Thread by @tribunaltweets

We expect to be reporting the final morning of evidence today in the employment tribunal of Ms B Hutchison and others vs County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust.

Our previous reporting and background on the case can be found here on our Substack.
open.substack.com/pub/tribunaltw…

Today's witness will be Dr J Phoenix, academic author and professor of criminology at Reading University. She was victorious in her employment tribunal vs the Open University. See our coverage here: open.substack.com/pub/tribunaltw…

Abbreviations are available on our Substack, expected to be most frequently used today:
JP - Dr J Phoenix
Cs - Claimants, the Darlington nurses
NF - Niazi Fetto, KC - barrister for Cs
R - Respondent, County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust
SC - Simon Cheetham, KC, barrister for R

EJ/J- Employment Judge Seamus Sweeney
P - panel members sitting with J
ET - Employment Tribunal
RH - Rose Henderson, trans identifying nurse
SH - sexual harassment
SD - sex discrim
SA - sexual abuse
HM - hospital management
TG - transgender
CR/CF - changing room or facilities

TITWP - Transition in the Workplace Policy of Rs
SSS - Single sex spaces
Ix - investigation
Gx - grievance
Cx - complaint

A reminder that our work is not a verbatim transcript. Witnesses in tribunals in England and Wales submit a written witness statement which we cannot access. Barristers then ask additional questions in examination and cross examination.

We are an all volunteer collective of citizen journalists. You can support our work through subscribing to our substack. tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/support-the-…

Published start time for the Tribunal is 10 am. We will return then.

Observers being admitted to online facility, but no picture or sound yet.

Participants and observers entering the tribunal room. No sound yet.

A change from recent days; appear to be no representatives of the Rs in the 'client chairs'
J - we seem to have gotten smaller in number today, not sure what its like on line, anything before we start
[nothing from barristers]
J - would you like to come to witness stand JP

JP - affirms
J - usual instructions, including on the fragility of cups
NF - you should have your report in front of you, does the tribunal have it
J - we have the report, hard and digital
NF - dated 9 2025,
JP - correct
NF - page 24, we see your signature, have you read

recently,
JP - yes
NF - to you continue to hold those views
JP - I do
NF - takes through accompanying docs
JP - yes all there
NF - can you give brief intro,
JP - you can see my CV, papers etc, I am a sociologist, specialising in sex and gender and have written mostly

about criminal justice and women and girls.
NF - no further qs
J - SC?
SC - page 4, para 13, you describe 'I hold gender critical beliefs'
JP - yes
SC - you are a member of adv group for Sex Matters,
JP - yes
SC - you say you advise
JP - yes

SC - Sex Matters (SM) says on website that adv board members endorses their principles
JP - yes, I do
SC - SM is very active
JP - it's a human rights org, yes
SC - intervened in Supreme Court, intervention positive
JP - yes
SC - is it reasonable to question your independence

JP - I'm really glad you asked that, that notion of holding a belief and the relationship to academic independence, just because I hold GC beliefs and I'm an adv board member of SX, does not mean I ignore evidence, I was asked to give evidence to Scots Parl last week, I ended up

changing my mind about what should be done about prostitution. And that was after 30 years.
If you think that any work I do in terms of advocacy are tainted....
SC - I'm going to stop you, because you have answered my q. You are saying that you have looked at the evidence,

you were asked to provide answers to 2 qs: are women likely to feel uncomfortable when undressing, and a variation of that.. but none of your work touches on these questions directly
JP - I am an expert in being able to work through the evidence on sexual differentiation and

the consequences of that
SC - you have said in your report that no research on the specific qs.
JP - the specific qs, yes, but there is a vast body of research we can drawn on
SC - you say there is an established body of literature that says women will be uncomfortable, etc

but 'more likely than not', do you accept that some women may not be uncomfortable
JP - there will be outliers, the existence of outliers does not refute the broad body of evidence, women have very different r'ship to their bodies than men do
SC - if there is a group or women

JP - let me explain, you are saying it's up to individuals, and therefore we can't make statements about social patterns, it's a classic criticism of sociology, and some may depart but those individual responses are likely to conform to broad patterns
SC - there may be different

responses.
JP - yes there may be, but the existence of an outlier does not break the broad pattern, some women may have a different perspective
SC - conclusion on being compelled to undress is strong, you say there are no studies that directly address women's fears

of undressing in front of opposite sex, but there is decades of research that supports that
JP - correct
SC - now about women being compelled to undress in front of the opposite sex, your conc is based on criminal evidence
JP - don't understand your q

SC - you are drawing upon criminological evidence
JP - that's not correct, it is sociological evidence, not just criminal, and can I just clarify, the q was on fear of being compelled to undress, when I say no direct study, no one has studied fear of those being compelled to

undress. You can call it criminological evidence, but much of sociology deals with human behaviour, crime and deviance.
SC - 2 qs, one about getting undressed and one about fear of being compelled to undress.
JP - yes that's correct.
SC - no further questions, thank you.

J - can I clarify, there are a lot of sub paras letters and roman numerals.....there is a footnote 1,
JP - bottom of page 3
J - any misconceptions about feminist social theory, what is the definition, I wasn't clear,
JP - apologies, it's very awkwardly phrased. What I mean is

that there is a body of work called 'feminist social science' it tends to be empirical and suggest how society should behave, I haven't used those because they are seeking to change society. But all feminist work starts from gender critical point of view.

