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

[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 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

Yep agreed

And where does this leave Jamie Doyle, head of nursing? Under enhanced DBS there is a requirement to notify your employer of any person you live with or have a relationship that has any criminal conviction. How could he maintain his position in this instance?

What is the source of the claim that this is his partner? Not doubting it, just want to be scrupulous.

How is it known that they are definitely partners or even ex partners?

Easy, Dr Upton. By miles!

For everything that he's already done, but particularly for his stated intent which boils down to an admission that he would sexually assault female patients.

I have a lot of judgemental thoughts to one degree or another of the women complicit in this, but I will always reserve my worst judgements for the men.

We know the varied reasons why women like these are centring the men in this ideology. We also know that one of the reasons is that we live in a patriarchal society in which men hold the majority of power.

So yeah, no one comes out of this well, but Dr Upton comes out of this worst.

Since it was in the news, and happened in 2019, Jaime Doyle wouldn’t have been able to hide it (if indeed he was/is MacPhail’s partner) so presumably he did disclose. Maybe they split because of the conviction? It’s unclear if they’re still together; a few on X are saying yes, others are saying no.

What’s quite horrifying if that MacPhail was only put on the sex offenders register for 3 years and so will be off now (and have been for 3 years).

I wonder if MacPhail also was a nurse at The Vic …

Sorry - I don't know, as I said in my original post, just reported on X.

And where does this leave Jamie Doyle, head of nursing? Under enhanced DBS there is a requirement to notify your employer of any person you live with or have a relationship that has any criminal conviction. How could he maintain his position in this instance?

Interesting as reports say they have been together for 7 years, the newspaper article was dated 2019, there's another one from 2020 saying that he tried to get readmitted to the nursing register citing the covid pandemic, (that he would be needed or some such rubbish). Anyway it would seem his conviction would have occurred after they had got together.

I'm not sure that living with someone with a criminal conviction means one would be barred from nursing, either by the employer or the NMC. I can't remember who but I do have a vague memory of someone else whose wife was able to carry on with her work despite the unsavoury activities of the husband. I think the discussion was along the lines of the wife isn't responsible for husband's behaviour, and why should she be punished.

Post doesn't say current partner. He could have split after finding out.

@FannyCann are you thinking of India Knight, her husband Eric Joyce’s conviction, and her role as a columnist for The Times?

Around 450 of the images were at the highest levels of depravity. It says in ‘The Courier’ that Ian MacPhail possessed, made and distributed the indecent images.

Still only got 180 hours unpaid work, three years of supervision and put on sex offenders register.

What these creeps get away with so lightly. He shared with 11 separate Yahoo account holders.

Edit: changed MadPhail to MacPhail.

The author of the thread on X has said that they have heard different versions of events in their DMs. Not sure why they posted before they were clear. Definitely best left well alone here until/unless there is clear evidence.

It said MacPhail had been working at NHS Tayside Renal Service.

Why would I report my own post

Because it was abusive and after letting it be seen for a moment, possibly to cause distress, it was necessary to hide the evidence of that abuse.

And because regulars on FWR don't tend to report those sort of posts, we like everyone to see them in their full glory.

FWIW trans rights are human rights

What does that even mean? You may as well say human rights are human rights.

Trans people have the same rights as everyone else.

What they don't have is the right to appropriate women's rights.

What rights (as in actual lawful rights) do you think have been taken away from trans identifying people?

Women's rights are just as important as everyone else's rights. Men's rights are not more important than Women's rights. Trans women are in fact men, always have been and always will be, in both reality and law.

Women's rights matter. Single sex spaces are lawful and matter. Trans identifying males do not belong in them, and are breaking the law by entering them.

And I'll repeat myself for good measure.

Women's rights are not only for the "good" women, they are for all women.

I think that is correct, except that the laugh emoji is open to other interpretations and it doesn't look great that the only response to the jokes was an emoji. If LN had told SP that her message was awful, or asked her not to send messages like that, LN would be in a somewhat better position.

Avoids prison? These men are responsible for abuse of the children, they drive the rapes and assaults by buying the pictures. They belong in jail for a long time!

No, this isn't sense.

When NC appears in court as a barrister she is independent of SM. She's arguing her client's case, not SM's case, whether or not SM is an interested party or not.

Someone else would have to appear for SM, but that's not a problem.

It wasn’t abusive at all. It was angry…and it got reported, and I get why the moderators removed it given the majority view on this thread…but I’ve simmered since then. People on this thread were surprised it was removed because it wasn’t abusive. But I apologise if you felt it was.

I get why the moderators removed it given the majority view on this thread

Nice dig at implying that unpopular views are removed here. We see what you did. Very classy.

NC would be representing SP not SM so in order for SM to have a voice in court they would need someone else to represent them. That wouldn’t cause an issue.

This comes awfully close to implying that SP has been unprofessional in her conduct in the workplace. No evidence of that, apart from gossip, was presented at the tribunal. Given how low counsel for NHS Fife and Dr Upton stooped in trying to discredit SP, I doubt if any compelling evidence exists.

@BouncyCastleNHSSquirrels
also at no point have I said women’s rights are only for good women. Not sure where you’ve got that from. I do, and will always consider trans women as women. So that’s always going to be a point of contention with this group.

Well you were on about fighting in court for women, (very admirable) and I wondered how you knew they were women and not transwomen.

I agree. NC would have to be careful to ensure that there was no conflict of interest, and the trustees of SM would need to consider any conflict and mitigate any risks, but there is nothing to prevent SM being an intervenor.

What about the bearded ones with cocks?

I’m honestly at a loss here. I’m trying my best to be understanding but short of saying “yes! I reported my own post”… I don’t know how I can honestly respond. My post was angry, you must know that there are opposing views to your own? And that some of those opposing views will be based on personal lived trauma. I conceded that I can see why my post was contentious to the majority view here and therefore why it was removed.