Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

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 #24

1000 replies

nauticant · 24/03/2025 19:16

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
Thread 21: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5276925-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-21
Thread 22: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5280174-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-22
Thread 23: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5285690-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-23

OP posts:
Thread gallery
39
Chersfrozenface · 17/04/2025 15:37

prh47bridge · 17/04/2025 15:30

That is the employee's problem, not yours. Provided you reasonably believe the employee is male, you can exclude them from female-only spaces. If they want access, they have to prove to you that they are female.

Why wouldn't a driving licence, a passport or a birth certificate with a female marker prove that?

Unless you can legitimately argue that these do not prove biological sex, being open to falsification, even if legal falsification.

Merrymouse · 17/04/2025 15:40

prh47bridge · 17/04/2025 15:30

That is the employee's problem, not yours. Provided you reasonably believe the employee is male, you can exclude them from female-only spaces. If they want access, they have to prove to you that they are female.

So just like any other employee they provide their passport, and then you have to explain why that isn’t sufficient.

What would qualify as reasonable belief, or might that need to be tested in court?

Cailleach1 · 17/04/2025 15:42

So women, or anyone who identified as a woman? I am a woman because of my biology. I don’t ‘identify’ as a woman.

I don’t overlap (as in sex class) with a male who says they identify as a woman. They remain a different sex.

It would be even more disparate than ‘a school class for 6 year olds, and anyone (of any age) who identifies as a 6 year old’. At least the (eg) 67 year olds were 6 once, and hopefully the 6 year olds will become 67.

ShockedandStunnedRepeatedly · 17/04/2025 15:42

This is why the documentation situation could do with being tightened up too. Lots of personal info I don’t like giving out but tough shit, if it’s important you have to and this is important.

Peregrina · 17/04/2025 15:43

Why wouldn't a driving licence, a passport or a birth certificate with a female marker prove that?

Because they are relatively easy to obtain with a marker of the opposite sex. The obvious way to tell would be for the employee concerned to volunteer to give a cheek swab.

And let's not allow an argument about how this is invasive - for the last five years a good number of us have been taking nasal swabs from ourselves because of Covid.

Needspaceforlego · 17/04/2025 15:45

ZeldaFighter · 17/04/2025 14:31

Not a lawyer but in my opinion, NHS Fife never had a leg to stand on. If Dr Upton had a GRC, they might have a case but he doesn't. He's legally and physically a man. Wearing a dress doesn't give him the right to access women's facilities nor does a made-up NHS transgender policy. The 1992 Workplace Regulations apply as does the Equality Act 2010, with its single-sex exemptions.

Now its an even easier slam dunk for Sandie 😀

I honestly hope she had a great day yesterday.

But remember they didn't just screw up in letting him in the ladies, they effectively bullied her too, suspending her without process too. And accused her of misconduct.

Stay strong Sandie

Arran2024 · 17/04/2025 15:51

prh47bridge · 17/04/2025 14:37

That is correct. That is exactly what the Supreme Court decided. If you are a biological male, it doesn't matter whether you have a GRC or have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment in any other way, you are still a biological male and therefore can be excluded from single sex provision for women.

And this is important. There was a case recently involving a girls' football league. A boy wanted to play in it because he didn't want to play with other boys. There was no suggestion he was trans. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13149771/amp/west-riding-girls-football-league-boy-footbal-association.html

Redirect Notice

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13149771/amp/west-riding-girls-football-league-boy-footbal-association.html

prh47bridge · 17/04/2025 15:56

Merrymouse · 17/04/2025 15:40

So just like any other employee they provide their passport, and then you have to explain why that isn’t sufficient.

What would qualify as reasonable belief, or might that need to be tested in court?

It isn't sufficient because a passport no longer records your biological sex.

The reasonableness test is fact specific, so, if the employee objected and took the matter to tribunal, it would be up to the tribunal to decide whether, in this particular case, the belief was reasonable given the facts known to the employer at the time.

KnottyAuty · 17/04/2025 16:15

Merrymouse · 17/04/2025 14:42

But if he did have a GRC, how would they practically go about communicating that they think he is male so should use the women’s toilet’s?

All his ID including tax info will describe him as female.

Sandie said that all the staff knew that Dr Upton was a trans woman in her evidence. They all knew he was male and there had been "chit chat" about it before the Dr started in the A&E department. DrU had also discussed their trans status with managers who sanctioned their decision to use the ladies CR. Before the SC ruling, women couldn't say anything without being accused of harassment so they all stayed quiet apart from Sandie (although others moved out of the CR and changed in cupboards etc). Because of the SC ruling, groups of women will be able to speak up and say what they see. I think there was a section of the ruling saying that manly trans men could be kept out of the changing room if their appearance might cause distress. So in theory all bases are covered legally if people are prepared to speak up

Merrymouse · 17/04/2025 16:17

prh47bridge · 17/04/2025 15:56

It isn't sufficient because a passport no longer records your biological sex.

