NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #42

[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 resumed 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] by 5pm on Wednesday 9 July. Detailed instructions were provided here:

drive.google.com/file/d/16-9POEZ7yHWUr6EmbfquJZO18Gv78bSm/view

The hearing is being live tweeted by x.com/tribunaltweets and there's additional information here: tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-fife-health-board-and-dr-005 and tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-fife-health-board-and-dr-bd6. 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.ph/WSSjg.

An alternative to Twitter is to use Nitter: nitter.net/tribunaltweets or nitter.poast.org/tribunaltweets

Links to previous threads #1 to #40 can be found in this thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379717-sandie-peggie-list-of-threads-covering-employment-tribunal-and-afterwards

Thread 41: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379334-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-41 24 July 2025 to 25 July 2025

It was the first thing I thought of. 😂

Interesting. Do you think other trusts watching will be silently concluding that employing trans people may be expensive?

I met up with my partner's niece who's in high-level recruitment a few weeks ago and she indicated that she'd had discreet conversations with people from a couple of big multinational names in which she was asked to remove any candidates who had a history of championing gender or were themselves trans.

For your perusal... Rather than 'struck off' it says 'erasure'. Warning you now, some of the reasons for erasure from the register are not for the faint-hearted!

https://www.mpts-uk.org/hearings-and-decisions/tribunal-hearings-and-decisions

It's actually helpful. You can lawfully discriminate against me because I think the earth is round, even though it's true. You can't lawfully discriminate against me because I think people can't change sex because it's a protected belief.

Yes. I know I am partisan, but I'm not impressed by the Judge's handling of this case. I appreciate he must try to ensure a fair hearing, but to suggest curtailing X-examination of this witness at JK's suggestion when he has indulged her with the pronoun business (on which he had already made a ruling) throughout seems unbalanced.

Dug out section of Dr. Upton's initial testimony from TT r.e. this "missing patient"

DU - I asked Rhianna if she could find her. Then I wrote up my notes and Rhianna left to find C.
JR - then?
DU - R returned with C. I said hello. Got no acknowledgement of my hello from C.
JR - what did you say and to who.
DU - I said hi and waved to C. She answered Rhianna, didn't look at me but said no concerns.
JR - where was C looking?
DU - at R.
JR - how far were you?
DU - half a metre. I said thank you and there was no acknowledgement.
JR - then?
DU - she left the area
JR - ref doc, is this summary fair?
DU - yes
JR - when did you write it
DU - eve of 19th I should think
JR - refs other notes DU made
DU - I try to write them as soon as possile to reflect feelings of the time
JR - why did you make notes about interactions
DU - I wanted a record of the incidents, it was odd and I was concious that those who are against the existence of trans people and I am vulnerable as a trans person to that. I wanted to be able to say this is what happened, this is what's gone on so that there would be
DU - accurate understanding.
JR - when a nurse doesn't interact with a dr, say in resus, what does that mean for a hospital.
DU - need to communicate and respect eachother you don't have to like eachother. A+E is a team game. You have to be able to trust the team as things can

Still catching up so apologies if already answered.

The GMC would usually consider tampering with notes/documents or falsifying records very seriously and it would call the doctor’s fitness to practice into question. As medical students quite some years ago we were told if we signed a mate in for a lecture that they hadn’t actually gone to then that would be considered FTP issue. Essentially, if we’d sign a mate in for a lecture falsely why wouldn’t we also tamper with medical records or falsify other information?

Then there’s the old medical adage “If it isn’t documented it didn’t happen.” I.e if you don’t record everything accurately then you have no defence if you are accused of malpractice- you can’t prove you asked the patient about a symptom if you didn’t write it down. Contemporaneous notes are our gold standard in terms of documenting our practice.

I've got to turn it in for the day, thanks everybody, I'll keep lurking when I can.

I snorted at the wheel spin one. Couple of threads back now, I think!

Scots often use the word bathroom when talking about toilets. We had this discussion on a previous thread recently.

Given that MC has said Sandie held GC views as she said she heard her say it's not possible to change sex.

I'd like Naomi to mask her 'do you think it's possible for a human to change sex'?

If yes, then she's outed as being bonkers or a liar.

If no, then she's GC as well.

Please go there Naomi.

JR U have received this at Xmas 23? Incident re PC of Nurse A and Dr B. Did u know who these ppl were when u received the Datix?
MC [long pause]
JR It's dated 29 Dec
MC Um. Yes, I think I was at that point
JR [new doc] Email from KS to ED consultants
MC Yes I am one of the ED consultants
JR Do u want to refresh your memory and read this to yourself. WHat did u make of this?
MC I was v disappointed that any staff member had had this experience in the dep

Disappointed that SP had had this experience? of course not, although MC already knew that at least one nurse objected to man using women's CR, so it could just as easily have been about SP. Theoretically.

I hope CE or NC ask her about that.

”Is sex the same as gender?”
”Is it possible to change sex?”
”So you share the foundation of SP’s view”

MC Whenever a medical staff member is struggling w an experience we'll share it w the team. We work shifts so is highly varied which juniors we work with. We need to be aware if any jr is struggling to ensure it doesnt impact their ability to work and check they're ok

He's already made up his mind. The more procedurally unfair against NC he is at this point, the better an omen it is.

Wow, that's quite a dangerous approach if they get found out (not that I don't understand where they're coming from but still - risky).

She’s only disappointed for the doctor, not for the nurse with an unblemished 30 year record.

JR Why did u talk about a formal Gx process?
MC Obvs v diff dor Beth and the staff member. Was perceived as B&H. Is a process for this and I suggested HR wld be most approp as not sure of the details of process. DU agreed

'Hate crime'

Honestly! Can they hear themselves?

Anyone else thinking of Omar on the stand in The Wire?
"I got the shotgun, you got the briefcase"

I think you are right to be hesitant. While there’s a lot to suggest possible concerns over DU’s evidence/claims/statements etc. it’s unlikely at this point to be a ‘slam dunk’ strike off offence. The evidence earlier - if the forensic expert had stated unequivocally that DU deliberately altered the documents/notes meta data to give false information, I’d say that’s a strong indication he’s not been honest as required by his regulator. But he stopped short of saying DU amended anything. He’s got documents he’s reviewed but can’t pin point any ID stamp as he wasn’t given the originals, or the phone to examine. He can’t say unequivocally DU did X. So it’s throws up some doubt, but it would be for the tribunal to determine what that evidence proves, separate from what it might infer but lack solid proof of. A regulator would be needed to determine to what extent it can be proven whether DU has been less than fully honest with his employer/the investigation/ the courts etc.

Bottom line is, it’s not looking great for DU, but the judgement will give us a steer if the tribunal felt the case presented by SP’s team convinces them DU has been dishonest at any point in his dealings with SP/his employer/the investigation/the courts etc.

Many thanks to @BezMills for the Fifer commentary. She’s had to stop for the day, but please know it’s been very entertaining and much appreciated xx

For those asking relevance this morning I figured

a) cast doubts on value / honesty of Dr. Uptons testimony, strong evidence notes have been doctored (!)

b) evidence of detriment to Sandie based on harassment/complaining about harassment. I.e. after Sandie had complained about Dr Upton being in the changing room other "issues" materialised.

As someone else pointed out, if Dr. Upton had clearly said they recalled this missing child incident that was odd and wanted it investigated that would be different.

Judging from her accent MC is English. With a slight estuary twang.

I do hope so.