NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #15

[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 was expected to continue for 2 weeks although once it was in to the second week it was looking like this would not happen. The hearing commenced with Sandie Peggie giving evidence. Dr Beth Upton gave evidence from Thursday 6 February to Wednesday 12 February.

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

However, as a result of problems with the livestreaming, apparently, as a result of a very large number of observers, remote public access to the hearing was suspended on Tuesday 11 February. It was suggested that it might be reinstated at some point but don't count on it.

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
Thread 10: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5271723-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-10
Thread 11: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272046-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-11
Thread 12: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272276-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-12
Thread 13: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272398-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-13
Thread 14: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272939-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-14

I'm not sure if this quote from X-exam has been mentioned here but over on Twitter holyroodmandy posted this gem from yesterdays proceedings:

Dr Upton to Naomi Cunningham KC: "You don't like me, that much is obvious, but if you dropped down in front of me suffering from a heart attack I presume you wouldn't object to me treating you...There are times when severity of illness trumps how we feel about each other..."

IANAL, but I would have thought it not a good luck for someone being examined to take it so personally. When you go to ET you should know it is a process and not personal - I certainly did when I went to ET.

It isn't illegal to be an entitled idiot, but I was wondering if the above comment along with the other patronising replies/digs Upton made to NC would be viewed in a bad light and as a mark of his intent/personality and therefore could influence to courts decision in any way?

having had the misfortune to engage with the scottish trans alliance I can confirm they are batshit. When is VV being questioned?

@nauticant thanks again for another great bbc link - it seems a robot would be handy!

Either he really doesn't understand quite basic principles of biological sex, which are crucial in patient care, or he's lying.

Yes, and many would look at a TW thinking, they are a just manish looking actual woman.

The GMC should never have allowed men to register as a different sex. That's where the muddying of the water is.

It is unbelievable how many organisations have allowed this without thinking through the consequences for actual women. And thinking the other way, lots of men wouldn't really want a TM touching them either.

It's like something out a cartoon - what another fine mess you've gotten us into

Friday, is the plan. I don't know whether morning or afternoon.

I think the judge is simply unhappy that the disclosure failures are causing problems. He will know that it will give SP an easy appeal if he refuses to order disclosure of relevant documents and then decides against her.

The BMA isn't the professional registration body. That's the GMC.

The BMA is a union, and therefore presumably has branch reps who are also staff within the hospital. Some.of these will have been on duty over Xmas.

I'm pretty sure you're right about this, and judges don't take kindly to this type of rhetoric. It seeks to undermine the legitimacy of the tribunal process (as did another claim by DU that the tribunal itself was brought about as a way of bullying him), and obviously if you are a tribunal judge you're not going to be impressed by this. A tactical error on DU's part, I think.

Agreed. The point I was making is that the fact most of the time is being taken up by NC might lead people to think this was still SP's case. It isn't. What we are now hearing is the case for the respondents, which is why NC doesn't get to decide the order in which witnesses appear.

https://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2025/01/19/jme-2024-110298

I suppose one way this could be playing out in the mind of the judge, which is consistent with what we see and especially with his obvious irritation, is "it's already clear that I'm going to have to decide FOR SP, we don't need extra documents and massive long cross-examinations to convince me of that, so could we please just get on with it and could you stop messing up the rest of my schedule". Obviously, if that's how he's thinking, he would have to be careful not to let on, but it's possible, I feel. Let's hope.

Thank you @RethinkingLife

Completely fair point in response to my somewhat facetious post. I know it is far from a laughing matter.

In a busy A&E department you don't want an expensive doctor standing around watching a nurse doing obs when there are other patients the nurse needs to see. Once the doctor arrives, it is far more sensible for the nurse to go and deal with other patients while the doctor takes the obs.

The GMC register shows Gender, not sex. And if a doctor has previously been registered with a different gender, they keep that secret.

I agree (assuming this is what you mean) they should not have allowed this.

Applies to other (most? all?) health care professionals too.

I realise the separation between BMA and GMC - just with me, as I said, it would be unlikely to get support through the channels over the office closure period.

Early on on his evidence, NC gave the scenario of walking in the street and there's someone behind you. She asked if the person's sex would alter his perception of risk and he waffled a lot but it boiled down to no. That alone tells you he isn't a woman, doesn't get what it's like and probably never will.

Someone - Julia Long or Kathleen Stock maybe? - said there should have been a whole new word invented from the start for TW. That it's proving impossible to claw the word "woman" back and it should never have been shared / lent. I hadn't thought of that before but it's so right.

It was never accurate either as you can't transition into womanhood, only pretend to. But now no compromise is possible because they royally took the piss and abused the kindness shown.

Does anyone know, if SP wins her case, what will be the consequences ( if any ) for Dr U?

Do no other men work in Fife A&E? I can't recall any mention of any involvement of any male member of staff in this whole sorry tale.

No it's striking, isn't it @Tallisker

Where does Vic V come into this? Is she his adviser in some capacity?

Sandie's fundraiser now at over £28,000

❤

It is one of the big disadvantages of no longer being able to see the posse on camera. Because usually this wouldn't be on show for the online observer at all. We would only get to see the reactions of other observers if in the room. In my experience as an observer to a professional conduct panel, the observers do influence things - sharp intake of breath, shocked look etc. It affects others nearby. If they came in fired up for support (having presumably taken 2 weeks off work to do this) and then had to sit through all the contradictory evidence and DU minimising of complaints previously described as "hate crime", there must be some doubts going on. But obviously (Cialdini persuasion principles) once a person has made a public commitment of support it is incredibly difficult for them to row back. So I was imagining that for today/tomorrow the group will defo remain committed to attending. It will be very illuminating to see who turns up in July. In that respect the initial attempt to give a visual indication of support, could potentially backfire if that support is visually diminished. Fascinating!

As I couldn't log in I couldn't see her response. She's doing a job, 'liking' doesn't come into it. But it's typical of a coercive controller - everything HE doesn't like someone doing is a personal attack on him, not something someone's doing for entirely different reasons (like doing her job as a KC), or wanting a single sex changing room. SP wants a single sex changing room, it's not about him, it's just he's male. Yet Upton has turned it into a personal attack and even on here we're often (not always) going along with this framing.

I think this is a type of abuser in the Freedom programme - maybe the victim? Everything is an attack on him. People using the language they've used their entire lives and just applying according to their perceptions is an attack on him. ('transphobic') etc. At best it's a really unattractive personality trait to turn every single human interaction that doesn't involve someone bowing down before you as an attack or dislike or some other personal thing. Extremely manipulative.

I also thought it was a vaguely threatening remark - if you were unconscious I could put my hands upon you. Honestly, I wouldn't want someone so obsessed about the tiniest perceived personal slight treating me. I'd want someone competent who is focused on my care and dedicated to saving me and doesn't think I'm a transphobic bigot who deserves punishing for using standard English pronouns. Because he's made it quite clear that he thinks people using standard English are transphobic bigots akin to racists and deserve the punishment of slurs at the very least. What is that type of person going to do in that situation when giving 'care' to someone he thinks deserves punishment and thinks is abhorrent? Who knows... i have no confidence he'd behave according to medical ethics, he's already said he wouldn't in other situations.