Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

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 #18

1000 replies

nauticant · 14/02/2025 11:43

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 in July (current best estimate). 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 caused by 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
Thread 16: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5273636-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-16
Thread 17: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5273827-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-17

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
rebmacesrevda · 14/02/2025 14:06

Tootsweets23 · 14/02/2025 14:02

Where are all the grown ups? Where are the lawyers, the board members, the safety and risk people? The safeguarding people? Where are they all? This is a complete car crash.

Totally agree. Really annoys me how an organisation will (eventually, when forced) take accountability, but it's actually people who caused the problems.

KnottyAuty · 14/02/2025 14:06
Impressive control of emotions
RoamingGnome · 14/02/2025 14:07

Largofesse · 14/02/2025 14:05

Again I’m no expert but from what I have gleaned from experts such decisions can’t be applied retroactively and so shouldn’t impact panel’s judgement whatever decision. They have to consider the contemporaneous framings.

Do any legal people know the answer here? Can a supreme court ruling inbetween now and July affect the outcome of an ET that has already started?

Lunde · 14/02/2025 14:09

Does anyone remember which session it was that DU - talking about psychiatry (is his there now?) - said that if a MH patient refused to accept that he was a woman that he would record it as an act of aggression against him?

I've been trying to remember when this was said as it struck me as chilling - especially as labelling a patient as "aggressive" could lead to all sorts of coercive treatments.

GalacticTowelMaster · 14/02/2025 14:09

KnottyAuty · 14/02/2025 14:06

Impressive control of emotions

Is this allowed?!?

nauticant · 14/02/2025 14:11

Upton and psychiatry:

https://x.com/tribunaltweets/status/1887472410544284029

OP posts:
fanOfBen · 14/02/2025 14:11

Whatever it was it's gone. If someone recorded NC in court, then no, that is a criminal offence!

ickky · 14/02/2025 14:12

Judge and Panel return.

P2 - you mentioned support on return to work, can I understand more about that

ED - it's occupational health and its to assess if able to return to work, to make sure that they are fit to return to work to the same work.

P2 =- in this circumstance

nauticant · 14/02/2025 14:12

Ahh, but that isn't what you wanted @Lunde.

OP posts:
PriOn1 · 14/02/2025 14:13

Re ED saying she would have removed herself, I assume she means that, in Sandie’s position, she would have changed somewhere else (as was suggested) rather than waiting outside to use the same space once the male doctor had removed himself.

While we can all see the slippery slope and problems with backing down when being bullied, I think a lot of women would have simply done that and unfortunately, there will still be those who see Sandie as unreasonable for not taking the path of least resistance. It’s exactly why we’re in this mess, as so many women fear to challenge a male bully that when a woman is actually assertive enough to do so, it is then seen as an act of aggression.

ickky · 14/02/2025 14:13

I had understood its to make sure SP is fit to participate in IX.
ED - missed. They usually do 2 things, they have telephone convo, prior to Covid it was face to face and then it's a follow up.

P2- you mentioned grades, you thought is should be grade 7 or 8, can you explain

Rightsraptor · 14/02/2025 14:13

maltravers · 14/02/2025 13:52

Isn’t V Valentine on today?

Should be as it's St Valentine's Day. But I think that witness is written statement only?

Merrymouse · 14/02/2025 14:13

guinnessguzzler · 14/02/2025 13:59

Does anyone know if it had been the case that Sandie asked about chromosomes, what is so bad about that? As far as I can tell, she raised her issue that Dr U isn't a woman and therefore shouldn't have been in those changing rooms and Dr U countered by saying that he is a woman / female and had every right to be there. If people (TRAs) are going to insist on denying reality and coopting language then surely they need to expect that people will have to fall back on eg reference to chromosomes to make their point. What could Sandie have said that would have allowed her to get her point across and been deemed to be acceptable? I expect nothing, but perhaps something like 'You have a trans history' or would that be transphobic too? Is it inherently transphobic to refer to chromosomes?

I think from NHS Fife's point of view the comparison would be a woman admitted to a previously male only golf club. If every time she tried to play golf, men kept going on about her sex that would be harassment - she has every right to play, just like every other member, and in this situation her sex is irrelevant.

NHS Fife erroneously do not believe that Dr Upton's sex is relevant to his use of the changing room, so they conclude that any reference to it must be harassment.

Lunde · 14/02/2025 14:14

The panel seem to be homing in on the purpose of the supervision/support. Perhaps considering whether it was a reprisal ...

