https://x.com/boswelltoday/status/1890022590384951766
'Day 9 Peggie v NHS Fife & Dr Upton - Morning Session The NHS Fife Circus Rolls On
If NHS Fife’s goal was to present itself as a competent, fair-minded employer, today’s morning session did exactly the opposite. What we saw instead was a shambolic, inconsistent, and biased process, where Sandie Peggie was treated as a problem to be managed, while Dr. Beth Upton was handled with kid gloves.
From the first concerns raised about the changing room to the chaotic decision to suspend Peggie, the entire process reeks of institutional cowardice. The NHS didn’t just fail Peggie—it exposed its utter unwillingness to uphold single-sex spaces, even when female staff explicitly said they needed them. At the centre of today’s evidence was Esther Davidson, Peggie’s line manager, who spent the morning desperately trying to justify the unjustifiable. Her testimony was riddled with contradictions: she claimed she reviewed policies to find clarity, yet admitted NHS Fife had no formal policy on trans inclusion in single-sex spaces.
She also acknowledged that she had no written guidance to rely on—but despite this, Peggie was somehow expected to accept a situation that even management had to figure out on the fly. Instead of considering Peggie’s rights, the unwritten rule seemed to be: don’t question trans inclusion, no matter the cost. The timeline of events is particularly revealing. Peggie raised concerns in August, yet Davidson only gave her an answer in October, two months later—an answer that boiled down to "too bad, Beth can use the space".
No discussion with affected female staff, no consideration for alternatives, and no attempt at compromise. Then, after the Christmas Eve incident, Peggie was removed from work almost immediately, before any formal investigation had taken place. So, was she a danger to patients, or was she only a problem once she refused to back down? NHS Fife can’t seem to decide.
The Christmas Eve incident itself is another mess of contradictions. Peggie allegedly questioned Upton about chromosomes and referenced trans women in prison—a conversation that, even if it happened exactly as claimed, is hardly grounds for what was to come. Meanwhile, Upton’s account was taken at face value, without even considering Peggie’s side before forcing her out of work. And what’s more—this supposedly catastrophic event happened at midnight, when staff weren’t even expected to be using the changing room. Was this really about an unsafe work environment, or about punishing Peggie for saying something unacceptable?
Then we come to the farcical “investigation” process, which barely qualifies as such. Peggie was removed before HR had even spoken to her. Davidson admitted that no written evidence existed for the claim that Peggie had left a patient unattended, yet this was thrown in as an extra excuse to justify her removal. If patient safety was a real concern, why did it only come up once NHS Fife needed another reason to justify her suspension? The entire thing feels retrofitted—they needed a reason to get rid of Peggie, and this was the best they could cobble together.
But the most outrageous moment of the morning session came when Jane Russell KC, barrister for NHS Fife, decided to probe Peggie’s personal politics. Russell explicitly brought up Peggie’s support for Donald Trump, as if this was somehow relevant to whether she had been treated fairly.
Naomi Cunningham (Peggie’s barrister) rightly objected, and even the judge admitted it was a leading question. But the fact that it was asked at all is telling—this wasn’t about Peggie’s conduct, it was about making her look like the “wrong sort of person.” The implication was clear: if you hold gender-critical beliefs, you are fair game for workplace punishment.
By the end of the morning, it was abundantly clear that this was never about fairness, due process, or workplace safety. Peggie was removed because she refused to comply with a belief system she didn’t share. The policies were nonexistent, the process was biased, and the investigation was an afterthought. Meanwhile, Upton—who made no effort to accommodate female colleagues—was given total backing.
This was not a balanced workplace dispute. It was a one-sided ideological purge. The afternoon session will bring cross-examination of Esther Davidson by Naomi Cunningham, which promises to be far more revealing. If Davidson struggled this much under questioning from her own side, it’s hard to imagine how she will hold up under scrutiny from Peggie’s barrister. So far, NHS Fife’s defence has been flimsy, contradictory, and riddled with gaps—and that’s before even facing a real challenge. If this is the best they can do when trying to control the narrative, the real damage is yet to come.'