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 was one of the people who raised concerns. There are plenty of people who have all manner of mental health issues who believe/hope that they will disappear once they become their authentic self. These people tend to be vulnerable.

There are other people with unstable personalities and narcissistic traits who also take on trans identities. These people often present risks to others.

Last week, DU could have fallen into either group. Today, his presentation indicated that the later seems probable.

Still struggling with the basics.
If he was a woman then he wouldn't have to pretend to "live as one" to get a certificate which lies and says he is one?
If he was a woman, Sandie couldn't have taken him/Fife to court for using women's facilities?
On a practical level, how can the court agree he is and isn't a woman? It will need to say he isn't?

@ConstructionTime that Nitter link to Seen is excellent thank you.

If he was a woman then he wouldn't have to pretend to "live as one" to get a certificate which lies and says he is one?

He hasn't got a gender recognition certificate (GRC). It would seem that his transition is too recent for him to have been able to get one yet.

That figures tbh, r/UK is full of transactivists that are ideological clones of Upton with the misogynistic attitudes to match, they're an awfully unpleasant bunch

NC framed it as possibly an act of discrimination against SP, JR jumped in to say KS isn't listed as a party to the lawsuit & almost like it's a favour she's doing by agreeing to appear. But NC then made the point it was v late disclosure of the 'infamous' email to all of the ED consultants (I think? Not 100% on who they were) meant they were not aware of what took place until very recently/close to hearing starting - so effectively they couldn't name her as they had no idea what she'd done.

<caveat: this is my recollection, it may not be 100% accurate>

Waves to @nocoolnamesleft from the doctors' forum.

Haven't been there in a long time - when I was last there it was v thought-policed on trans, was delighted to find recently that there are some incredible GC women on there.

And depressingly a bunch of men who can't imagine how awful it must be to be born in the wrong body...

Also doctors who think Furries are just a sweet subculture and it's mean to call it a paedo paradise.

So close, but still so overwhelmingly naive.

He mentioned at several points today that manu of his colleagues see him as a woman and other phrases to that effect.

They probably thought it was the right/kind/easiest thing to go along with him but now it becomes clear just how dangerous pandering to his nonsense is.

He will be incandescent when they admit (as they will under oath) that they spoke to him/treated him/let him believe they saw him "as a woman" but that they see him as a very different male kind of woman to themselves etc.

There is a somewhat clever sophistry that makes this arguable, if unconvincing. The argument is that it is what is going on in the brain that makes you male or female; the brain is biological; so if you think like a woman then you are a biological woman. It is easy to pick holes in this argument, but it is sort of self consistent.

There was a tense moment when NC threatened to make Searle a respondent, if she wasn’t heard in person tomorrow (I think). It was technical, but an adamantine moment.

Sandie needs taller friends! Or they need to wear heels! DrU manages to find people around him that diminish his 6’. Sandie manages to make her 5’5” look tall!

Ahhhh that timeline makes everything make much more sense. He’s got the fervour of the new convert.

I’m pretty sure that when NC was talking about the imaginary Pete she said something like “you haven’t said you’ve got a GRC (and presumably you would have) so the difference can’t be that.” She said something similar about hormones/surgery too. The clear implication was the only practical steps to transition he’d taken were a change of name and hairstyle. And changing room usage of course.

Thank you. I hope your relative is (relatively) okay. This whole thing is just Orwellian. I feel like I'm joining the revolutionaries. It's absolutely mad! I'm half wondering if I'm being radicalised by you lot, but also horrified by how sinister the trans movement actually is. It's a very dark rabbit-hole to fall into.

I have a gay friend, who quietly questions the inclusion of "T" in LGBT. He doesn't see why he's put in the same category, but he feels he can't complain out loud for fear of being labelled a bigot... even though he's gay FFS!

That's what I picked up - it sounded like KS felt it was either an imposition to expect her to be able to turn up when required as opposed to the limited availability that was on offer. The dragging on of cross examination of Upton & subsequently other witnesses is down to NHS Fife's failure to disclose in line with the court order.