J - what is the definition you are offering
JP - feminist work takes as a starting point the observed social inequality between men and women
J - [repeats]
JP - yes
J - what are the charitable objects of SM
JP - without looking it up, fighting for sex based rights

J - may sound like a silly q, what do you mean by gender critical
JP - sex is immutable, people cannot change sex, it is important to recognise on occasion that sex matters more, sex has an ongoing and enduring social significance
J - you draw distinction between sex and gender

JP - they should not be confused
J - para 18b, you refer to it is a 'widely accepted empirical observation' widely accept by whom?
JP - widely accepted by social scientists, it may help...
J - that's okay, just wanted to know that
J - a ref to research, you refer to research

that discusses women's bodies as objects..... can you explain that
JP - I'm trying to figure out where to start.
J - one of the skills of an expert, to simplify for the non-expert
JP - the origins of sociologists and psychology, women's body are different, women bleed, give

birth. We are individuals that come together in groups to live differently. One of the challenges for women to deal with in terms of equality is that our bodies betray us as being closer to nature. Why is that men had status in hunter gathered societies? Meat was relatively

rare, harder to get, men are prized because of that. The theory of the abject,
J - what is that
JP - culture is symbolic, we use words, we must reject nature and natural impulses.
J - I understand the answer....that's for sure
JP -good

J - empirical research across a range of disciplines is that what you used
JP - yes, there is not a great deal of research that deals with CRs because it's a new social norm we're dealing with
J - you say that the qs posed are sociological qs,

[JP watch chimes, she apologises, J says 'we've all been there]
J - there is no body or research that directly addresses but there is research from which we can draw inferences, and the answer is yes
JP - yes
J - you then set out that research and studies in this report

J- you give your opinion in para 22,
[JP watch goes off again, J offering guidance on how to turn it off, JP takes watch off, trying to fix, suggestions to hand to lawyer - watch is handed off]
J - your conclusion based on 2 established and connected facts does that boil down to

the historical prevalence of the risk of male on female violence, or is that over simplifying it.
JP - I may have misheard you
J - does it boil down to the historical prevalence of the risk of male on female violence and the fear of, that triggers response
JP - that doesn't

speak to the modesty norm,
J - what is the modesty norm
JP - that women are much more sensitive to undressing than men
J - and the other
JP - that women are particularly afraid of being compelled to undress, that's the response to historical violence,

J - [interrupting] I don't mean to be discourteous but you have answered my qs. your conclusion here, q a or b
JP - it comes down to fear of crime, men's fear of crime is very different than women's fear of crime
J - is there any research on women's reactions and responses

to women in the presence of bio males who profess a female gender identity,
JP - not that I can think of immediately, there is a different q that people are beginning to ask, does gender identity override sex based patterns of behaviour
J - repeats,

'does gi override sex based', I don't want you to elaborate on that just yet. Go on to ... a quote you refer to extensive discussion in USA and Canada of tws presence in female crs' what does that mean
JP - that quote is referring to are popular and political discussions, not

research.
J - who are they (Woo, Kaschler and Harris ?)
JP - researchers and authors
J - you don't use their work in your paper this is your only reference
JP - yes
J - may not have any bearing....[J is reading, looking for his q]

J - para Roman number 16, page 14, seems to be talking about heterosexual male behaviour in locker rooms, why heterosexual important
JP - locker room studies, in general men's locker rooms have a greater level of camaraderie unless you are not heterosexual

J - qualitative accounts further illustrate that men's discomfort at undressing in front of women is muted, what does this mean, how is it relevant,
JP - forgive me that was very awkward phrasing, it wasn't a study, it was anecdotal but it was the only thing I could find

and I was very struck by it.
J - this is where female sportswriters go into male locker rooms
JP - there was a change in law and it was in a professional context
J - so that's an inference
JP - I've tried to indicate the weight of the evidence I put before you

J - final q, first sentence, again, just my understanding - the thrust of the opinion is that more women than men feel personal insecurity, and that is because of the history of men and women, is that right
JP - you've got it right, you cannot say it is simply about personal

insecurity, it is much more than that, and this speaks to the point about individuals
J - I think I've probably asked qs that were on the minds of my colleagues, any from the barrister
NF - you were asked about 'women who don't mind', it was presented to you as a concept that

women don't mind. Is it fair to consider that as constant across ages - from youth to old age.
JP - no, there are periods of acute discomfort, adolescence is one, when women have periods, women also have problems with incontinence after childbirth and post-menopausal. A woman

will experience things differently throughout her life.
NF - menopause?
JP - post menopausal women tend to have more problems with bladder incontinence, menopausal women have sweats, it is almost impossible for women to escape their biology, women are smaller and slighter

we have periods, we go through menopause, we are constantly reminded that we are women by our biology, every 28 days through our adult lives. For example if a woman floods during her period, that is tremendous shame...
J - thank you, I'm going to stop your there.

J - thank you, JP that concludes your evidence. Don't forget to get your watch back.
J - that finishes us for today. We will have written submissions on Monday morning at 10 am. How long
SC - my oral subs will be in response to NF's subs
J - so you're going first

SC - I think no more than an hour
NF - I will take the same approach, to be safe 2 hours,
SC - so we should finish within Tuesday
SC - leave it with us to deal with the authorities we rely on
J - aim for 1.5 to 2 hour each, we should finish by lunch time or shortly thereafter

J - we will leave first.
Court rises, court finishes for today.
End of session.

@threadreaderapp unroll please