Manchester, Mr Barclay also criticised an NHS training manual that told staff to declare their pronouns to each other at NHS staff meetings.
Issued by Health Education England, the manual advised doctors, nurses and other staff to act in the same way in the presence of patients. “The easiest thing to do,” it explains, “is to start by introducing yourself with your own pronoun. In doing so you are creating a safe space for trans, non-binary, intersex and gender non-conforming people who may not feel comfortable to go first in introducing themselves with pronouns.”
However, the Health Secretary went on to reveal that he has ordered the training material to be withdrawn as part of efforts to restore what he described as “simple common sense” to the service.
Last year the FSU wrote to the South Tyneside and Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust following a tip-off about its ‘Transitioning at Work and Gender Diversity Policy’.
In our letter to the Trust’s Chief Executive, Ken Bremner MBE, we pointed out that this policy is effectively telling female Muslim employees that if they refuse to use – or express any concerns about using – toilets or showers with trans-identifying biological males they will face disciplinary action. That is a clear breach of the Equality Act and any employee sacked by this Trust for failing to comply with the more draconian aspects of this policy, whether a person of faith or someone with gender critical beliefs, would have an open-and-shut case for compensation in the Employment Tribunal.
As a further action, we requested that the policy be withdrawn and an urgent review undertaken, bearing in mind the legal duties of the Trust to balance the rights and needs of all its employees, including those with gender critical beliefs. The Trust employs more than 8,300 people. They will hold a wide variety of religious and philosophical beliefs. They all deserve fair and equal treatment from their employer.
You can read our letter in full here.