The parts of the clip that report DU saying 'i am biological female ' and 'sex is a nebulous term' is likely to land with general public in 1 of 2 ways (a) they will think a transwomen is a female with a trans identity or (b) DU is mad.

The general public will never be convinced that it's 'just too difficult' for the average person to know what sex is and what sex they and others are.

the original should be at archive.org

I really want this to be tested in court. I don't see how it can possibly pass point 4 of the Grainger test. And it's on pretty shaky ground on 5. [Bold is my emphasis.]

1. It must attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance.

5.It must be worthy of respect in a democratic society, be not incompatible with human dignity and not conflict with the fundamental rights of others.

What happened in the Edinburgh Rape Crisis case?

There were a bunch of women who were desperate to uphold their values and demonstrate just how committed they were to supporting trans rights.

Which one threw Mridul Wadhwa under the bus during the court case?

Even after the court case, they still tried to support Mridul Wadhwa despite there being a huge amount of criticism in the judgement against Mridul Wadhwa personally.

That's why I wouldn't hold any hope of this happening. Not when they've got that much in the way of sunk costs they can't reverse ferret on.

They'd have to admit they screwed up if they did that too. And I can't see an admission of that coming - senior managers in the NHS generally are conditioned never to admit how much they've fucked up until they've got to a point and been forced to admit it.

Likewise. The failure to consider others is a feature not a bug.

Honestly we’ve all been there!

I was fully in the “be kind/how does it hurt you?” camp 10 years ago. I hadn’t understood that these men weren’t asking to be treated like women, they were demanding we accept they were women

then I realised how incredibly sexist it all was - that woman was reduced to a costume of dresses and long hair and make up that these men could put on

and then (just as was posted earlier) I rapidly ascended up the mountain

along the way radicalised DH who is involved with a sport where men were suddenly appearing on women’s teams

So sorry @NotAGentleReminder sending hugs and prayers she will see sense. My daughter came close. I hope she's moving away from the lunacy now (at least to NB) but I remain terrified that it wouldn't take much to push her back into those dark spaces

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.

Hard agree. Life is awash with those little smirks and remarks and once you see it you can't stop.

People are saying Searle is testifying tomorrow but I don't think that's right, is it? I thought it went like this:

• we aren't going to be finished with Upton today
• which is OK provided we can push Searle back
• oh dear, she can only attend tomorrow
• shall we intermit, have her and then come back to Upton?
• No, that's not acceptable to the claimant
• Hmm.
• Claimant accepts that we aren't going to get through all the evidence this week anyway. So let's have Searle when we reschedule.
• Oh dear, that's not acceptable to the respondents, who have arranged to hear from their witnesses in logical order.
• But but, it's only really recently that we knew we were even going to hear from Searle so how can where she fits be that important?
• Oh, ok then, we'll fill this week with other respondent witnesses, then have Searle when we reschedule.

Edit: though there was some talk about "if it gives us any chance to get through" which I did realise I wasn't following, so maybe I am confused. I really find it hard to believe they're going to get through everything this week, though!

So sorry this happened to you @Boiledbeetle
I have noticed similar behaviour of medical staff throughout my long nursing career.
It's why I think the Lucy Letby guilty verdict is unsafe.

Does that mean there's another whole day of DU peaking the nation? I'd assumed DU, KS, then onto the emails etc on Wednesday.

I wonder how much time JR spent with her client before this, and how much / what they discussed. Specifically I wonder if JR saw this side of him? I am suspecting not because I doubt she would have said anything to set him off schooling her. I would love to know what she really thinks of him. In fact I wonder if anyone in what PPs brilliantly call the wall of sad have heard him going on with himself in quite this manner before. They can't see him, so it's less petsonal, they can just hear the nonsense pouring out and the over confidence and deliberate contortion of every other answer must be so obvious.