NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #10

[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 February 2025 and is expected to continue for 2 weeks. The hearing commenced with Sandie Peggie giving evidence. Dr Beth Upton started giving evidence on Thursday 6 February.

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.

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.

An alternative to Twitter is to use Nitter: https://nitter.poast.org/tribunaltweets

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
Thread 3: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5268347-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-3
Thread 4: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5268942-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-4
Thread 5: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5269149-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-5
Thread 6: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5269635-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-6
Thread 7: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5270365-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-7
Thread 8: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5271511-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-8
Thread 9: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5271596-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-9

I’m not feeling 100% optimistic, given the judge has already referred to DU as ‘the victim’. I literally doubted myself thinking he can’t have said that, because it’s so biased, but others heard it too.

He did amend it quickly to witness, but clearly the thoughts already there 🙄

Pull up a seat we have Tunnocks Teacakes. 😄

'Dr Upton says that if a patient spoke to him the way Sandie Peggie had spoken to him when she said he shouldn't be using the female changing room, he would describe it as, "a confrontational encounter with an aggressive patient."'

Coming back to this - he really ought to be asked in what way a woman can raise concerns about a male doctor turning up to treat her after she's asked for a female doctor, if he takes any objection to his presence as 'a confrontational encounter with an aggressive patient'. She can say til she's blue in the face it's because he's male, but as he's demonstrated today, he doesn't even acknowledge this as a reason anyone would have an issue with him - not when he's breaching the boundaries of his female co-workers, and it seems he's equally unlikely to even acknowledge the premise of a woman's objections (him being male) as he's deluded to the point he simply cannot accept anyone else's viewpoint.

He's been asked & answered that SP wasn't able to do anything that wouldn't upset him when she removed herself from the CR. That's bad enough & as we've seen, it's being used to question her fitness to practice as a nurse after a 30 yr blemish free record. But, as someone else has posted in response to this from Mandy Rhodes, you can be denied treatment & removed from the hospital if you're labelled 'confrontational & aggressive' in these circumstances.

https://x.com/defiaye/status/1888996466838188385?s=466*

"If you are labelled as ‘aggressive’ by a doctor the hospital can discharge you without treatment. I know this because when I tweeted about how cruel the nurses in Ayr Hospital were being (some of you might remember from 9yrs ago) - the hospital administrator demanded I delete the tweet and when I refused - they labelled me as ‘aggressive’, discharged me WITH internal bleeding from a crohns flare up and got a secure taxi to take me home. What Dr Upton is saying is that if you don’t comply with his delusion - you will be evicted from NHS care which can endanger your life. He is willing to kill you if you don’t affirm his mental illness."

It's extremely serious if NHS trusts take this line against any woman who raises concerns about a man like Upton, only to be labelled as the problem & be placed at risk as a result. So both Upton & NHS Fife management (and Dr Searle when she appears) should be asked to give a detailed process that permits a woman to raise concerns on the basis of a HCP's sex, when her dignity, bodily autonomy, privacy & informed consent depends on it.

Honestly, I feel uncomfortable saying it! I consider myself to be liberal and tolerant, and before today I had nothing but empathy for trans people as marginalised members of society.
But this guy.... I wish I could say he's the only one, but the way he talks it sounds like a cult. The only explanation I can come up with for the blatant disregard for reality, is radicalisation. I still think Trump and Musk are dickheads, but now I know what they mean by "woke mind virus".

"trans people as marginalised members of society" - they're not

"it sounds like a cult" - it is.

Welcome to terf island.

Welcome! Enjoy the dark side!

His arrogance knows no bounds. He isn’t deluded. He just thinks that he can’t be caught out because he’s practiced his ‘gotcha’s and is calm and fluent.

He has that circular logic working for him, and has DARVO completely mastered.

So he thinks he’s untouchable.

Naomi Was extraordinary - I would love to hear her take on it, at some point.

And if I were to make an armchair diagnosis I’d be trying to narrow down some personality disorders.

Blimey! How many threads filled since this morning? I'm on page one here, so may be making points already covered...

He has never considered why there are single sex changing rooms, eh? Like shite, he knows perfectly well why that is.

As for being biological, well, so is Ebola.

Upton on the Michael

I once knew a vet who didn't believe in evolution which seems like an unlikely belief for a vet to hold but I didn't think affected his ability to carry out his vet duties. But believing that biological sex is nebulous and that doctors guess the sex of babies and pretending not to understand what a woman means when she asks for a female clinician does ring serious alarm bells. It's really scary to think there are men wafting round hospitals who are prepared to completely ignore a woman's request for a female clinician AND that the hospital are aware of this problem and not prepared to do something about it like make it extremely clear that this should never happen.

3,600 plus comments and increasing by the minute.

I don't think the general public have quite realised the enormity of the lies being told. For a qualified male doctor to insist in court that he's a biological female and that women MUST be compelled to undress in front of him or they're guilty of bigotry doesn't fit with the most stunning and brave myth that's been so widely promoted.

@rebmacesrevda many here we’re concerned about him last Friday, because they feared he was being taken advantage of and was extremely vulnerable.

That perspective has been quite absent today!

No, they don't. His evidence is part of their joint case, but they can disagree with some or all of his evidence if they wish. However, as they are represented by the same barrister, that could put her in a difficult position depending on the nature and extent of the disagreement.

