NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #3

[nauticant]

Sandie Peggie, a nurse at Victoria Hospital in Kirkcaldy (VH), has brought claims in the employment tribunal against her employer; Fife Health Board (the Board) and another employee, Dr B Upton. Ms Peggie’s claims are of sexual harassment, harassment related to a protected belief, indirect discrimination and victimisation. Dr Upton claims to be a transwoman, that is observed as male at birth but asserting a female gender identity.

The Employment Tribunal hearing started on Monday 3 January 2025 and is expected to continue for 2 weeks.

Access to view the hearing remotely can be obtained by sending an email request to [email protected] headed Public Access Request (Peggie v Fife Health Board) 4104864/2024 and requesting access.

Thread 1: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5186317-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse

Thread 2: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5267591-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-thread-2

The hearing is being live tweeted by https://x.com/tribunaltweets and there's additional information here: https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-fife-health-board-and-dr. This also has threadreaderapp archives of live-tweeting of the sessions of the hearing for those who can't follow on Twitter, for example: archive.is/xkSxy.

She talks to everyone as if they are 4 years old. It's like nails down a blackboard.

Think he said back at 2pm.

I’m on a train and reading this thread and sitting with my jaw on the (train) table at what I’ve just read.

Maya is a force of nature 💪 but oh my god. What the actual F has happened to the world?

So 2.15 then.

She was the leading counsel for the respondents in the Employment Appeal Tribunal hearing when gender critical feminism was found to be WORIADS. Just saying.

And she was junior to Andrew Hochhauser representing GCC.

https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/18973/pdf/

The researchers state: ‘male-to-females . . . retained a male pattern regarding criminality. The same was true regarding violent crime.’

MtF transitioners were over 6 times more likely to be convicted of an offence than female comparators and 18 times more likely to be convicted of a violent offence. The group had no statistically significant differences from other natal males, for convictions in general or for violent offending.

Lunchtime reading for the thread, the takes on the case by a group of real and self-identified lawyers:

https://www.rollonfriday.com/discussion/female-nurse-suspended-after-male-doctor-complains-she-wouldnt-look-him-eye-when-he

Freudian slip....... she must be shitting herself.

Surely mis-naming someone like this is considered harrassment? Especially by someone with a higher level of authority/social position like a KC?

Seems odd that JR mis-genders her own client and mis-names a witness but holds SP to higher standards than she herself can manage?

Is every girl supposed to read up on these statistics and have a biology degree and social sciences degree before she contemplates about changing rooms when she’s older and in work? In seems to be implied that lesser beings to not have the authority to question.

I should have taken time off work when I was a secondary HoD: a disgruntled boy once asked me: "Dae ye think ye're a man?"

It is ONE of the reasons why we have single sex spaces. We also have them for privacy and dignity.

It seems a bit curious that all the KCs are from England.

Hippocratic oath extract

• Professionalism
• Doctors should practice their profession with dignity and conscience, and in accordance with good medical practice.

Has DU be following this in his dealings with other staff esp SP

Sorry, banned was making my lunch!

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1887101539430342977.html

For those who are watching, we all know that JR didn't understand the Swedish study, but do you think the judge/panel agreed with that?

Thank you for the thread. I'm glued. Rooting for Sandie.

Perhaps just ensuring there are suitable fragments spoken to grab hold of and pretend are arguments.

As with yesterday's headlines that SP 'admitted harassment'.

Yes, it's about spinning preferred narratives.

Effective rhetorical technique is to talk a lot of bullshit and pepper it with keywords. The listener is befuddled and confused by the bullshit, but remembers the keywords, and that's often what they come away with.

I'm worried that they had no questions for Maya about the conflict in interpretation of the study findings (I may have missed a question, was interrupted). Maybe they will come back with questions after lunch.

Does anyone know if SP has any other witnesses giving evidence on her behalf other than Maya?

I have set up my other monitor so I can keep an eye on this thread, will be dipping in and out, again many thanks wims.

They'll likely wait until the end of the cross examination before asking questions.