The reasonableness test is fact specific, so, if the employee objected and took the matter to tribunal, it would be up to the tribunal to decide whether, in this particular case, the belief was reasonable given the facts known to the employer at the time.

I think it’s still much easier for an employer ito assume that the employee is telling the truth and plead ignorance later if somebody like Sandie Peggie raises a concern - unless the tribunal decisions become very financially motivating.

NoBinturongsHereMate · 17/04/2025 16:34

The law doesn't care what the easier option is.

RedToothBrush · 17/04/2025 16:35

Merrymouse · 17/04/2025 16:17

I think it’s still much easier for an employer ito assume that the employee is telling the truth and plead ignorance later if somebody like Sandie Peggie raises a concern - unless the tribunal decisions become very financially motivating.

Staff in the NHS have to have medical indemnity insurance for various reasons through the NHS. This also means if something happens then NHS will ultimately support you against a claim but you have to adhere to your responsibilities under this.

If you lied about your sex, you potentially would be in breech of your insurance terms. This means if something happens then the Trust would be liable for lack of due diligence but the individual would be personally financially exposed too. Legally you would have fraud as a potential charge on the cards too.

Needspaceforlego · 17/04/2025 16:39

RedToothBrush · 17/04/2025 16:35

Staff in the NHS have to have medical indemnity insurance for various reasons through the NHS. This also means if something happens then NHS will ultimately support you against a claim but you have to adhere to your responsibilities under this.

If you lied about your sex, you potentially would be in breech of your insurance terms. This means if something happens then the Trust would be liable for lack of due diligence but the individual would be personally financially exposed too. Legally you would have fraud as a potential charge on the cards too.

Where's that WTF face?

How could insurance cover Dr U if he touched a woman who only wanted single sex carers? 😮
Why would anyone leave themselves open like that?

RedToothBrush · 17/04/2025 16:44

Just think.

All those forms that insist on using gender instead of sex...

...pretty sure they are going to have to get changed pretty darn quickly.

BeLemonNow · 17/04/2025 16:50

Relevant section from Supreme Court judgement (reported very badly in the press/social media)

While many women in a female-only changing room or on a women-only hospital ward or in a rape counselling group might reasonably object to the presence of biological males, it is difficult to see how the reasonableness of such an objection could be founded on possession or lack of a certificate. This is so especially when the distinction does not track physical appearance or presentation, and the woman is unlikely to have any information about the GRC at the point at which her objection might be raised. A trans woman with a GRC who presents fully as a woman may feel she is more likely to prompt objections from other users if she enters the men’s changing room or other facilities than if she uses the women’s changing room or facilities. But in facing that dilemma she is in the same position as a trans woman without a GRC. Although such trans women may in practice choose to use female-only facilities in a way which does not in fact compromise the privacy and dignity of the other women users, the Scottish Ministers do not suggest that a trans woman without a GRC is legally entitled to do so.

It's clear from photos that have been circulating that Dr. Upton was discernibly biologically male at the time and so Dr. Peggies objection was reasonable. He also acknowledged he was frequently "misgendered". In the Darlington nurses case, the individual was sitting in boxers with telltale bulges. In both these cases management could have made a space for an individual trans changing facility.

In other cases though I think it's unnecessary and not practical. I went to ballet classes where there was a womens, men's and some sort of gender neutral changing, split from previously being two. Each room had one private cubicle and an open changing space. Most were biological women who couldn't fit in "our" room! Any trans woman would have been fine in the men's or using the loo. Ballet classes aren't exactly dangerous for non gender conforming people, and if anything this creates resentment against trans folk who as far as am aware never asked for this anyway.

Personally I don't have an issue with fairly female looking trans women probably on hormones using public loos in places like busy shops. As long as they are discrete. But it has to be in a way biological women feel comfortable with and are safe. Disabled loos need to be available as far as possible for disabled people who may have urgency needs / stomas leaking etc. Someone who is trans and their physical appearance is of that sex should be using facilities for that sex.

Sorry for the long post. Hope it is of interest.

MummBRaaarrrTheEverLeaking · 17/04/2025 16:52

Is there any update on whether they've allowed the case to be heard behind closed doors yet? Or whether NHS Fife will fold like a pack of cards? Or anything really?

spannasaurus · 17/04/2025 16:56

MummBRaaarrrTheEverLeaking · 17/04/2025 16:52

Is there any update on whether they've allowed the case to be heard behind closed doors yet? Or whether NHS Fife will fold like a pack of cards? Or anything really?

Judge said it would be several weeks before the decision is made

prh47bridge · 17/04/2025 16:56

MummBRaaarrrTheEverLeaking · 17/04/2025 16:52

Is there any update on whether they've allowed the case to be heard behind closed doors yet? Or whether NHS Fife will fold like a pack of cards? Or anything really?

