NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #21

[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 last 2 weeks. However, after 2 weeks it was not complete and it adjourned part-heard. It is planned that it will resume on 16 July and the last day of evidence will be 28 July and then there will be 2 days of submissions from counsel meaning that the hearing will end on 30 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 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
Thread 18: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5274332-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-18
Thread 19: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5274571-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-19
Thread 20: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5275782-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-20

It's such a shame that the video of Upton at the witness box is locked away as court evidence & can't be seen & shared. With each answer to Naomi's questions, his replies got more & more expansive. She didn't pull him up, she just let him speak & ramble on. And the judge was trying to write it all down, longhand...

Eventually he exploded into what seemed to be a full 'Trans rights manifesto'. The transcription of that would be something to behold.

Tribunal Tweets couldn't do his eloquence justice. He's articulate, educated, lucid and garrulous... and nutty as a fruit cake.

I think it's a warning to the staff that they won't be preventing men from going into the female changing room, regardless of what they've heard about its illegality due to the Tribunal.

'Don't you even think about getting ideas about also complaining!'

I think that's really sad. I expect the vast majority of trans people are harmless, troubled people who just want a quiet life and hate how toxic the debate has become

I don't support males in female changing rooms / sport etc but they should be treated with kindness and compassion in a bank

@Datun And yes I know men are also victims of other men, but that doesn't seem to make them clasp their keys in their fist across an empty car park, for some reason.

I've been thinking more about why women seem to have this visceral fear response to men that is stronger even than the reaction of smaller, more feminine men to other men. Besides the obviously much lower chance of defending ourselves due to significantly less upper body strength, there is one thing that can ONLY be inflicted by a man on a woman, and that is pregnancy.
Our heightened sense of danger in those situations could have evolved partly due to our evolving reproductive strategy as the female of the species.

Pregnancy, childbirth, and child rearing is enormously costly for female mammals in terms of bodily energy, resources, and risk. There would have been strong pressure to develop instincts that would help us control when, and with whom, we procreate. Obviously we didn’t have things like birth control or access to abortion when we were developing as a species, so the only way for women to control their own reproductive life was to avoid rape at all costs.

This could be why we are so much more tuned into the dangers of men than other men are, even though they are also at risk of violence. Our Spidey senses are more alert because we’re instinctively protecting not only our safety but also our reproductive autonomy.

And when it comes down to it, single-sex spaces, especially where we undress, could be thought of as part of that protection. Anything that decreases our chances of being raped increases our ability to control when we get pregnant.

Someone posted earlier about that study that found something like 90% of rapes occurring in changing rooms happen in mixed-sex changing rooms. I mean, duh, right? Of course they do! So in addition to the many other reasons to have single-sex spaces, it can be argued that they also serve to help us control our own reproductive lives.

Forcing us to pretend we can’t recognize the type of human that can get us pregnant and then forcing us to accept those humans into places where we are vulnerable increases the chances we end up impregnated against our will.

Obviously, once we're past childbearing age, that risk goes away, but the beneficial fear instinct would still be there because that's how evolutionary traits work.

Scottish Labour on gender / Sandie Peggie. This is really encouraging, I think

This study illustrates really well the difference between how men and women experience the world. It tracked where women and men looked when shown pictures of various parts of a college campus at nighttime. The image says it all. We are always scanning for danger. "CONSTANT VIGILANCE!" as Professor Moody would say.

https://news.byu.edu/intellect/study-visually-captures-hard-truth-walking-home-at-night-is-not-the-same-for-women

It does seem that it's his lengthy arrogance that has peaked so many.
His insistence on changing with women, recording Sandie's behaviour, levels of emotional manipulation and fury at being challenged. Lots of people - men especially previously unbothered by all this - looked at that performance and then looked at their teenage daughters, their mother, sister, wife, niece and other girls and women & realised. This is who girls and women are being expected to undress alongside. Society now offers no protection to women. So they've reacted.

Wow that’s a powerful article compared to lots of the other reporting. And direct to the Mail faithful. Interesting that Scottish politicians are already starting to distance themselves from the gender stuff by suggesting they were somehow misled by Nicola Sturgeon. I suppose she’s a useful blame hound. Quite a few papers are gunning for the Scottish Health Secretary Neil Grey. The Mail article will be adding to the pressure on him to speak up. Surely it’s just a matter of time that he does? Our elected representatives must be realising that the majority of voters won’t look kindly on this come the next election? And it’s not the sort of thing thats going away - the summer will be full of nurses and changing rooms thanks to Darlington…

Although NC wasnt keen on an adjournment initially, I can’t help thinking that it’s possibly going to work in SP’s favour. If the judge wasnt sure that the “typical person” would expect a female only changing room at work, then he surely does now?!

And if that’s the view then surely it strengthens the argument that SP was harassed under the EA just by DU’s presence?

Is it then necessary to further disprove or discredit DU’s version of events in the CR to make her case?

Yes and add in the fact that he is a medical professional, a doctor! Under oath proclaiming he is a biological female. The cognitive dissonance here is a step too far for most people.

HMRC hold data on your sex, as per birth certificate or GRC. I have never experienced this, but I assume that if you tried to add somebody to payroll with incorrect sex, HMRC would query this. Also, if you were continuously employed, this information would be carried forward on your P45.

As far as I understand there is no process to reverse a GRC, so not sure where this leave detransitioners.

As you point out, while it's legal to ignore a GRC where 'legitimate means etc.', it's not clear how an employer is supposed to do this.

However, following their recent announcements, I am sure Scottish Labour have a plan.

Neil Grey is visiting a hospital in Fife today in his role as Scottish Health Minister. Will be interesting to see what reception he gets!

