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

In the NHS "single-sex" wards are really single-self-declared-gender-identity.

Annex B Delivering same-sex accommodation for trans people and gender variant children from the 2019 NHS policy "Delivering Same-Sex Accommodation" at your service. Read and weep.

Baroness Nicolson has been on this for some time. In fact that's how I got to the Matterhorn - the hospital rape case that never was becase there were no men in the ward.

(edited to correct section title and typo)

Just to be pedantic, he has never said "identify as female", only that he is female.

24 hours ago, I had no issue with pronouns either. I thought, what's the harm? Let people call themselves what they want; live and let live.

After following the case yesterday, I now believe that pronouns are the thin end of the wedge. Pronouns are lies, albeit small and seemingly harmless ones. But pronouns are the start of the brainwashing that culminates in the complete denial of reality. Thank god NC was allowed to use male pronouns yesterday. If she had been forced to use female pronouns, everyone in the room and everyone watching would have been subjected to the denial of reality. Last week SP was asked if she realised that referring to Dr Upton as male would be hurtful. SP replied "It's the truth". She's not wrong, and this is the crux of everything. We are all being asked to avert our eyes while a small group of predatory men dismantle the rights of women that have been fought for and died for. This "debate" is not about identity. It's about power and control.

I could not stop thinking about the things he said overnight.

One thing NC has conclusively proven though: he's able to cope extremely well with being told he's a man and shouldn't have been in the female changing room. She told him repeatedly, and he didn't burst into tears once. Hard to imagine that a few comments from SP could have done it.

I actually think what we are seeing here is the combination of some very bizarre gender identity theory with a very unpleasant personality type.

And I think that seeing an obviously male doctor describe himself as biologically female and claim that sex is so complicated that even he, with his medical degree, cannot clearly define it, is going to change things.

The NHS isn't going to come out of this looking good. We already know that medical misogyny is everywhere, that women with endometriosis can't get diagnosis or treatment, that women in labour are treated extremely badly. Now we've got a doctor, employed by the NHS, arrogantly saying that there is no definition of female that excludes him, who doesn't even seem to understand how babies are made. And the NHS KNEW he had these views, and supported him in expressing them at work.

Yesterday afternoon I was exposed for the first time to listening to and watching that irritating 6 foot twerp, who came across as a know-it-all 12 year-old trying to sound like an adult. Thanks to mumsnet for the link below and the prompt response from edinburghtet that works throughout the entire proceedings.

For all those who are reading these posts and thinking this is "batshit crazy" the posts are in reality detached from how absurd, ludicrous, stupid and entitled Theodore comes across as, to the point of being cringeworthy if you watch or listen to proceedings. Open-mouthed, jaw-dropping cringe worthiness.

That Theodore is a Doctor, accentuates the ridiculous and illogical substance to his submissions and amplifies that he is not fit-to-practice or care for patients of either sex. It is not a nice expression but he typifies a village idiot.

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.

I stand corrected, and it is an important point. Pedantry accepted.

Baroness Nicholson in the House of Lords in 2022, about Annexe B and that hospital rape case.

You can guess I'm a fan of the Baroness

@eulittleb831 you’re not wrong about the irritating 12yr old!

That awful phase some boys go through of feeling oh so clever, much cleverer than mum!

He’s still channeling that at 30 and 6’!

They use the use of pronouns as compliance DrU said plenty of his colleagues see him as a woman why? Probably because they call him her. They don't see politeness or compulsion they see women call me a woman so they believe I am one, so woman I am.

I object to him using the changing room carries a very different weight to I object to her using the changing room.

If we can't define women we can't protect women and pronoun kindness has lead to a medical Dr declaring sex is nebulous and that he is a biological woman.

Enough l, this needs to stop.

I haven't watched, just followed things on here. How do people think things will go for Sandie? The thing that worries me is that we can all see through his manipulation and his science-denying obfuscation because it's what TRAs do and we've seen it all before. But how will the judge view it? Perhaps he will be really convinced by what he is saying? We are watching on in horror, but maybe the judge will buy it all?

Because if this goes in DU's favour, then it is a judgement against biological reality, and we're f*cked. It is really worrying me.

There were no men in the ward where there was(n't) a rape but someone in the ward was a "biological woman" the same way that Dr Upton is a "biological woman".

(D'you know, I'm still quite cross about that.)

The whole 'I am not a robot therefore I am a biological female' really does my head in. They think it's clever but it really isn't, it's just sophistry. But that is the way with the TRAs. If Dr U was asked could he carry a baby, the answer would be one of a) I don't know, I've never tried, b) Lots of women can't, or c) Yes, I'd just pick it up and hold it in my arms. It just doesn't make sense; happy to be out as trans but not happy for there to be any recognition that women and transwomen are different in any meaningful way and determined to play with words to 'prove' it. That need to control the narrative runs through it all. Dr U says he just wants respect but his idea of respect is for everyone to see him the way he chooses and it's just not going to happen, even the law can't control our minds.

It is concerning and hard to know what the decision will be

If SP doesn't win we keep pushing for change. I'd like the laws changed. Vote for people who will do that.

his idea of respect is for everyone to see him the way he chooses

Worse, it's for everyone to convincingly pretend to do so. Even while they and the doctor know they don't actually. Its about control and coercion. The 1984 analogy was absolutely perfect.