Arglefraster · 14/02/2025 14:14

A lurker of late (have been here 15 yrs but serial name changer cos interns) & have been following case on X (still can't believe it's called that now🙄) but wanted to thank nauticant & ickky in particular for these fantastic threads as I have hugely appreciated reading everyone's thoughts.

Also if notabaker is still about my eternal gratitude to the TT team.

"DARVO" was my yelp moment 😆 & NC is my heroine. 💚🤍💜

RobinEllacotStrike · 14/02/2025 14:14

CriticalCondition · 14/02/2025 12:39

Does anyone know if DU is at the tribunal today? Or any members of the Wall of Sad?

Or, most importantly, what has happened to the Sad Chairs behind the witness box? Have they detransitioned back to the clerks' office where several people have been forced to hotdesk for a week during DUs evidence? Or maybe that should be hotchair.

I think the Wall of Sad was a very special accommodation for a "very special" man.

mrshoho · 14/02/2025 14:14

Boiledbeetle · 14/02/2025 12:16

And she knows we know that she knows!

God her head must be mashed!

I am imagining the preparation and coaching ED was given by her seniors before the trial consisted of "just make bloody sure you never never admit to knowing or believing that BU is in fact Male." This poor woman is in such a muddle.

ickky · 14/02/2025 14:15

ED - all reg nurses are band 5, charge nurses are band 6, senior charge nurses are band 7, 8, I am band 8.

P2 - the two senior charge nurses are both band 7

ED - yes, band 7

P2 - do doctors fall into this system

ED - describes categories of doctors, too quick to catch details

Lunde · 14/02/2025 14:15

nauticant · 14/02/2025 14:12

Ahh, but that isn't what you wanted @Lunde.

no it was definitely something about reporting patients who refused to accept his GI - which would seem an abuse of power

Merrymouse · 14/02/2025 14:15

PriOn1 · 14/02/2025 14:13

Re ED saying she would have removed herself, I assume she means that, in Sandie’s position, she would have changed somewhere else (as was suggested) rather than waiting outside to use the same space once the male doctor had removed himself.

While we can all see the slippery slope and problems with backing down when being bullied, I think a lot of women would have simply done that and unfortunately, there will still be those who see Sandie as unreasonable for not taking the path of least resistance. It’s exactly why we’re in this mess, as so many women fear to challenge a male bully that when a woman is actually assertive enough to do so, it is then seen as an act of aggression.

But that would have been avoidance. The only approved course of action was to get changed with Dr Upton.

Bannedontherun · 14/02/2025 14:16

Largofesse · 14/02/2025 14:05

Again I’m no expert but from what I have gleaned from experts such decisions can’t be applied retroactively and so shouldn’t impact panel’s judgement whatever decision. They have to consider the contemporaneous framings.

I believe you are incorrect it is legislation that cannot be retrospective. Common law judgements, ie interpretations of the meaning of an Act will apply from the date the Act was ascended by the then queen.

A lawyer may come along and correct me….

Signalbox · 14/02/2025 14:16

RoamingGnome · 14/02/2025 14:07

Do any legal people know the answer here? Can a supreme court ruling inbetween now and July affect the outcome of an ET that has already started?

IANAL but I would think a SC ruling would certainly affect an ongoing case because the SC decision is an interpretation of the law as it stands and the decision would overrule the incorrect decisions made by the lower courts.

rebmacesrevda · 14/02/2025 14:16

ickky · 14/02/2025 14:15

ED - all reg nurses are band 5, charge nurses are band 6, senior charge nurses are band 7, 8, I am band 8.

P2 - the two senior charge nurses are both band 7

ED - yes, band 7

P2 - do doctors fall into this system

ED - describes categories of doctors, too quick to catch details

She's a band 8?!?! Oh, good lord. I want my money back.

ickky · 14/02/2025 14:16

P2 - so KS would be a consultant

ED - yes

P2 - after your phone call why did you go on to look at policies

ED - it's not that I doubted I just wanted more information

P2 - after DU started had convo with KS, checking okay to use
F CR. were you aware of that

ickky · 14/02/2025 14:17

ED - no I was not aware, I was told by another consultant that was the case

P2 - DU had been in dept previously, what were the circumstances around that

ED - we are ED we have to refer patients to specialists, there's a lot of mental health issues at the moment and DU was in and

Please create an account

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

This thread is not accepting new messages.