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

This has very probably been shared already but for anyone who hasn't seen it -

https://kpssinfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/DBS-Checks-and-Identity-Verification.pdf

Well, yes, you might think so wouldn't you? Especially where heterosexual encounters are concerned there's a lot of emphasis on consent. Yet with trans issues there is often a curious inversion - it's the people who don't want to consent who are seen as the problem. I can't comment on my colleague's views because I haven't explored them with her in detail, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were similar to those of Sally Hines, and she's expressed herself very freely all over the internet so it's easy to see how this kind of mindset works. I'm increasingly coming to the view that thinking isn't abount marshalling evidence or constructing a rigorous argument - far from it. Thinking is about affiliating oneself withthe 'right' kind of people (or in the current phrase these days 'the right side of history'). I don't have any evidence for this, but try entertaining it as a working hypothesis, gentle reader; it explains a lot!

Charging anyone with perjury is rare. In theory every defendant who takes the stand claiming their innocence & who is then convicted by definition must have committed perjury.

Charging anyone with perjury is rare. In theory every defendant who takes the stand claiming their innocence & who is then convicted by definition must have committed perjury.

Not necessarily - some people have declared their innocence and wrongful convictions have subsequently been overturned.

But Upton swearing he was a woman, doesn't appear to be one who fits into that category.

I've done jury service a few times. In one case the defendant produced a faked-up email, and after we had given our verdict the judge asked the police/prosecution service to look into further charges relating to this. I don't know what the exact charges would have been.

More from the Telegraph, don’t think this has been previously posted (with archive link)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/02/21/nhs-hospitals-hiring-trans-doctors-disciplinary-records/

https://archive.is/0vYeN

I think faking or disposing of evidence is actually perverting the course of justice.

A spokesman for the GMC subsequently told The Telegraph: “We haven’t faced the situation you describe, as no fitness to practise history has been removed or suppressed. In such a scenario we would need to consider carefully how best to present such information, balancing a number of factors and being mindful of the Gender Recognition Act.”

There we go. Now the whole world can see that a gender recognition certificate is used as a license to hide your past 'misdemeanours', right up to fitness to practice!!

And

I bet none of the 62 doctors even have one

😎 😎😎😎

Wtaf?!?! What exactly would there be to consider here?!??

I think that it's usually where the evidence given is to the detriment of a 3rd party that charging someone with perjury becomes a possibility e.g. giving false evidence in an attempt to get someone convicted.

BTW I'm impressed that you have done jury service a few times. I am now 71 & have only been called once in 2020 but that of course was during the pandemic so my attendance was later cancelled & I never got asked again.

Faking or tampering with evidence is most likely to come under perverting the course of justice. Funnily enough I've also done jury service where the defendant faked evidence, in this case, an entry in the office incident book. The trial was halted while this was investigated. A few months later he was charged and convicted of perverting the course of justice. The courts take this very seriously and he got a hefty custodial sentence, longer than he would have received if he'd been convicted of the original crime of assault which was dropped.

A spokesman for the GMC subsequently told The Telegraph: “We haven’t faced the situation you describe, as no fitness to practise history has been removed or suppressed. In such a scenario we would need to consider carefully how best to present such information, balancing a number of factors and being mindful of the Gender Recognition Act.”

Yet, they had absolutely no problem in carrying forward the information about where and when Theodore Upton gained his medical qualification.
Strange that.

I've actually been called up a couple of times, but made it through a few trials. One of them collapsed when the two prosecution witnesses came up with wildly differing stories, and the judge told us we were finding the defendant not guilty. I don't think there were any calls for action against the accusers.
I'm in England so there will be differences to how things happen in Scottish courts.

And arms-length bodies. I needed to look up NICE’s updated menopause guidelines. The state of them! I advise against a drinking game for which “Drink” is the number of times the word “people “ or “person” is used rather than women (outside a legacy link to a document with it in the title).

This guideline covers identifying and managing menopause, including in people with premature ovarian insufficiency. It aims to improve the consistency of support and information provided to people experiencing menopause.

https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng23

I thought universities were fairly hot on consent education these days?

Only if it's the right sort of consent, for the right sort of people, it would seem.

And in Terms of transwomen forming a corridor to clap Beth back into court, the optics of a bunch of men back slapping another man's determination to access undressing women, will not make quite the point they think it will.

Never fear, they'll have a gaggle of complacent and unimaginative young women with them.

If it's not "transwomen only" (and to quote one of their oft-used tropes, how could they tell?) it'll just be the usual crowd of "allies". Most of whom will look and sound ridiculous or demented.

That would be perjury or perverting the course of justice if the authorities chose to pursue it.

There are around 100 perjury convictions a year in England & Wales. The courts hear over 3.5 million cases a year, so that gives some idea of the rarity of perjury prosecutions.

We might think that, but we're boring old terfs so who cares?

I do hope they manage to arrange this.

I wanted to double check my memory regarding the EHRC points and the case-by-case checks. Looking back at the TT it’s clear that no one was doing any checking. Everything is mentioned in terms of blanket policy - very little thought was given to this, everything was face value and TWs’ rights were to prevail over everyone else’s by default:

13/2/25 am1:
ED - Sandie said that Beth was using the female CR I hadn't thought about the CR, I had seen Beth a fair amount in a prev role in psychiatry but I hadn't thought about it. SP told me that she was uncomfortable. I didn't know what the Trust's policy was and I would follow up.

Later in the same session…

JR - what did you say to IB
ED - I explained that there was a TW dr in ED, what was the trust policy on tw in women's CR.
JR - what did IB tell you
ED - that Beth was a TW and had the right to use the women's CR, then I went and looked at the Blink system

…

JR - what else did you do
ED - I spoke to the deputy head consultant, Maggie Currer (sp) she had been advised that Beth was within rights to use female CR

…

JR - was there any official communication from Fife about the policy for trans people
ED - no there wasn't
JR - why was there nothing from Fife management
ED - I don't know, it would have been nice if MC had had that communication that we would have been told about it.

…

Sorry if this has been asked before but where can I find a list of witnesses please?

I do hope they manage to arrange this.

Judging by the way things are going, aligning yourself to Upton or Fife is beginning to look more and more toxic.

Not that TRAs will get that, of course. Which is always quite useful

Back in the day when homosexual men were the oppressed minority the women who liked to hang out with them were known unflatteringly as "fag hags".

What is the July date again? I think school holidays in Scotland will have started, what about the English ones?