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

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #50

1000 replies

nauticant · 07/08/2025 21:44

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 over 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 more 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
Thread 48: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5382317-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-48 29 July 2025 to 31 July 2025
Thread 49: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5383443-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-49 31 July 2025 to 8 August 2025

OP posts:
Thread gallery
46
nutmeg7 · 30/08/2025 13:52

impossibletoday · 30/08/2025 13:34

My oh my.

Theswiveleyeballsinthesky · 30/08/2025 13:57

impossibletoday · 30/08/2025 13:34

😳

Hoardasurass · 30/08/2025 14:07

anyolddinosaur · 30/08/2025 11:03

Do we assume that the intervention by trans activists is because they dont think Russell is doing a good enough job? Or just that organisations were criticised for not intervening in FWS? Of course there were some interventions in FWS and one was said to be very helpful.

I suspect that its a bit of both

CriticalCondition · 30/08/2025 14:07

impossibletoday · 30/08/2025 13:34

Crumbs. I really don't know what to say.

CriticalCondition · 30/08/2025 14:23

Please God, in an idle moment over the weekend can Big Sond think 'I'd better just look up this chap Oscar Davies' and pop his name into Google. Please.

SinnerBoy · 30/08/2025 14:29

White and Swan? What could possibly go right for them? They need Dragoons, but they've called in Chelsea Pensioners!

😅

JanesLittleGirl · 30/08/2025 14:42

SinnerBoy · 30/08/2025 14:29

White and Swan? What could possibly go right for them? They need Dragoons, but they've called in Chelsea Pensioners!

😅

It's more like the EDI section of the Women's Auxiliary Balloon Corps.

SerendipityJane · 30/08/2025 14:43

White and Swan?

Sort of low rent Mapp and Lucia ?

SabrinaThwaite · 30/08/2025 15:18

SerendipityJane · 30/08/2025 14:43

White and Swan?

Sort of low rent Mapp and Lucia ?

More like Hinge and Bracket but without the wit.

InterrobangsArePureBias · 30/08/2025 15:36

SerendipityJane · 30/08/2025 14:43

White and Swan?

Sort of low rent Mapp and Lucia ?

Have a heart.

Flanders and Swann surely?

So many sketches and songs.

Fist and Second Law.

Neither man nor moose but a gnu.

Or their version of Mozart’s Horn Concerto.

Their Friendly Duet. (Said Hero and Leander, “It’s nothing but slander”.)

Hippopotamus Song of course.

NebulousSadTimes · 30/08/2025 15:38

impossibletoday · 30/08/2025 13:34

I say again, we used to have the fear about wearing white socks to school in case one or two classmates took the piss and now we have people like this putting this shit out there for the whole world to see. Do they honestly think they're being viewed as S&B or the victims they're desperate to be? Have they no self awareness at all? It's really quite worrying.

AdultHumanFemaleOne · 30/08/2025 16:10

prh47bridge · 30/08/2025 13:28

This is wrong. Anyone wishing to intervene can apply at any stage up to closing submissions. They should apply promptly, but the rules accept that an intervenor may only realise their interest in a case and the value they can offer late in the day. It would be surprising if Leigh Day, their solicitors, were lying about this and making false claims about a decision of the tribunal.

Edited to add following your later post - no, they have not been given leave to appeal. They have been given leave to intervene. That means they can make a submission on the law and any other relevant factors to help the tribunal.

Edited

Thank you for that clarification. I wonder what the hell the ground are?

AdultHumanFemaleOne · 30/08/2025 16:23

prh47bridge · 30/08/2025 13:28

This is wrong. Anyone wishing to intervene can apply at any stage up to closing submissions. They should apply promptly, but the rules accept that an intervenor may only realise their interest in a case and the value they can offer late in the day. It would be surprising if Leigh Day, their solicitors, were lying about this and making false claims about a decision of the tribunal.

