Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #48

1000 replies

nauticant · 29/07/2025 17:54

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 was 29 July 2025. It will resume again on 1 to 2 September for closing submissions.

The hearing commenced with Sandie Peggie giving evidence. Dr Beth Upton gave evidence from Thursday 6 February to Wednesday 12 February 2025. Sandie Peggie returned to give evidence on 29 July 2025.

Access to view the second part of 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: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379717-sandie-peggie-list-of-threads-covering-employment-tribunal-and-afterwards

Thread 41: 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
Thread 42: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379820-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-42 25 July 2025 to 25 July 2025
Thread 43: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379979-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-43 25 July 2025 to 27 July 2025
Thread 44: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5380196-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-44 25 July 2025 to 28 July 2025
Thread 45: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5381518-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-45 28 July 2025 to 28 July 2025
Thread 46: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5381640-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-46 28 July 2025 to 29 July 2025
Thread 47: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5382102-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-47 29 July 2025 to 29 July 2025

OP posts:
Thread gallery
30
LadyBracknellsHandbagg · 30/07/2025 15:59

ThatCyanCat · 30/07/2025 15:04

How can anyone who is concerned about domestic violence not be concerned that men can get into women's refuges by claiming to be women? Or to force their victims to call them she/her if the case goes to court? Or to have the domestic violence stats skewed by male crimes being recorded as female ones, all on the say so of the men themselves?

Or if they're concerned about equality in the workplace, how can they not be worried that women who can't tolerate a mixed changing space won't have equal access to opportunities? Or that the stats for who's employed at the top and bottom levels will be skewed by men being recorded as women? How do we gauge the success of workplace equality for women when anyone can say he's a woman and be recorded as one?

It's nonsensical. How can you claim to care about these issues without thinking that it matters who the women are?

This is excellent. JR introduced that WhatsApp group for exactly this reason, to divide SP’s supporters and by the look of some of these comments she’s done a great job. It never ceases to amaze me how women can sometimes be their own worst enemy, and even worse, turn on other women at the behest of trans identifying men.

All this, ‘horrible racists like SP shouldn’t be working in the NHS’ has got them so fired up that they’ve completely forgotten that the female doctors who were questioned couldn’t even confirm their own sex, and apparently aren’t experts in sexing babies. And that Upton stated under oath that he would disregard a woman’s request for female only care, to satisfy his own delusional ideas of himself, and that he considered reporting a dementia patient for the heinous crime of misgendering him, as in telling the truth. I would be far more worried about being treated by any one of those people than by SP. But you know, SP said some abhorrent things on a private group chat, which everyone else in the group agreed with, so let’s burn the witch.

GargoylesofBeelzebub · 30/07/2025 16:03

SqueakyDinosaur · 30/07/2025 14:54

I think that the podium for "comes out worst" is shared by DU, Kate Searle and Lindsey Nicoll, but I don't know who I'd award which medal to.

Easy. The man wins.

LadyBracknellsHandbagg · 30/07/2025 16:04

BettyBooper · 30/07/2025 15:55

Framing this as if allowing trans women into changing rooms undermines other women’s boundaries doesn’t reflect the reality I see: trans women are far more likely to be harassed or assaulted than to harm others.

@Tangfastic71 But how would you see otherwise if MSM continue to report trans identifying male crimes as women's crimes?

Have you researched into it? Had a look at Reduxx for example?

I don't think anyone here is implying all TIMs are offenders. But there is absolutely zero evidence that , as a group, they pose less risk than other men.

There is actually verifiable evidence that they pose more of a risk as they commit sexual offences at a higher rate than other men.

GargoylesofBeelzebub · 30/07/2025 16:05

Astonishing that someone who claims to be concerned about domestic violence wants to give men open access to spaces for women's safety.

Look what is happening in Spain. Join the dots.

www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/24/spanish-men-self-id-gender-law-access-female-care-service/

WearyAuldWumman · 30/07/2025 16:07

LadyBracknellsHandbagg · 30/07/2025 16:04

There is actually verifiable evidence that they pose more of a risk as they commit sexual offences at a higher rate than other men.

Show quote history

Plus, as I've said previously, SP would - as a Fifer - be very aware of the high profile cases from our part of Fife: Peter Laing/Paris Green; Lennon/Katie Dolatowski; Andrew Burns/Obi Wan Kenobi/Mr Mighty Almighty/Mitzababy/Tiffany Scott. All three were violent offenders.

