Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

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

1000 replies

nauticant · 10/02/2025 15:51

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

OP posts:
Thread gallery
27
Rightsraptor · 11/02/2025 09:35

The comments under the DT article about this have now reached 6,500

DrUptonsNebulousDogwhistle · 11/02/2025 09:36

Checking in for a day of refreshing this and the subsequent threads while pretending attempting to work.

Huge thanks to all the live watchers keeping the rest of us up to speed!

OP posts:
ThatsNotMyTeen · 11/02/2025 09:36

Datun · 11/02/2025 09:21

Ah ok. I did not know that. What about his solicitor?

Also no

BonfireLady · 11/02/2025 09:36

He's in the middle of giving evidence. His legal team are not allowed to coach him.

barristers are not allowed to coach witnesses in the UK

This is useful to know. I had no idea.

🍿🍿🍿

If we get the same performance as yesterday, even the BBC's evening sub editors might struggle to "fix" the headline and reporting to maintain the editorial approach of gender identity belief as fact.

PaintDecisions · 11/02/2025 09:37

fanOfBen · 11/02/2025 09:35

One thing I've been wondering is how a witness feels who gives evidence over several days covering a weekend and must have no access to online discussion of the case, or any in person discussion of it. Can you imagine? I think I would have needed to take myself physically away from any device - which may be why he came back looking different, as going to a spa hotel or something without even a phone would have been a very sensible choice. Wrong time of year to go camping up a mountain!

Done it in a criminal trial. It's absolutely exhausting, and I was a copper not a victim of or witness to the crime!

I was on the stand for DAYS going over the evidence and the investigation with the CPS barrister, then SEVEN defence barristers (two declined to add questions to the mix).

I knew I was squeaky clean and I knew my case inside out, and it was still one of the most mentally shattering things I've been through.

teawamutu · 11/02/2025 09:38

Offered without comment:

he tells her (after Wendy Cope)

He tells her he's a woman too
He has a ladybrain
He tells her his identity
and hers; they are the same
He tells her not to talk about
her body; it's not fair
her body is her privilege
his own, a cross to bear

He tells her that she cannot talk
Or otherwise allude
to what her female body does
It's nasty to exclude
He says respect diversity
except he would prefer
that she would not point out the ways
that he's diverse from her

He tells her that biology
does not impact her life
she should still bear his children
but she must call him 'wife'
He says that words must all evolve
She must learn to make do
And now that woman is his word
He's taking 'female' too

He tells her that a woman is
whatever he decides
He will not put it into words
She must not ask, he chides
He tells her he is more oppressed
Than she has ever been
He says she must agree with him
or else she's being mean

She searches for the words she needs
To talk about herself
The billions who exist like her
their lives, their rights, their health
Whatever word she chooses now
He finds a way to spin it
The conversation carries on

But she's no longer in it

-R Irischild

Bannedontherun · 11/02/2025 09:38

@AnnaMagnani this is a trial an inquest is not a trial, it is a fact finding enquiry.

AnnaMagnani · 11/02/2025 09:39

Thanks, we were given loads of prep!

LipbalmOrKnickers · 11/02/2025 09:40

9:39 <drums fingers>

Swashbuckled · 11/02/2025 09:40

CheekySnake · 11/02/2025 09:31

Just as a reminder for everyone, this used to be included in the DSM as a mental illness. It was removed a few years ago for nebulous reasons that had nothing to do with science or medicine. (not saying for a second that the DSM is scientific, because it's not, but still).

I do wonder about the clinical risks of no longer being able to consider a delusion to be so, in Mental Health Act assessments, if the delusion is centred on sex.

So a patient can be legally detained due to risks, if he believes he is a llama, but not if he believes he is a woman. I mean, I know we’re aware of how crazy this is, but in terms of clinicians not being to apply for a section (to protect from risks of suicide, magical thinking, safeguarding issues etc).

TheHereticalOne · 11/02/2025 09:40

Datun · 11/02/2025 09:22

That is fascinating. So if he's making himself look terrible, they can't tell him?

Correct. This is actually true before trial too - if it appears that a witness has been coached on their evidence beforehand, judges will take an extremely dim view and it is very likely to be a professional conduct issue for the barrister or solicitor involved, just as it would if they had tinkered with a document they were disclosing to try to make it read better.

Witness evidence is supposed to be factual evidence just as documents are supposed to be factual evidence. Tampering with factual evidence in either format is very much forbidden!