No. According to Tribunal Tweets, it will be several weeks before we find out the outcome of the applications heard this week (one of which was to remove public access to the video feed, not hear the case behind closed doors - journalists will still be able to watch and the public can attend in person even if this application is successful).

As for whether NHS Fife will settle, we won't know until a settlement is announced.

Needspaceforlego · 17/04/2025 17:03

BeLemonNow · 17/04/2025 16:50

Relevant section from Supreme Court judgement (reported very badly in the press/social media)

While many women in a female-only changing room or on a women-only hospital ward or in a rape counselling group might reasonably object to the presence of biological males, it is difficult to see how the reasonableness of such an objection could be founded on possession or lack of a certificate. This is so especially when the distinction does not track physical appearance or presentation, and the woman is unlikely to have any information about the GRC at the point at which her objection might be raised. A trans woman with a GRC who presents fully as a woman may feel she is more likely to prompt objections from other users if she enters the men’s changing room or other facilities than if she uses the women’s changing room or facilities. But in facing that dilemma she is in the same position as a trans woman without a GRC. Although such trans women may in practice choose to use female-only facilities in a way which does not in fact compromise the privacy and dignity of the other women users, the Scottish Ministers do not suggest that a trans woman without a GRC is legally entitled to do so.

It's clear from photos that have been circulating that Dr. Upton was discernibly biologically male at the time and so Dr. Peggies objection was reasonable. He also acknowledged he was frequently "misgendered". In the Darlington nurses case, the individual was sitting in boxers with telltale bulges. In both these cases management could have made a space for an individual trans changing facility.

In other cases though I think it's unnecessary and not practical. I went to ballet classes where there was a womens, men's and some sort of gender neutral changing, split from previously being two. Each room had one private cubicle and an open changing space. Most were biological women who couldn't fit in "our" room! Any trans woman would have been fine in the men's or using the loo. Ballet classes aren't exactly dangerous for non gender conforming people, and if anything this creates resentment against trans folk who as far as am aware never asked for this anyway.

Personally I don't have an issue with fairly female looking trans women probably on hormones using public loos in places like busy shops. As long as they are discrete. But it has to be in a way biological women feel comfortable with and are safe. Disabled loos need to be available as far as possible for disabled people who may have urgency needs / stomas leaking etc. Someone who is trans and their physical appearance is of that sex should be using facilities for that sex.

Sorry for the long post. Hope it is of interest.

You might be comfortable with discreet trans-women but "discreet" is impossible to define.
And there's plenty evidence they'll be people who'll exploit any loopholes in the law.

Black and white no for room grey, no balls in the ladies.

wheretoyougonow · 17/04/2025 17:03

I hope you don’t mind me asking a question and sorry if it’s been addressed beforehand.

Dr Upton has stated in court that you can biologically change sex. Will their fitness to practice be addressed in court or by their employer as this is very concerning for a medical practitioner?

As a side note- aren’t the nhs concerned that Dr Upton is unable to be questioned without a large amount of support from people whilst on the stand? All politics aside I’ve never known people from other professions who have had to have that much support to speak on the stand. How are they going to cope in a high pressure environment when dealing with a variety of the public!

Conxis · 17/04/2025 17:07

wheretoyougonow · 17/04/2025 17:03

I hope you don’t mind me asking a question and sorry if it’s been addressed beforehand.

Dr Upton has stated in court that you can biologically change sex. Will their fitness to practice be addressed in court or by their employer as this is very concerning for a medical practitioner?

As a side note- aren’t the nhs concerned that Dr Upton is unable to be questioned without a large amount of support from people whilst on the stand? All politics aside I’ve never known people from other professions who have had to have that much support to speak on the stand. How are they going to cope in a high pressure environment when dealing with a variety of the public!

Numerous people have reported him to the GMC. Apparently they won’t do anything during a live legal case!

wheretoyougonow · 17/04/2025 17:08

@Conxis thank you for your reply. Obviously a disappointing result but after the case hopefully they will have some answering to do!

Conxis · 17/04/2025 17:17

Is the issue for NHS Fife is it’s not as easy as just conceding as they joined their defence to Dr uptons? Does Sandie not have a separate harassment claim against him, and he has accused her of patient safety issues? So presumably Dr Upton would also have to agree he did wrong? Where does that leave him as a Dr with a successful harassment claim against him and possibly false allegations?

TriesNotToBeCynical · 17/04/2025 17:21

Conxis · 17/04/2025 17:17

Is the issue for NHS Fife is it’s not as easy as just conceding as they joined their defence to Dr uptons? Does Sandie not have a separate harassment claim against him, and he has accused her of patient safety issues? So presumably Dr Upton would also have to agree he did wrong? Where does that leave him as a Dr with a successful harassment claim against him and possibly false allegations?

The harassment claim is equally against Fife, both because of vicarious liability and the way they followed it up.

Please create an account

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

This thread is not accepting new messages.