Spot on! Look how many news stories there about appalling crimes committed by ‘women’ which unsurprisingly when you read are committed by men who are being referred to as she/her. Scarlet Blake is a prime example.

I am concerned about how it will go but I think NHS Fife, and NHS Scotland, should be far more concerned. If they lose they'll presumably have to pay out some money, will have clarity on their policies and will need to make a few changes regarding additional changing rooms in their hospitals. If they 'win', they may well face wholescale revolt from their workforce.

For those who wondered why NC was pausing for some time between questions, it was to allow time for the response of Theodore to be considered, to let what he had just said sink in.

JR is fully aware that keeping him pinned in the chair and questioned by NC is damaging, and therefore has wants the damage to be limited "any indication as to how much longer the questioning will continue?"

(Personally, I will not refer to him as a Dr any longer, as he is spouting verifiable nonsense that any qualified Dr would not. Just imagine SP being stuck in a changing room with that know-it-all bloke, if it wasn't primarily for his male presence he should have been ejected because he is clearly dangerously obnoxious.)

This (and the post you quoted) is a key point for me in a nutshell: now that I've settled on atheism, I find much of religious belief to be non-sensical.

Transubstantiation, creationism, the idea that a virgin can give birth etc etc. If someone was in court expressing either a heartfelt or feigned belief that this was all true - much like Dr U and his belief that it's possible to be a female by way of self-ID and that biological sex is nebulous - then IMO it would sound completely mad. Not remotely WORIADS. Therefore, from an objective point of view, I'll accept that Dr U and others say that they hold a belief in gender identity and that it's just as WORIADS as any other belief that lots of people hold, or say they hold. But in both cases, "respectfully"** accepting that people hold a belief doesn't involve being forced to accept it as true.

Just as I wouldn't accept transubstantiated wine in blood banks, science lessons replacing the big bang with creationism, biology lessons teaching children that under some circumstances a human child can be conceived without sperm etc, I won't accept the Dr Us of this world forcing their belief onto society as if it's fact.

Thankfully Catholics, Protestants and others stopped all the religious enforcement in the UK a long time ago. Unfortunately, the radicalisation and harm (to self and others) associated with gender identity belief is more akin to how religion was historically enforced than the way that it fits in the UK today. Personally, I'd like to see gender identity belief viewed through a Prevent lens when it comes to children and young people being drawn towards it and how it might impact them.

But on the theme of this thread, the idea that the NHS thinks it makes sense to force non-believers to accept Dr U as a woman in women's changing rooms is appalling. Hopefully what we're seeing gradually happening in the UK is people waking up to the fact that gender identity belief is inherently extreme in and of itself, unlike common or garden religious belief, and it has tramped all over women's rights (men's too but to a lesser degree e.g. freedom of association for gay men where transmen are now self-IDing as gay men), freedom of speech and the safety of children and young people. Isla Bryson, women's sports, the Edinburgh Rape Crisis centre debacle, this NHS case and more all show it up for exactly what it is in relation to women's rights.

**I'll accept that it wasn't particularly respectful that I called both religious belief and gender identity belief mad when examined in detail. FWIW I don't do this IRL with either of them - I just say that I don't believe in god and I don't believe that we all have a gender identity.

If Dr U was asked could he carry a baby, the answer would be one of a) I don't know, I've never tried, b) Lots of women can't, or c) Yes, I'd just pick it up and hold it in my arms.

Spot on. That’s exactly how he’d answer.

Exactly this as well. Women particularly use pronouns to be polite and kind (or becatse they’ve had none too subtle pressure brought to bear by employers) and then the likes of Dr U take and use that as evidence that everyone believes them to be female

no!

Being forced to lie about someone’s sex through the use of pronouns is the thin end of a very large wedge!

If it does go against SP, I really hope that she will be up for an appeal. And if she wins at appeal, then that, unlike a first round ET, sets precedent, so there would be an advantage, as with Maya. The support for her, here, in the comments section of practically every news article, and via her dad's memorial, may help her a little in deciding she can do that if necessary, and I'm positive that even if whatever funding she currently has won't cover it, we will. I hope she hasn't had TRA death threats to push her the other way.

I think it's possible she'll win against Fife and lose against Upton, depending on what Fife say. Not sure it would be sensible to appeal that - I think maybe having him as respondent will have served its purpose by having him seen and heard.

He would opt for b, and probably throw in a mention of hysterectomies, and then pregnant men.

NC has to keep pausing, because she has to wait each time until the judge has finished taking notes! The judge is writing everything down, longhand.
(You'd think that technology had a better solution...)

Yes, I remain dumbfounded as to how the NHS, an institution that deals in scientific and medical reality, seems to have been overtaken and turned inside out by this ideological movement. How any sane person believes that it is right to force people to play along and acknowledge something that is completely untrue. How we are in this position of spending millions of pounds arguing in courts, case after case. I can't think of any other situation in modern times where people stating the truth are regarded as the bad ones. The arrogance of these sinister men is too much.