SCHOOLS, hospitals and gyms are set to bar trans women from female-only loos and changing rooms under new rules.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has rejected the demands of staunch campaigners to ease the regulations regarding the choice of facilities for trans individuals.
Upcoming regulations will make it clear that trans athletes may be barred from women’s sports and affirm that women have the right to object to a trans woman being present in spaces where they are changing.
The rules will apply to any organisation offering services to the public.
This includes shops, gyms, NHS hospitals, prisons and government departments, all of which will be bound by the guidance.
Private companies and charities delivering public services, such as care homes contracted by councils, will also have to comply.
The EHRC plans to submit the updated rules to equalities minister Bridget Phillipson this month, who is expected to approve them.
The guidance follows an April Supreme Court ruling which defined “women” and “sex” as biological sex under the Equality Act.
Several major organisations, including NHS trusts, are delaying changes until the EHRC guidance is issued.
Angry trans activists are likely to launch legal challenges against the new regulations.
Services won’t be obligated to provide single-sex spaces.
However, if they do, trans women must be excluded, as failure to do so could be illegal.
The guidelines will permit staff to request birth certificates to protect women-only spaces, and excluding trans individuals will be considered lawful in various circumstances.
The draft even mentions that a trans man could be asked to leave a women-only area if his presence causes distress, despite being biologically female.
Organisations must ensure reasonable alternatives are available for trans people, as denying access to any facilities would be considered unjust.
Staff will be authorised to inquire about birth sex or legal gender status, but they must approach the matter with care.
A source stated: “The EHRC fully understands the law and cannot issue final guidance that contradicts the Supreme Court’s decision, regardless of what some might desire.”