LadyBracknellsHandbagg · 30/07/2025 16:07

GargoylesofBeelzebub · 30/07/2025 16:05

Astonishing that someone who claims to be concerned about domestic violence wants to give men open access to spaces for women's safety.

Look what is happening in Spain. Join the dots.

www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/24/spanish-men-self-id-gender-law-access-female-care-service/

I am all astonishment.

MyAmpleSheep · 30/07/2025 16:09

WandaSiri · 30/07/2025 14:00

I apologise in advance for posting this without having read several pages of this thread but I heard an interesting explanation about JR's legal argument on Michael Foran's Substack.

People in the chat were asking why the judge had allowed all the evidence and hearsay about racism and homophobia to be aired since it was irrelevant to Sandie's claim. MF said that this was because JR was arguing that there was no detriment to SP in Upton using the changing room. (You have to prove a detriment as well as the less favourable treatment.) In support of this she will argue in submissions that the SC judgement does not apply to changing rooms or toilets and only to gender-balancing of public boards in Scotland, so it is still at least an open question as to whether Upton counted as a woman or not. JR says he is, so if Sandie Peggie, a general bigot and transphobe according to JR, took offence at and was outraged by Upton's presence in the changing room, it was due to her bigoted views, and therefore her objections are not reasonable. Other women wouldn't have minded - this is another point she kept trying to hammer, that only Sandie minded.

So that was MF's explanation which I am sure is a correct summation of what JR's arguments will be when she puts forward her submissions. However...I still cannot understand why JR was allowed this latitude, given this is such a pathetically weak line of argument. It may be correct in a technical sense that FWS was originally about nominations to boards, but the judgement itself clearly said that in the EA2010, under which Sandie brought this action, sex was biological and Upton is a man.

I think your analysis is a bit off. Two of the claims are harassment and discrimination. Discrimination is to treat less favourably, that less favourable treatment being the detriment. Harassment is to create a hostile environment or violating someone’s dignity: in finding that, the tribunal has to take into account if it was reasonable for the complained-of conduct to have had that effect. SP’s prior attitude to trans people wouldn’t affect the discrimination claim but the tribunal will be invited to decide that given her attitude it wasn’t reasonable that allowing DU to use the CR created a hostile environment for her, because she would have found the environment hostile regardless due to her attitude.

NebulousPhoneNotes · 30/07/2025 16:10

"I’ve never met a woman, trans or otherwise who has had a negative experience with trans women"

A few thoughts on this @Tangfastic71 :

-A lot of that will be down to self-protection though and actively avoiding a negative experience. Many women don't often confront or retort back to men, regardless of if they're self-IDing or not, because we get a sense they will turn aggressive, or at least belligerent. And aside from that being uncomfortable and potentially threatening our safety, frankly we sometimes can't be bothered to waste the energy or have to focus on something else in that moment.

-Many women I know have had a negative experience with 'transwomen'. Including my daughter. The trans-IDing teenage boy who wanted to change in the female changing room at school really didn't like it when she and a few others stood up to him and said they wouldn't feel comfortable if he was allowed in there. He became verbally aggressive. (And got chastised later by the Principal.)

Many male-bodied people don't like being told no or that they're wrong. Sadly, them calling themselves a female name and telling everyone they're women strangely doesn't seem to change that characteristic ...

lcakethereforeIam · 30/07/2025 16:12

Should really take a look at the transwidows threads. Perhaps refrain from posting there though.

Tangfastic71 · 30/07/2025 16:14

LittleBitofBread · 30/07/2025 15:57

Thanks for replying.

I think it’s a bit disingenuous to suggest that not prioritising the changing room issue means I don’t care about women’s safety or dignity. We clearly see this differently - you don’t see trans women as women, but I do.
The law sees trans women as people who need to use facilities for their biological sex: the male sex. Can you answer to that, with women's safety and dignity (and privacy) in mind?

Framing this as if allowing trans women into changing rooms undermines other women’s boundaries doesn’t reflect the reality I see: trans women are far more likely to be harassed or assaulted than to harm others. Putting aside how true it is that trans women are more likely to be harassed or assaulted themselves than to harass or assault, I have to refer back to/repeat my first point: the law sees trans women as people who need to use facilities for their biological sex: the male sex. So a trans woman in a female facility IS undermining other women's boundaries.