Bannedontherun · 11/02/2025 09:41

The officials will be in sorting out timetables bundles etc

Datun · 11/02/2025 09:41

teawamutu · 11/02/2025 09:38

Offered without comment:

he tells her (after Wendy Cope)

He tells her he's a woman too
He has a ladybrain
He tells her his identity
and hers; they are the same
He tells her not to talk about
her body; it's not fair
her body is her privilege
his own, a cross to bear

He tells her that she cannot talk
Or otherwise allude
to what her female body does
It's nasty to exclude
He says respect diversity
except he would prefer
that she would not point out the ways
that he's diverse from her

He tells her that biology
does not impact her life
she should still bear his children
but she must call him 'wife'
He says that words must all evolve
She must learn to make do
And now that woman is his word
He's taking 'female' too

He tells her that a woman is
whatever he decides
He will not put it into words
She must not ask, he chides
He tells her he is more oppressed
Than she has ever been
He says she must agree with him
or else she's being mean

She searches for the words she needs
To talk about herself
The billions who exist like her
their lives, their rights, their health
Whatever word she chooses now
He finds a way to spin it
The conversation carries on

But she's no longer in it

-R Irischild

She's a genius. And a Mumsnetter.

There were many conversations, way back, that if you gave away the word woman, female would be next. It doesn't matter what word you use, because it's the concept that's important not the word.

This is why you cannot give an inch.

prh47bridge · 11/02/2025 09:42

fanOfBen · 11/02/2025 08:11

Can any legal bods say, does anything we've seen so far look like grounds for SP to appeal if it goes against her? Most obviously, would all the late disclosures count as "did not follow the correct procedures" in this list?
https://www.gov.uk/appeal-employment-appeal-tribunal

I think SP will be able to appeal on the basis that the tribunal got the law wrong if this case goes against her. I doubt she will need any other grounds.

User0103 · 11/02/2025 09:42

ThatsNotMyTeen · 11/02/2025 09:36

Also no

What about and independent person who just happens to be a KC, and whom you have appraised of the case?

Datun · 11/02/2025 09:43

TheHereticalOne · 11/02/2025 09:40

Correct. This is actually true before trial too - if it appears that a witness has been coached on their evidence beforehand, judges will take an extremely dim view and it is very likely to be a professional conduct issue for the barrister or solicitor involved, just as it would if they had tinkered with a document they were disclosing to try to make it read better.

Witness evidence is supposed to be factual evidence just as documents are supposed to be factual evidence. Tampering with factual evidence in either format is very much forbidden!

Thank you. Very useful to know.

JR clearly doesn't trust him, because of her constant interruption and need to control the dialogue. So it's quite useful to know she's not allowed to actually tell him!

BountiesAreUnderrated · 11/02/2025 09:43

Morning all, I got stuck with work stuff all of yesterday and didn't get to hear any of the afternoon session. Spent a couple of hours trying to catch up on your excellent commentary and think I'm up to speed. I'm WFTCHTJ now but got a meeting at 10 and another at 11.30 then 2 & 3 this afternoon so I'm unlikely to have much time to listen. Plus I have a huge amount of data to analyse and a presentation to write which needs full concentration. Gah, if only this was an admin day where I could multi task!

frenchnoodle · 11/02/2025 09:43

prh47bridge · 11/02/2025 09:42

I think SP will be able to appeal on the basis that the tribunal got the law wrong if this case goes against her. I doubt she will need any other grounds.

The judge called DU the victim, hence may be argued not impartial.

Late bundles, lack of disclosure.

There's loads of things.

chilling19 · 11/02/2025 09:44

Morning all. Time for a cuppa and a girding of the loins.

ILikeDungs · 11/02/2025 09:44

Yesterday I predicted they would start at 10:30 this morning, on the basis they wanted an earlier start

ed for clarity

Ereshkigalangcleg · 11/02/2025 09:44

-R Irischild

Love her!

irischild.blogspot.com/?m=1

NotAGentleReminder · 11/02/2025 09:45

Was the judge saying 'victim' not a slip of the tongue and he immediately changed it to 'defendant'? Although it's 'respondent', isn't it?

eulittleb831 · 11/02/2025 09:45

ILikeDungs · 11/02/2025 09:44

Yesterday I predicted they would start at 10:30 this morning, on the basis they wanted an earlier start

ed for clarity

Edited

I thought that proceedings would start promptly personally, but have "waiting for the conference host to join" ringing in my ears at 0945!

frenchnoodle · 11/02/2025 09:46

NotAGentleReminder · 11/02/2025 09:45

Was the judge saying 'victim' not a slip of the tongue and he immediately changed it to 'defendant'? Although it's 'respondent', isn't it?

I think it's still ground for appeal. But in this case I don't think it would be mentioned, in all honesty there is so much already little thing won't be needed.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread