NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #16

[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. However, it is going to overrun and there will be an adjournment with the hearing resuming, possibly, in July. 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
Thread 15: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5273119-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-15

If ED hasn't been peaked before, I suspect she is now. The emperor is definitely naked.

2009, my late husband was transferred to the Vic after open heart surgery. Was immediately put in a side room. (Didn't realise at the time - they tend to do that if they think you're on the road out.)

He was supposed to get physio before coming home.

A Muslim gentleman created merry hell because his wife was in a mixed ward (albeit with single-sex bays).

So DH was punted into the main ward and the Muslim lady got the side room. Mind you, that probably saved DH's life.

They accidentally discharged him after 3 days - I was told to pick him up. (Physio: "Can you walk up these steps?" DH managed it - laboriously - so they discharged him.) Got him home and it turned out that he had an infected chest wound and the Vic had forgotten to check his bloods. (He'd had two blood transfusions at the Royal in Edinburgh,) He was gasping for breath with anaemia.

Our District Nurse saved his life. (After she intervened, a Cardio Nurse from the Vic turned up at our door. When I asked why DH hadn't had the physio etc: "Oh, well..he was at the Royal for so long that we assumed he'd had it." They obviously don't read notes at the Vic.)

My point is that the Vic can move to sort out worries over sex when it wants to.

My (presumed-female) dog shags women's arms. Sigh.

Bearing in mind that Lennon/Katie Dolatowski attempt to rape a 10 yr old in a Kirkcaldy supermarket toilet, this is a very relevant question.

the resus incident and the missing patient complaint. Yes?

ED - yes

NC - doc on 23 Jan was about Christmas eve. This longer doc has all those additional elements. Now your IX interview, 'I was subsequently given a statement by DU that SP would walk out of a room if DU walked in'

That was my point - she hasn't (there was a query yesterday whether people would adhere to that).

NC - so you must have seen this longer statement before April?

ED - yes

NC - now back to JH's account of earlier convo, on 3 Jan, it was clear that she knew about the resus incident,

ED - there was some earlier verbal dissemination of information by DU

NC - to whom

ED - Louise Searle,

NC - when

ED - on 30 December. I knew about it on 31 December,

NC - and you told JH?

ED - yes.

NC - so that's why your email on the 26th was not so urgent in tone (deal with when back in office in new year)

Your dog may have mis-read Plato's 'An armY of lovers...'😄

Dissemination is a long word from someone who isn't sure if wearing lady clothes makes your DNA change.

No, I think he knew to be very very careful around Upton bcos everyone immediately knows you are in the presence of a manipulating bully who will use the system against anyone he can - including the judge. That being said, the fact that sex is relevant was established by the j before the tribunal started because he ruled that make pronouns could be used when referring to BU so I think it’s clear why is responding the way he is on that score. That doesn’t mean he favours either side but just a point he’d already ruled on. Same issue with facts. There are different interpretations of facts but they still remain facts. He needs to present as fair — that’s his job — but I also think he is aware ED ain’t the brightest spark and his job is also to make sure witnesses like ED aren’t pushed beyond their capacity given she is not a respondent. NC will make her case elsewhere if she can’t push ED too far anyway.

ED - yes, because I wrote it on the 26th.

NC - Hearing about the other elements made it feel more urgent?

ED - yes

NC - the allegations about patient care, must have been concerning to you, especially that the C had been so prejudiced against DU that she couldn't work with him

probably means diarrhoea though.

and had walked out of resus.

ED - yes

NC - and if that is true, that is incredibly serious

ED - from what I can gather there was no harm to the patient, we don't want people leaving, its not ideal but I believe that DU had remained in the cubicle,

NC - you said in your IX

NC - Hearing about the other elements made it feel more urgent?

I bet it did.

Don't know others may have that info but if Hochhauser was the senior for Garden Court she may be...

interview that you were not aware of it at the time

ED - that's correct

NC - because if it had you would have been dealing with it, if it had been reported you would have investigated it urgently

ED - certainly we would have had to follow up and understand her reasons

NC - if it was an innocent reason, it would have been a short ix, wouldnt it

ED - yes

NC - but if DU's account was true, a nurse who could abandon her duties and couldn't work with someone because of their bigotry, that would be unacceptable

ED - that wouldn't be ideal

I would really like to know, in the wider department, how people really felt about working with Upton.

NC - wouldn't be ideal is quite an understatement, it would end a nurse's career if true

ED - it would need to be investigated,

NC - that's understood, its hypothetical, assume it had been investigated, assume there was no innocent reason, SP had left the cubicle because of her

what if it’s a 12 year old girl and a 50 year old bloke who suddenly decides he’s a woman and needs to come in the ladies with her.

I've had very similar situation, except with a blokey bloke in a 'gender neutral' toilets at a theatre.

It was just 11yo DD and 50 year old man in there. I walked in and we were both immediately uncomfortable (man washing hands and DD just coming out of cubicle). Even though I had no reason to assume nefarious intent, I felt very strongly he shouldn't have been here, and from the look of him he knew he shouldn't have been there (as in why the mixed sex toilets?). That's the fist time I noticed the creep of 'gender neutral' toilets and, by extension, the GI ssue.

hatred of trans people, it would have been extremely serious.

ED - needs to be an investigation

NC - but assume that's how it went, it could have ended her career, she would have been struck off and fired.

ED - that wouldn't be my decision but yes, it might happen.

I'm more concerned she thought it possible a hair style could change your DNA. She's either not fit to practice or lying under oath.

NC - email from Kate Searle (KS), please read, its possible you're reading for the first time, KS says 'Louise has also spoken to Laura and other charge nurse, to inform SP that her actions were unacceptable and to make a plan to go forward' Did you agree to that?

A nurse who doesn't know if make up changes your DNA, but knows she wouldn't put herself in a mixed sex changing room.

Even though Sandie not using the changing room was also a cause for complaint!

Unless the "I wouldn't put myself in that situation" wasn't referring to the changing room but to a situation where she was not compliant with whatever Dr Upton wanted.