Actually, I think SP had just made a comparison generally about men in single sex spaces like a female changing room or a women's prison. Upton was the one who specifically made the connection to Isla Bryson, and when questioned did say that SP had not mentioned Bryson

Exactly. He gets away with it because these captured organisations let him. If this tribunal was about anything else he would not have been able to lie with impunity.

I wish I knew how this is going. It sounds like a car crash for Fife and DU, but the courts do sometimes come up with judgements that surprise me (and, at times, appear to be based on a very one-eyed reading of the evidence). We will only really know when the judge delivers the panel's judgement.

Your post made me think of this excellent one from the 'Break It Down for Me' thread by the mighty Datun -

'Yes, peak trans is meant to invoke the image of a hill.

So people might start in the foothills wondering what on earth women are talking about, why is it so important?
Then they begin to question. Still not sure, because up until now, they didn't see any problem. Why not be nice? What's the big deal?

Then they start to understand the concepts. Sometimes they still waver, because this all feels like it's happening somewhere else. Online, or not really affecting them. And anyway, feminists have a downer on men, so it's unsurprising they're cross. And, honestly, I know a transwoman and she's absolutely delightful.

Then they read about a rapist being transferred to a female prison. So what, one news story. Are you saying all transwomen are rapists?!

Then they read about the woman who asked for a female HCP and got a man. Oh well, a little uncomfortable, but still, what's the big deal? Then they read that the woman was called a transphobic bigot for objecting.

Hmmm, well that's a bit off. I may not mind a man doing my smear test, but I can understand women who do. It's not really bigoted.

At this point you have advanced a few hundred yards up the hill.

Then a sports story is mentioned on here. A mediocre male weightlifter suddenly winning awards by competing as a woman.

Oh, whatever, I don't like sport anyway.
Then another one. Then someone in cycling, fell running, roller derby, football, cricket, golf.

Then suddenly it appears to be less about sport, and more about women being disadvantaged.

The crampons come out and you advance another few hundred yards up the hill.

Then you notice that a 19-year-old boy has been elected as labour's women's officer. Oh well, he probably feels like a woman inside. That's gender dysphoria, right?

Except he starts to compile a secret list of all women who disagree with him to get them ousted from the party. Despite his remit being to include as many women as possible in the party. Claims he can get pregnant in that biology is irrelevant.

Then you start to notice intimidating tactics against women. Meetings to discuss the upcoming law change are targetted, a 60-year-old woman is hit at speakers corner. Venues pull out, peoples jobs are threatened, they are doxxed online, they are reported to the police for disagreeing.

You scramble up towards the peak of the hill.

Then someone tells you about autogynephilia, and all the men's rights activists flocking to the trans movement. You realise that it is actually true that the government is legislating to legitimise a fetish.

You peak. You look back down the hill and can't believe you ever stood at the bottom.

Then you read of 2 transwomen, one of whom has been asked to speak at the Women's March. Who claims that being treated like a piece of meat by men is sexy and objectification is hot. And because they are woman, they speak on behalf of women. And the other one who claims that women are allowed to go to the Women's March, as long as they don't talk about their reproductive systems. You know, the very basis of women's oppression. Because it excludes men. The ones who are doing the oppressing.
And you peak all over again.

This keeps going.

You look at the handful of men with gender dysphoria and how to include them, and wish, with all your heart, that it could be that simple again.'

This post was written in 2018 and is as pertinent now as it was then.

"No, they don't. His evidence is part of their joint case, but they can disagree with some or all of his evidence if they wish. However, as they are represented by the same barrister, that could put her in a difficult position depending on the nature and extent of the disagreement."

That's an interesting & difficult position JR finds herself in. Taking a view on evidence from Upton, to try and argue a point for NHS Fife, could end up creating more problems & muddle any closing arguments she wants to make. She's have to highlight something in Upton's evidence that discredits him to NHS Fife's advantage & vice versa. Given the bill is being picked up by NHS Fife, it does weigh heavily more in their favour to instruct JR to make their case stronger & throw Upton under the bus - if there's a legal argument to make to defend their actions at any point. Im not a lawyer so this is my take on how this sits - but happy to be told I'm off base here.

It's incredible that he got the hospital management on board with his delusion. Is he really that adept at manipulation? Or are they just utterly spineless? I'm amazed/ horrified!

This is extremely concerning.

Are the Telegraph comments only visible on the Telegraph site? I can't get them to open on the archive version that's linked to on the TT substack.

As a definitely left wing male, I can confirm that you don't have to be Trump/Farage supporter to want to limit transsexuals' rights. My initial reaction to men wanting to be women was that it was a daft way to deal with a real psychological issue, but it cost nowt so why not give them what they want? But, noting a considerable female opposition to this, and that women are objectively an oppressed group, I took the the radical step of listening to women's arguments. And also noted the magnitude of violence and harassment against women. So now, although I still sympathise with transsexuals and think they should be accommodated to some extent, I realise the GRC process of erasing people's history of being borne male, and the wholesale granting of access to female spaces is oppressive to women. So I'm 90% of the way there with this forum's views.

I think it is very hard for many men, judges included, to have the instinctive understanding that many women do, of the kind of gaslighting, controlling behaviour we saw from Dr Upton today. Women (especially older women), unfortunately, are more likely to have experienced it in their own lives and once they've figured out how it works they are much more able to spot the pattern if it happens in another context.

The explanation I've seen is that DU only started transitioning in late 2022, and so at the time of the incident, would not have the "two years living in the acquired gender" that's a prerequisite for a GRC.

"Seen" alleges that BBC changed the headline - with screenshots:
nitter.poast.org/JournalismSEEN