Nurse Files BC Supreme Court Appeal of Disciplinary Decision Over Gender Comments

Amy Hamm, a nurse from Vancouver, B.C., is seen in a file photo. Courtesy of Amy Hamm/JCCF

A B.C. nurse who lost a disciplinary hearing over gender comments she made has appealed the British Columbia College of Nurses and Midwives (BCCNM) decision in the provincial Supreme Court.

Amy Hamm was accused of making “discriminatory and derogatory statements regarding transgender people” by BCCNM. The accusations were in connection with comments she made in podcasts, in videos, and on social media between 2018 and 2021.

One of the incidents included Hamm referring to her nursing profession in a podcast with a “noted feminist,” according to Hamm’s filing with the Supreme Court of B.C. During the recording, the two talked about author JK Rowling, transgender activism, and gender ideology, which they agreed were having an “adverse impact” on women’s spaces, sports, and safety, the document notes.

Hamm’s team said the BCCNM discipline committee panel erred in its decision in several ways, including expanding the scope of discrimination to include disagreement with gender ideology and transgenderism.

The filing also says the panel’s decision favours one group over another by putting gender ideology over the charter rights of women.

“Women experience varying degrees of differential treatment and outcomes on the basis of their sex, across all cultures and places and over all time, not because they ‘self-identified’ into being a woman and are now denying transpeople this ‘right’, but because they are female,” the court document said.

“The Panel failed to balance this concern, and to maintain regulatory neutrality over a clash of rights that must be dealt with by the debate in the public square and ultimately the legislatures.”

Hamm’s court filing says the BCCNM panel erred by accepting a “novel and unsettled opinion” about the nature of sex presented by BCCNM experts without indicating why their evidence was favoured over that of Hamm’s on the issue.

The document also said the panel equated disagreement with “a mystical belief in a ‘gender soul’” to being discriminatory, calling it a “fundamental error of law” that was biased and created a protected class of people whose beliefs cannot be criticized.

The filing notes that there were no discriminatory complaints against Hamm in her work as a nurse.

Hamm’s appeal said that “importing” the term of discrimination to a finding of unprofessional conduct was a “slippery slope.”

The BCCNM told The Epoch Times in an email that it was aware of the appeal but had no comment.

Following the conclusion of the disciplinary hearing, BCCNM said that it considered the decision to be an important statement against discrimination.

BCCNM said nurses and midwives have a position of trust and influence in society. The college said it would continue to “stand up against discrimination.” BCCNM said a core aspect of its public protection mandate was to ensure nurses “uphold the important principle that the health care system is non-discriminatory.”

Disciplinary Hearing

BCCNM started the hearing against Hamm in September 2022, and a decision was issued on March 13, 2025.

Following the decision, Hamm said she was shocked and “in disbelief.”

She told The Epoch Times that no woman should be punished for “standing up for our rights.”

Hamm lost her job at Vancouver Coastal Health (VCH) following the disciplinary decision.

She said she had worked there for 13 years and would not be getting severance pay.

VCH told The Epoch Times that it expects staff will adhere to high standards of conduct and that it is “committed to creating safer spaces and providing affirming care for transgender, non-binary, two-spirit and gender diverse communities.”

Hamm has since filed a human rights complaint over the BCCNM decision.

Investigation

In September 2020, Hamm helped a friend sponsor a billboard in Vancouver that read, “I [love] JK Rowling,” referring to the British author’s public defence of women’s right to female-only spaces, such as prisons, restrooms, and sporting events.

However, the billboard lead to complaints to the BCCNM, which referred the matter to the College’s Inquiry Committee for investigation. The result was a report on Hamm’s tweets, articles, and other online activities. The report led to a charge against Hamm that her statements constituted professional misconduct.

In its decision, the panel said it found some of the statements Hamm made online fit the criteria of “unprofessional conduct.”

These were in relation to four cases where Hamm identified herself as a nurse while making “discriminatory and/or derogatory” comments, including describing herself as a nurse in the biography attached to three articles she had written, and in one podcast.

The panel said that statements Hamm made were “untruthful and unfair” because they “challenge the existence of transgender women, argue for less constitutional protection for transgender women, and are designed, in part, to elicit fear, contempt and outrage against members of the transgender community.”

No disciplinary action was determined by the panel, with another hearing needed to determine what action would be taken by BCCNM. Hamm could face suspension or cancellation of her nursing registration, according to the BCCNM website.