NHS Fife tries to silence nurse

[Hoardasurass]

So as has been mentioned on threads about the Darlington nurses a nurse is sueing NHS Fife over its trans staff policy.
The poor nurse was forced to get changed infront of a man in the female changing facilities, when she complained about it she was 1st told to change in a cupboard if she didn't like it, then they tried to bully her into swapping shifts so she didn't work with the man in question (she wouldn't), then they wanted her to move hospital (again she refused) so then they suspended her without pay for months until her solicitor got involved and now they are trying to gag her by insisting that the court case (starts in February) must be held in secret (I wonder why) and will be in crt next month asking to restrict reporting on the case.

This case is really important in Scotland because the trans staff policy that's going on trial in this case is the Scottish government's own policy used in all public sector organisations in Scotland and works on self id. So when this case is won it will finally kill the Scottish government's self id policy in all public bodies

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/nhs-fife-fights-secret-hearings-33877891?utm_source=linkCopy&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar

Only a man would approach this set of circumstances with that attitude.

Sums it up perfectly.

So Upton was already identifying as a woman in 2023 but had only just begun "transitioning". It's therefore highly unlikely that most people saw Upton as female.

It also means he didn’t have a GRC as you need to ‘live as a woman’ for two years for that.

Has there been a final indication from Judge Tinnion about whether or not he will use grammatically correct or neutral pronouns, etc or not during the hearing?
I saw there has been an objection by Sandie Peggie's solicitors but I don't know if that means the judge has still to decide, or whether SP is just registering an objection to a decision that had already been made.

Peggie alleged that Upton started to undress when they were alone together in the female changing room.

apparently this was the third time that Peggie had found herself with this person in the women's changing room, presumably having to change down to their underwear? And he's in women's underwear?

And the NHS supports him and criticises her. How have we got to this

I totally agree with their point - I use of female language for a man, who is also legally a man, is incredibly biased.

Looking at that GMC entry. The false registration of a man as if he were a woman is plain fraud. It is lying. When supposedly respectable organisations present false information as if it were true, it is like ‘Pravda’ has arrived. You become sceptical of everything, and lose all trust in what previously were assumed to be trustworthy official bodies and organisations.

I don't think anything has been said about what will happen during the hearing, but here's the relevant para from the case management order (linked from https://sex-matters.org/posts/updates/edinburgh-employment-tribunal-says-no-to-trans-anonymity-order/ ):

30. At the commencement of the hearing on 28 November 2024, the Tribunal stated
it would refer to the 2nd Respondent as Dr. Upton. In this written decision, the
Tribunal will use Dr. Upton’s preferred ‘she/her’ pronouns rather than ‘he/his’
because (a) Dr. Upton requested this (b) the Tribunal (EJ Tinnion) is inclined to
5 refer to all people appearing before it in accordance with their stated preferences
(c) Chapter 12, para. 19 of the Equal Treatment Bench Book (which is not legally
binding, simply guidance) states it should be possible – and in this case, the
Tribunal finds it is possible – to work on the basis of a person’s chosen gender
identity and their preferred pronouns (d) there is no good reason not to in this
10 case (the Tribunal does not accept the use of Dr. Upton’s preferred pronouns
constitutes an implicit acceptance or pre-judgment of any substantive matters in
dispute between the parties).

So I would expect she/her to be used in the hearing also - in which case, it's a pity that it won't be streamed so that we could observe whether participants manage to cudgel their brains into doing that reliably!

Sandie Peggie has her photos on the Sex Matters website and they are downloadable, it says. No hiding in dark corners for her. Good woman: I salute you.

Dr Upton seems somewhat fragile to be working in A&E, which is a demanding area to say the least. I can't find any pics of Dr Upton, who is no doubt in fear of being attacked by GC activists. We are well known for such behaviour (sarcasm).

Weren't all of the parties in the Supreme Court case at the end of last year about the very definition of the word 'woman', in agreement that a man without a GRC is legally a man? It seems that Dr Upton started using the women's changing rooms very early in his employment at Fife when, as others have said, it's very unlikely he qualified for a GRC, and so was a legal male. The hospital trust must be on very dodgy ground here.

It seems that Dr Upton started using the women's changing rooms very early in his employment at Fife when, as others have said, it's very unlikely he qualified for a GRC, and so was a legal male. The hospital trust must be on very dodgy ground here.

Is this part of the recommended activities for someone "living as a woman" prior to a GRC. Is that still a requirement and is it for 2 years?

How about Sandie Peggie wanting her prounouns to say ‘the real woman’, or a ‘real her, not a him using a pretend her’.

Dr Upton seems somewhat fragile to be working in A&E

It looks like he was doing his F1/F2 rotation. He was there for six months then moved to psychiatry.

Jane Russell's 'in court' voice is...um...unique, i'd say.

Half the wards in don't have adequate changing facilities on the wards, you are told to go to the charging rooms in the basement. I know of one ward the changingroom is an old bathroom and it's unisex.

Fucks sake, the judge's subjective opinion should be neither here nor there. That's outrageous.

If the doctor is a biological male, what the NHS trust did is illegal, end of story.

Unless women don't have human rights.

Very important men who think woman = dress and lippy (because they don't see women as fully human and only bother to take notice in so far as sex is concerned) are outing themselves as misogynists. Women have much stronger safeguarding instincts than men. Just as we're able to push babies out of our vaginas, we're able to tell, always. Men just can't accept that sometimes women have a different experience to them and perception of sex differences if they're misogynistic pricks.

The judge should be recused for this.

Yes. using female pronouns for a biological male is taking a side in the debate, is a political act, is clearly biased and should lead to the judge being recused.

I hate they/them pronouns but in this case they are a more neutral option, or even better just banning pronouns altogether FOR EVERYONE and treating any slip up BY ANYONE as a terrible act. Forcing everyone to just use names. That would be truly impartial and I'm betting the GC side will find it much easier to comply having been gaslit and abused for years over this shit.

I'm not sure about the time frame, but from what was said at the FWS hearing, I think it's all about documentation now. A new name on your gas bill, your driver's licence etc. I don't think Upton or the Trust have that excuse for the changing room use/policy.

Yes, I saw that, and that SP's solicitor had subsequently lodged a written objection. I just wondered whether the court might reconsider the pronouns question regarding the actual hearing in the light of the objection.
It's possible that I have misunderstood the timeline re when the objection was made, though.

Thank you.

I think the objection was made in response to the in camera heating decision document.

That's what I thought. So there is still a possibility that the court could decide to use correct sexed/neutral pronouns during the hearing.

There is also the possibility that both teams get to use the pronouns they see fit to use. I loved the response,

"The whole point of this complaint is that he is a man, by being required to use wrong sex pronouns we would be undermining our own arguments"

It's also forcing the complainant to lie in court. She clearly sees him as a man. The judicial system is a farce if women are forced to lie in court.

I wonder why trans organisations would lobby courts to use their preferred language? 🤔

This