I just don’t believe rolling back trans women’s rights makes anyone safer Which rights have been rolled back?

I’ve never met a woman, trans or otherwise who has had a negative experience with trans women. Is your position that this means such women don't exist? Or that, because this is your lived experience, this is how it should be/is safe and appropriate to be, in law, for everyone? I will say the names Katie Dolatowski and Isla Bryson here.

Lastly, I did misunderstand your final point, so mea culpa on that. We are on the same page there: I cannot and do not condone racist or homophobic jokes or comments, but I defend to the hilt SP's or any other woman's right to single-sex spaces under law.

Show quote history

We come from such opposite sides of the argument that this is now pointless. On the matter of the law….the law used to say that men could rape their wives. That doesn’t mean that all men thought they could and should.

MyAmpleSheep · 30/07/2025 16:16

I also expect JR to say that SP doesn’t come with clean hands: she lied about the menstrual flood in order to fabricate a confrontation with DU, motivated by her clear animus against him individually and trans people in general. It would therefore be inequitable to allow her to profit from the situation that she engineered, and that any consequences flowing from it at her own fault. That the tribunal doesn’t need to decide what the law says about changing room uses, because it’s a moot point.

LittleBitofBread · 30/07/2025 16:16

Tangfastic71 · 30/07/2025 16:14

We come from such opposite sides of the argument that this is now pointless. On the matter of the law….the law used to say that men could rape their wives. That doesn’t mean that all men thought they could and should.

Show quote history

EDITED as have had a further thought.

Well, that's a great pity; I would have very much liked to hear your responses.

Are you able to answer at least the question about which rights have been rolled back? The issue of marital rape having once been legal has no bearing on this point, so you should (I would think) feel able to answer in good faith.

Londonmummy66 · 30/07/2025 16:16

prh47bridge · 30/07/2025 15:12

Don't know if this has been posted on here already. This is from LGB Alliance:

“We want homophobia to be taken seriously. We are appalled to see accusations of homophobia weaponised, without any evidence, against a nurse who simply asserted her right to a single-sex changing room at work.”

Also, having read some of the coverage in more detail, I was appalled to see this question from JR:

"I find it suspicious that you, a working class woman, managed to find the money to defend yourself in court, because this is usually something only the wealthy can afford. I wouldn’t ask a rich person where they got their money, of course. That would be terribly rude."

Couldn't be more clear that this is about class, at least as far as JR is concerned.

Can you link to that coverage - I only followed the TT thread which was obviously less explicit?

MyAmpleSheep · 30/07/2025 16:19

Tangfastic71 · 30/07/2025 16:14

We come from such opposite sides of the argument that this is now pointless. On the matter of the law….the law used to say that men could rape their wives. That doesn’t mean that all men thought they could and should.

Show quote history

If you think the law should be different, campaign to change it. What is occurring at the moment is a rearguard action by women to revert a subversive change in society’s interpretation of equality law which quite rightly the SC saw right through and put down.

LadyBracknellsHandbagg · 30/07/2025 16:19

NebulousPhoneNotes · 30/07/2025 16:10

"I’ve never met a woman, trans or otherwise who has had a negative experience with trans women"

A few thoughts on this @Tangfastic71 :

-A lot of that will be down to self-protection though and actively avoiding a negative experience. Many women don't often confront or retort back to men, regardless of if they're self-IDing or not, because we get a sense they will turn aggressive, or at least belligerent. And aside from that being uncomfortable and potentially threatening our safety, frankly we sometimes can't be bothered to waste the energy or have to focus on something else in that moment.

-Many women I know have had a negative experience with 'transwomen'. Including my daughter. The trans-IDing teenage boy who wanted to change in the female changing room at school really didn't like it when she and a few others stood up to him and said they wouldn't feel comfortable if he was allowed in there. He became verbally aggressive. (And got chastised later by the Principal.)

Many male-bodied people don't like being told no or that they're wrong. Sadly, them calling themselves a female name and telling everyone they're women strangely doesn't seem to change that characteristic ...

Saying ‘it’s never happened to me, or anyone I know, therefore it hasn’t happened to anyone’ is an argument that’s put forward as a bit of a gotcha, when it actually isn’t. I’m assuming the women who were raped by Adam Graham/Isla Bryson, and the child that was sexually assaulted by Lennon/Katie Dolatowski in a Morrisons toilet would have a very different view on how dangerous some trans identifying men can be.

UpDo · 30/07/2025 16:21

I’ve never met a woman, trans or otherwise who has had a negative experience with trans women

How could anyone possibly know this? You can't possibly be sufficiently familiar with every woman of your acquaintance to make such a claim. Even women you know quite well might not have had occasion to tell you.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 30/07/2025 16:22

Tangfastic71 · 30/07/2025 16:14

We come from such opposite sides of the argument that this is now pointless. On the matter of the law….the law used to say that men could rape their wives. That doesn’t mean that all men thought they could and should.

Show quote history

Yes, we do come from different sides of the argument, because you don’t get to consent for me that I should have to change in front of men. As you were clear about earlier, when you yourself said that was “unacceptable”, didn’t you?

MyAmpleSheep · 30/07/2025 16:22

UpDo · 30/07/2025 16:21

I’ve never met a woman, trans or otherwise who has had a negative experience with trans women

How could anyone possibly know this? You can't possibly be sufficiently familiar with every woman of your acquaintance to make such a claim. Even women you know quite well might not have had occasion to tell you.

Indeed. Isn’t that a bit like a man (or woman) saying “well no woman I know has been sexually assaulted… I don’t think there’s an issue with sexual violence”.

UpDo · 30/07/2025 16:24

MyAmpleSheep · 30/07/2025 16:22

Indeed. Isn’t that a bit like a man (or woman) saying “well no woman I know has been sexually assaulted… I don’t think there’s an issue with sexual violence”.

Show quote history

Yep.

And of course, in both instances it would be worth critically examining just why the person was so keen to make a claim whose veracity they couldn't know.

prh47bridge · 30/07/2025 16:25

Londonmummy66 · 30/07/2025 16:16

Can you link to that coverage - I only followed the TT thread which was obviously less explicit?

Show quote history

The coverage I referred to derives from JKR who has mockingly rephrased JR's question. Having checked, JR clearly didn't say that, although that is obviously the subtext. There is no way she would have asked a middle- or upper-class claimant who was funding them.

NebulousPhoneNotes · 30/07/2025 16:26

LadyBracknellsHandbagg · 30/07/2025 16:19

Saying ‘it’s never happened to me, or anyone I know, therefore it hasn’t happened to anyone’ is an argument that’s put forward as a bit of a gotcha, when it actually isn’t. I’m assuming the women who were raped by Adam Graham/Isla Bryson, and the child that was sexually assaulted by Lennon/Katie Dolatowski in a Morrisons toilet would have a very different view on how dangerous some trans identifying men can be.

Edited
Show quote history

I completely agree. Others had deftly dealt with that point already by the time I posted, so I was coming at it from different angles. A negative experience doesn't mean rape, verbal aggression is a negative experience, and many of us here or those we know will have had that level of interaction with a trans-IDing man from standing up for SSS.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 30/07/2025 16:28

Some people appear to have their empathy chip missing when it comes to women rather than this particular cohort of men. Sad times.

murasaki · 30/07/2025 16:29

I've said it before, but when I went into the work toilets and did a double take at a man dressed in female clothing in there, I left, but was too worried to go back directly to my nearby office as it had my name on the door and I was worried I'd be followed and reported to HR. So I went down 5 flights of stairs and spent 10 minutes outside collecting myself before returning. Ok, not violent, but definitely unpleasant and I genuinely feared repercussions.

WandaSiri · 30/07/2025 16:30

MyAmpleSheep · 30/07/2025 16:09

I think your analysis is a bit off. Two of the claims are harassment and discrimination. Discrimination is to treat less favourably, that less favourable treatment being the detriment. Harassment is to create a hostile environment or violating someone’s dignity: in finding that, the tribunal has to take into account if it was reasonable for the complained-of conduct to have had that effect. SP’s prior attitude to trans people wouldn’t affect the discrimination claim but the tribunal will be invited to decide that given her attitude it wasn’t reasonable that allowing DU to use the CR created a hostile environment for her, because she would have found the environment hostile regardless due to her attitude.

Show quote history

IANAL, so I will take your word for it - my apologies to Michael Foran if I have misdescribed his explanation, as well.
However, do JR's arguments not still stumble over the fact that Dr Upton is actually a man and the changing room is for women only?

Please create an account

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

Join Mumsnet Log In
This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread