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

Can I just say that suppport animals are highly trained sensitive beings who are offered support from their handlers to be safe and well. I very much agree that a majority of TIM males do not even value women never mind respect and support their needs.

Personally I’d not engage with @Tangfastic71

Thinks they are being clever and ‘brave’ but in fact stating blatant worn out lies, pretending to engage to discuss innocently their views but in fact extremely disingenuous.

Trans rights are human rights, yes. But it's not a "human right" for a man to have access to naked, vulnerable and non consenting women and girls, or to prevent women from having single sex spaces. Only an absolute creep would think it is.

They also get the choice to be support animals. If they don't display the right temperament or willingness, or don't respond to training properly, then they aren't forced to do it.

I think many of us here fail to have the required temperament, willingness or aptitude for training. And thank fuck for that!

This

Who thinks this a human right? And why?

This!

SP was cleared of the gross misconduct investigation on 15th or 16th July (after a total of 18 months of investigation).

If any professional conduct evidence existed, we would know about it - and Fife wouldn’t have had to roll out FW and LN with a smear campaign instead. And even then they only did that at the 11th hour in the face of seeming inevitable loss.
Which means they had nothing else to throw at it.

The alleged remark is disputed. SP said it was made by a (named) paramedic. Whoever said it, it wasn't a statement of intent. There is no evidence suggesting that he, or anyone else, would carry out the insulting action.

Sadly there are lots of absolute creeps in the world, and thoughtless and gullible people who enable them.

Quite.

'Bearded transmen with cocks will be in the ladies, happy now?' is really showing your hand.

Transwomen (and this case concerns a transwoman) are not marginalised or unsafe. Upton has been afforded power and influence that other junior doctors couldn't dream of, solely because he claims to be trans. Certainly not marginalised.

And how was he ever unsafe? His male colleagues had no chance to welcome/ignore him in the men's changing room, because he never used it. The lack of safety is all imaginary. The lack of safety for women, when men are allowed into women's spaces, is anything but.

But a lot of people do think that the risk of a man having hurt feelings is worse than the risk to women's actual safety, privacy, dignity and lawful rights.

Agreed!

But seeing as NHSF did suddenly start to care about it when it suddenly suited them, if they had any inkling that SP’s attitudes had affected her care then I’m pretty sure they’d have presented that, rather than the group messages. Obviously I can’t be 100% sure but I’m 99% because bringing the messages into evidence might harm Fife’s case by supporting the idea of a witch hunt regarding the CR and revealing a wider toxic culture amongst staff.

They had 18 months to investigate and a break in the Tribunal hearing. They’ll have trawled her record for the DU claims and anything else that would support their defence. She was cleared.

Im still not justifying the messages but if there was concrete evidence that SP was racist to patients surely you agree that we would have seen that by now?

Are people STILL doing the sodding "Transman Gotcha"??? It was fully addressed in the SC ruling. Women have a right to single sex spaces. However, if a woman has gone to such measures to obscure her sex that she can indeed pass for a man (and that takes more than trousers and a short haircut) then she can legally be excluded because her presence will cause the same alarm and female self exclusion as if she were a man. Yes, this presents a problem for her but it's her choice to do this. She should be warned of this before she goes about it. Third spaces would be a solution but it's clear the TRAs don't want that.

And once again, this was never considered a problem when women were being excluded from voting booths, university and bank loans. Only when women start speaking up for their hard-won spaces do these people start pouring out of the woodwork crying that if it can't be enforced with 100% certainty at all times then it shouldn't be allowed at all. They don't say it about any other unlawful activity either. Why are women's protections the only thing not worth legalising and enforcing?

Agree with this. It was a real education to read the opposing views when I knew nothing about the subject back in February. It’s like eavesdropping on a conversation and the bad faith arguments, poor evidence, poor logic and general evasiveness isn’t a good look on those with “opposing” views on here. (I use quote marks because theres lots of debate but the “opposing” ones I reference are a particular type - no debate to be had - just lecturing or scolding.) And such unlikeability is rarely persuasive.

'Bearded transmen with cocks will be in the ladies, happy now?'
I don't think a surgically created penis would worry me from a safety perspective, it seems quite different to a real one.

And just to respond further to @Tangfastic71

firstly, 'transmen' don't actually have cocks or anything close to cocks.

Secondly, I never understand why people think 'bearded' is a gotcha. Women who aren't on synthetic hormones are also occasionally capable of growing facial hair, it's just that they generally shave it. It's not beards that are the problem.

Thirdly, I'll never understand the logic that Upton cannot possibly be expected to share with men, because he's so vulnerable. But Peggy should be happy with a unisex changing room otherwise she's a bigot.

If people can't see the preferential bias and misogyny there, I have no words

These TRAs are like bloody Groundhog Day. Wot about DSDs, wot about transmen, wot about if someone somewhere gets away with breaking the law, wot about when I consent for you, wot about the "human right" for men to get into women's changing rooms and when all else fails, Y U CARE ANYWAY BIGOTS U SHD WORRY ABOUT MORE IMPORTANT THINGS LIKE ME!!!

Is their plan to get us out of the way by just boring us all to death? That might actually work.

And I can’t support a racist.

Such an interesting remark. Do you divide people into the groups "racist" and "non-racist"? If so, on what basis? One slightly off joke? Several references to going to the "Ch**kie" for a takeaway (or carry out)? A concern about poorly controlled immigration? A targeted verbal attack? Poor nursing practice for ethnic minorities but not for everyone else? Voting Reform? Being a past or present member of the NF, BNP, Britain First? Having voted for Brexit?

To be fair, some of the above would be enough for me to mentally label someone as racist. But should that mean I write them off as a bad person? Is there any room in my worldview for forgiveness or redemption? What happens when someone I greatly admire for their kindness and service to my community turns out to have feet of clay? Does that person get transferred instantly from "good person" to "bad person"?

I prefer to be less judgmental, though I'm not perfect myself so I don't always succeed. I don't know the whole of anyone's background, what has influenced them, what good and bad experiences they have had. I confess to having had a negative image of Nigerians until I met some who have become good friends. I hope I have learned my lesson, but I may well have some prejudices that I haven't recognised yet.

I am happy to condemn SP's posting of very unpleasant jokes. I would describe them as racist, and by implication SP has been guilty of what I would call a racist act. I will not write her off as irredeemably bad for that.

But we've been having actual bearded men 'with cocks' as you put it in women's spaces and in orders of magnitude more than we might have a woman who's undergone surgery. Did that never bother you?

when anyone posts an opposing view, they’re either met with “the lads have arrived” or “the handmaidens have arrived”

they're also met with "I'm interested in what you mean by that, please could you clarify what you mean when you say X, Y, Z?"

You must know this - I've been in conversations where Tang etc have been asked that - and you must know that you're being dishonest about this?

And the response is always ignore, change the subject, lie, or abuse. I could count on one hand the number of attempts to actually engage. It's almost as if you don't want anyone to know what you do actually think.

The past 8 or so years have really opened my eyes to the people who claim to want to educate you yet have the attitude of "I've said what I've said, it's not up to me to tell you what I actually mean".

Just a reminder…..

In only 5 months that approach screams off the threads I’ve read. Asked a direct question the responses are never to answer directly but instead to disappear, change the subject, twist the question or generally obfuscate. I’m then left wondering why they bother spending so much time here? It’s clearly not to argue their case persuasively so unfortunately I’m left with personal pleasure on their part which might come in different forms and some of which I don’t care to think about

Bearded men with cocks: bad. Clean shaven men with cocks: “come on in”

Think you might be onto something!

Death by a thousand tedious non arguments.