Amy Hamm, a registered nurse with 13 years of experience, was recently fired by Vancouver Coastal Health following a ruling by the British Columbia College of Nurses and Midwives (BCCNM) that deemed her guilty of “professional misconduct.” Her termination stemmed from her public advocacy for sex-based rights, including her co-sponsorship of a 2020 billboard stating “I love JK Rowling” and her statements asserting that biological sex distinctions matter, particularly in contexts like women’s private spaces. This decision has sparked widespread debate, with critics arguing that her firing represents a severe overreach by her professional organization, punishing her for exercising free speech rather than any failure in her nursing duties.
The BCCNM’s investigation, which spanned over four years, focused on Hamm’s off-duty comments made in articles and a podcast where she identified as a nurse. The disciplinary panel labeled her statements about transgender issues as “discriminatory and derogatory,” claiming they undermined trust in the nursing profession. However, Hamm and her supporters contend that her views—rooted in the belief that biological sex is immutable—were not only unrelated to her professional conduct but also reflect a scientifically grounded perspective. The panel’s ruling, followed by her immediate dismissal without severance, raises questions about whether the BCCNM prioritized ideological conformity over fairness and evidence.
Hamm’s mistreatment highlights a broader issue of professional organizations stifling dissent under the guise of maintaining public trust. Her case suggests that nurses and other regulated professionals in Canada may face severe repercussions for expressing personal opinions, even outside their workplace, if those views clash with prevailing social narratives. The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, which supported Hamm legally, decried the ruling as a blow to free expression, arguing that it sets a chilling precedent for others in similar positions. This punitive approach effectively silences debate on contentious issues, forcing professionals to self-censor or risk their livelihoods.
The decision to fire Hamm also appears disproportionate when considering her exemplary record as a nurse. No evidence was presented that her views impacted her patient care or professional performance; instead, the BCCNM focused solely on the perceived social implications of her statements. This disconnect between her job performance and the punishment meted out underscores a troubling trend: professional bodies acting as arbiters of personal belief rather than guardians of competence. Hamm’s termination without severance after 13 years of service further amplifies the perception of vindictiveness, suggesting an intent to make an example of her rather than address any tangible harm.
In the aftermath, Hamm has vowed to continue speaking out, supported by figures like JK Rowling and a growing chorus of advocates for free speech and women’s rights. Her case exposes the fragility of individual rights within Canada’s regulatory frameworks and the potential for professional organizations to wield unchecked power against those who challenge orthodoxy. As Hamm faces a possible appeal, her ordeal serves as a stark warning: the mistreatment she endured—being fired for her convictions—may foreshadow a future where intellectual freedom is sacrificed for institutional control, leaving professionals vulnerable to ideological purges.
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
3 comments
March 31, 2025 at 6:49 am
tildeb
When we hear assurances that ‘woke is dead’ or in decline, think of Hamm. The toxic ideology is embedded in our institutions and professional oversight bodies and it will take a DOGE-like effort to root it out under threat of huge penalties as the only alternative. BC is particularly egregious with the attempt to not only go after nurses who state the truth but use government to go along and try to destroy lawyers for stating the truth by firing politicians who offer dare offer their support. But Trump – and by decree all those right of the most extreme left activists – is the fascist. Yeah, right. Fascist is as fascist does as Hamm’s case shows and today’s mainstream source of fascism comes from the left and those who suffer the delusional belief, in spite of overwhelming evidence from reality, that being aligned with these fascists is being ‘kind’ and ‘progressive’ and ‘tolerant’ when they support exactly the opposite. That’s the destructive power of this malignant ideology.
LikeLike
March 31, 2025 at 9:26 am
tildeb
Arb, you write regarding Hamm’s case that this may,”foreshadow a future where intellectual freedom is sacrificed for institutional control.” I say that control is already firmly entrenched where intellectual freedom – called tenure, in case people have forgotten why this matters in academia – is already sacrificed. From a repost on Lawrence Krauss’ site:
“For the sake of brevity we will call this implausible and self-contradictory cocktail (ed. ideology) by the familiar name of “wokeism.” Its bureaucratic manifestation, called DEI (i.e., diversity, equity and inclusion) appears to be under a momentary retreat (especially now that President Trump has sought to ban it, by executive action, in the entire federal administration), but wokeism has so deeply penetrated our institutions of learning, and indeed broader elite society, that it is foolhardy to think that we will get rid of it any time soon. Wokeism has an uncanny ability to both defend itself and attack its detractors by manipulating words and ideas with little regard for Truth, which it deems illusory whenever it contradicts its precepts, and by taking full advantage of the tolerant civil liberties guaranteed by that very same society it rails against.” (Source)
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 31, 2025 at 10:43 am
The Arbourist
@tildeb – One nursing organization and associated apparatus doesn’t equal them all.
I see hyperbole and exaggerated claims every day – intentional or not – they are misleading for those who don’t take the time to read closely.
I’m trying to comport with where the truth lies as closely as possible and I don’t have the evidence that points to a complete institutional capture.
Are we close? Absolutely. But you can still find the odd academic that speaks out against the orthodoxy and institutions exist that are explicitly against the woke.
LikeLike