As a doctor myself, that is so embarrassing. 🫣 I don’t really care whether a man wears a skirt or not but I could not work with someone who doesn’t seem to understand basic biology.

Assuming this is harmless is a big part of how we've ended up here.

I am finding the vibe shift around TWAW fascinating. Nothing material has changed yet everything seems to have changed. Like the emperor's clothes have finally come off.

I cannot thank the women who have had to fight this through the dark years and who have been instrumental in bringing the sunshine. It must have come at such a huge cost. We owe you so much.

Referring back, the generic use of 'trans' to refer to what used to be called transvestites and cross-dressers and transsexuals and men and women and children of all ages, without any differentiation as to motivation muddies the debate. To the level that it is often impossible to know what anyone is talking about.

Deliberately, I suspect, part of queering the discourse.

That George Orwell knew a thing or two.

With the previous posts (maybe thread 20?) about statistics and minority views being imposed on the mainstream I thought I’d look at another controversial topic - abortion.

You gov have done a poll and only 6-7% of the population think that abortion shouldn’t be legal
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/47568-where-does-the-british-public-stand-on-abortion-in-2023

And to protect the majority against “extremist” campaigners, exclusion zones have been created to give privacy around clinics.

If we believe the Census figure of 0.5% of the population being Trans (which we don’t unless you also believe that (black people are 3 times more likely, and Asians twice as likely, as white people to be Trans and a that third are non English speakers) then how on earth have we got to the point where DU was able to go into the female CR with the support of the NHS?! Surely this is a measure of how much more vitriolic and aggressive this tiny number of folk are? And anti-abortionists arent mild mannered are they?

I’m quite curious about this. Is there dissent in the troops on the ground I wonder?

I know you’ve all moved son but I have been ruminating on a theory.

My theory is that Kate Searle - the senior consultant who aggravated an already screwed up position taken by EDI advisor enacted by Esther Davidson — is so certain of her righteousness that when the judge ruled, in advance of the tribunal, that SP and team could use correct pronouns for Upton she became so incensed that she triggered disciplinary for misgendering and that the letter notifying SP was timed to arrive at close of her testimony where she was guaranteed to be using correct pronouns.

I suspect they considered this an additional complaint so were free to act independently of tribunal. The timing of the letter was, in my theory, designed to cause further upset to SP and also to reassure Upton of Searle’s continued devotion/ support just before his testimony.

Then SP’s solicitor started to plan an additional action in response to this clear act of harassment but didn’t reveal it to the press until end of play of tribunal part one.

Given that SP’s solicitor has stated they are raising a separate action we can, I think, infer that the disciplinary around misgendering is not part of the claims of tribunal and, as I said, my theory is that they think although judge ruled use of correct pronouns ok they are using their internal policy to exploit this public, therefore evidenced, ‘misgendering’ as contrary to policy and which will merit dismissal.

At the point they were deciding to act independently this way they had no way of knowing how badly public opinion would go against then - soo cocooned have they been in compelled speech, chilling effect and enforced compliance.

They thought SP’s Team weren’t going to draw attention to it, and so the double whammy if the solicitor making it known at the end of the shit show of testimony came as a surprise and they’ve quickly agreed to delay. I suspect there will be some who will want it dropped but I think that will be too difficult now a separate action is being raised by the solicitor. I’m not sure if that can therefore be referenced in the tribunal part two but I suspect SPs legal team are not going to be assuaged and will add it to general harassment.
It also makes me wonder that when Upton was included as R2 and not allowed anonymity he might have threatened his own ET

I truly hope there’s no truth in that theory, it sounds pure intentional evil to deliberately cause extreme harm.

Agree with all of this, knowing that at 25 I would have disagreed, reasoning that I was comfortable in all mixed sex spaces - sleeping on the floor after parties, sharing mixed sex accommodation when doing various outdoorsy activities, getting changed on the beach.

I think this was partly an age related sense of invulnerability, but also lack of appreciation that I was making a risk assessed choice (however naive or unwise). This is why I think the 'Staniland question:' 'Do you believe that male-sexed people have the right to undress and shower in a communal changing room with teenage girls?' sometimes goes over people's heads - at 18 I would have thought 'of course', thinking of nice people wearing swimwear.

Well thank Stonewall for that. As usual.

But how would HMRC be able to confirm someone's actual sex if that person has managed to get their birth certificate changed?

The Government's together have created an absolute mess.
Why did they support Stonewall in the first place?
Nobody should ever have been allowed to change the historical record that is their birth certificates.

The GMC even have Dr Upton as female, so you'd expect the hospitals HR records to be the same.

I have asked our ploppers, TRAs and gender identity defenders the question below and I have yet to get an answer from any of them.

Should a teenage girl, who has been bady injured in a car crash and needs intimate care while they recover in hospital (bed baths, help with a bed pan, wiping after using the bed pan, changing sanitary pads/tampons etc) who has requested same-sex care get a female nurse for that intimate care rather than a male who identifies as a woman?

ETA. This is in response to Merrymouse and the post about the Staniland question.

You get an NI number at 16, and HMRC records your sex. This never changes unless a GRC is granted, which prompts HMRC to change their records.

Tone deaf.

Is she aware that Upton has rowed back on some of his claims regarding Peggie?

Is she aware that the evidence available strongly suggests Upton is lying about the alleged patient safety complaints?

Is she aware that evidence given to the tribunal on behalf of NHS Fife clearly shows a complete failure to follow the correct process?

Is she aware that NHS Fife allowing a male without a GRC to use the female changing rooms is a clear breach of the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992?

Does she not think that the female staff who use the changing room deserved the dignity, kindness and respect of being informed that a man would be using the room?

In what way does she think they have treated SP with dignity, kindness and respect?