Help Whistleblower Hold the Priory Accountable
Help Whistleblower Hold the Priory Accountable
Latest: April 5, 2026
We hit the first target. Thank you.
43 people have backed this case. That means 43 people believe that patient safety matters and that speaking up about it should never cost a clinician their career.
We recently received a notice of a t…
Read moreHelp OT Whistleblower
"Too many people in today's workplace don't have any protection if they speak up to stop harm," said Liz Gardiner, CEO of whistleblowing charity Protect.
I found out how true that is. Speaking up isn't an act of disloyalty to an employer; it is a duty of conscience to the people in their care. That duty should never cost someone their career.
I took a job as an Occupational Therapist on an eating disorders ward because I believed I could help patients recover. What I found were practices I could not stay silent about. I knew that if I spoke up, I would have to live with the consequences, but if I didn't, I would have to live with myself.
This case tests whether speaking up about patient safety is protected or punished.
I am bringing claims of whistleblowing detriment and discrimination to the Employment Tribunal against Priory Hospital Cheadle Royal, and I need your help to see this through because what happened to me was unlawful and the patients whose safety I raised concerns about deserve for this to matter.
Hold the Priory Accountable
THE PRINCIPLE AT THE HEART OF THIS CASE
I raised formal concerns about the routine use of physical restraint to administer tube feeding at rates far higher than clinical guidelines recommend, or than those recorded at comparable units. Both an internal investigation and inspection followed. The wards were restructured under new leadership. Ward leadership changed. And then I was dismissed.
I. What Happened
I worked as an Occupational Therapist on an eating disorders inpatient unit run by the Priory Group - the UK's largest private mental health facility caring for some of the most vulnerable patients in our healthcare system. From my first weeks, I raised concerns that patients were being physically restrained for tube feeding in ways that fell outside national clinical guidelines, and that this was causing harm. I believed then, as I believe now, that speaking out was not only right, but it was necessary.
I raised concerns verbally from May 2024 and formally in writing in June 2024. I set out specific clinical evidence and referenced national guidelines. Changes to the ward followed.
In July 2024, I raised further concerns and the very next day, I was told my contract was being terminated with immediate effect. The reason given was that I was "stressing the staff out." That reason then changed to "professional differences," "difficulty integrating with the team," and later to “no need for OT.”
THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK
Under the Employment Rights Act 1996, as amended by the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013, workers who make protected disclosures about matters of public concern — including patient safety — are entitled to legal protection from detriment and dismissal. Employers can be held vicariously liable for the actions of colleagues who victimise a whistleblower, unless they took reasonable steps to prevent it.
This is the law I am relying on. It exists precisely for situations like mine.
II. Why This Case Matters Beyond Me
If a clinician can be dismissed for putting safeguarding concerns in writing, that sends a message to every healthcare professional in a similar position: stay quiet or lose your job. The law is supposed to tip the balance toward honesty, making it safer than silence. When employers are allowed to retaliate without consequence, that promise is hollow.
I am not doing this out of anger, and I am not doing it lightly. I am doing it because:
- Patients at psychiatric hospitals are among the most vulnerable people in our care system. They depend entirely on staff who are willing to speak up.
- Whistleblowing protections only function as a deterrent if they are actually enforced. This case is part of that enforcement.
- A successful outcome sends a message that retaliating against someone for raising patient safety concerns has a cost.
- This case is not only about me. It is about whether healthcare workers can trust that the law will protect them when they speak up. If we cannot, patients suffer in silence, too.
Discrimination claims alongside whistleblowing cases are rare, complex, and expensive, but they are the full picture of what happened here.
Legal Representation · Instructed Solicitor
Danielle Ayres
Partner, Employment Team · Primas Law | Legal 500 Leading Lawyer | NHS v Fecitt Experience | Pregnant Then Screwed Advisor | 2026 Northern Power Women Finalist "Disruptor for Good"
I have instructed Danielle Ayres to represent me, and I could not have chosen more carefully. Danielle is a Legal 500 leading lawyer, an award-winning specialist in pregnancy and maternity discrimination, and a long-standing advisor to Pregnant Then Screwed.
Critically, Danielle has direct experience with the landmark Court of Appeal case NHS Manchester v Fecitt & Others — the case that exposed a gap in UK whistleblowing law and helped catalyse the 2013 reforms that now allow co-workers to be held personally liable for victimising a whistleblower. She does not just know this area of law. She helped shape it.
III. Where Your Money Goes
All funds raised go directly to Danielle's client trust account at Primas Law via CrowdJustice - I never handle the money. Every pound funds the legal work required to bring this case to the tribunal.
| Case preparation & disclosure review | est. £2,500–£3,500
| Witness statements & expert input | est. £3,000–£4,000
| Pre-hearing reviews & case management | est. £2,000–£3,000
| Full tribunal hearing representation | est. £15,000
These figures reflect core legal work. The £28,500 overall target includes an additional contingency allowance to cover unforeseen applications, interim hearings, or disbursements that may arise as the case develops.
100% of funds go directly to the instructed solicitor.
Targets
Core target: £1,000 (all-or-nothing - if not reached, no cards are charged)
Stretch target: £5,000 — case preparation and disclosure review
Stretch target: £10,000 — witness statements and expert input
Stretch target: £15,000 — pre-hearing reviews and case management
Stretch target: £20,000 — full tribunal hearing representation
Stretch target: £28,500 — full legal costs including contingency
A full cost breakdown will be provided on the live CrowdJustice page in collaboration with Danielle and Primas Law. CrowdJustice charges a 3% administrative fee on funds raised once the initial target is met.
A Note From Me
I am not someone who wanted to go to a tribunal. I am someone who tried to do the right thing, was punished for it, and eventually had no choice but to fight back through the law.
The process has been long, exhausting, and expensive. I have managed this far as a litigant in person. But I now have professional legal support, and I am ready to see this through.
If you have ever worked somewhere that made you choose between your conscience and your livelihood, you will understand why I couldn't stay silent. If you believe that the healthcare system depends on people who are willing to speak up, and that those people deserve protection, then this case is also yours.
Thank you - whether you donate, share, or simply read this page. Every person who does is a reminder that patient safety matters and that speaking up about it should never cost a clinician their career.
Back This Case
Every contribution - no matter the size - sends a message that patient safety and worker rights are worth fighting for.
Funds go directly to Danielle's client account at Primas Law · Managed securely by CrowdJustice
This page has been prepared in advance of the live CrowdJustice campaign. Details, including fundraising target and case reference, will appear on the official platform page. Nothing on this page constitutes legal advice or comment on any ongoing proceedings.
Dagmara Hrabal
April 5, 2026
We hit the first target. Thank you.
43 people have backed this case. That means 43 people believe that patient safety matters and that speaking up about it should never cost a clinician their career.
We recently received a notice of a third preliminary hearing - another procedural hurdle before the final hearing in July '26. The next milestone is £10,000: the cost of ongoing case preparation and securing a barrister for 15 June '26.
If you have already given, please share. That is the most powerful thing you can do right now.
If you're sharing on LinkedIn, WhatsApp, or social media, here's a line you can use:
'An OT whistleblower is taking the Priory to tribunal for patient safety concerns. She needs our support - please read and share: https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/defend-whistleblowing/'
Recent contributions