Edited to add following your later post - no, they have not been given leave to appeal. They have been given leave to intervene. That means they can make a submission on the law and any other relevant factors to help the tribunal.

Edited

I just realised. Instead of thanking you for your clarification, particularly grounded in reality as it was.....nay, exactly because it was grounded in reality , I should have taken a leaf out of the Sophie Molly playbook. Had a massive tantrum, screamed sexual, lying slurs at you, then reported you to every regulating body I could think of. Relevant to you or not.
Oh well. Opportunity missed. But at least I am a woman and SOPHIE MOLLY IS A MAN

AdultHumanFemaleOne · 30/08/2025 16:28

Hi. This was an example of not checking something out - I did not follow the link to see that it was their legal rep. who has posted the info. Add you say, this would be factual

SlackJawedDisbeliefXY · 30/08/2025 16:47

impossibletoday · 30/08/2025 13:34

I'd not seen this before - a bit taken aback.

Barrister is considered to be a professional occupation - right?

He's rolling around on the floor at what appears to be his place of work, beside his chambers' logo, in his court attire - that doesn't seem to be respectful to the process of law.

Having seen this I am concerned about how seriously he takes arguing his clients cases. This reflects on Garden Chambers too, why would they employ this fool?

Namechangedagain999 · 30/08/2025 16:52

SlackJawedDisbeliefXY · 30/08/2025 16:47

I'd not seen this before - a bit taken aback.

Barrister is considered to be a professional occupation - right?

He's rolling around on the floor at what appears to be his place of work, beside his chambers' logo, in his court attire - that doesn't seem to be respectful to the process of law.

Having seen this I am concerned about how seriously he takes arguing his clients cases. This reflects on Garden Chambers too, why would they employ this fool?

I quite liked the dance though. I am ashamed to say :-)

AskingQuestionsAllTheTime · 30/08/2025 16:53

SlackJawedDisbeliefXY
This reflects on Garden Chambers too, why would they employ this fool?

Presumably he didn't push his luck so much to begin with, and, having once employed him, it might be difficult to get rid of him.

prh47bridge · 30/08/2025 16:56

SlackJawedDisbeliefXY · 30/08/2025 16:47

I'd not seen this before - a bit taken aback.

Barrister is considered to be a professional occupation - right?

He's rolling around on the floor at what appears to be his place of work, beside his chambers' logo, in his court attire - that doesn't seem to be respectful to the process of law.

Having seen this I am concerned about how seriously he takes arguing his clients cases. This reflects on Garden Chambers too, why would they employ this fool?

For clarity, chambers do not employ barristers. Barristers are self-employed. Chambers are a group of barristers who have got together to share expenses and administrative services. Barristers pay chambers to use their rooms and services. Having said that, the other barristers in his chambers may be able to expel him if they think he is bringing them into disrepute.

lcakethereforeIam · 30/08/2025 17:17

A new article in the Times. Essentially a recap

https://archive.ph/RJbw7

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/sandy-peggie-transgender-row-bdxlls20z

Although this paragraph is notable

Yet one side appears to be far more willing to discuss the issue than the other. The Sunday Times made multiple approaches to LBGT charities, legal groups, and politicians sympathetic to Upton’s case, as well as her legal team, but all declined to comment.

Sandie Peggie, NHS groupthink and a public reckoning on the trans debate

As the case of the nurse who refused to undress alongside a doctor who self-identifies as a woman resumes, opinions appear to be shifting

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/sandy-peggie-transgender-row-bdxlls20z

Theswiveleyeballsinthesky · 30/08/2025 17:18

SlackJawedDisbeliefXY · 30/08/2025 16:47

I'd not seen this before - a bit taken aback.

Barrister is considered to be a professional occupation - right?

He's rolling around on the floor at what appears to be his place of work, beside his chambers' logo, in his court attire - that doesn't seem to be respectful to the process of law.

Having seen this I am concerned about how seriously he takes arguing his clients cases. This reflects on Garden Chambers too, why would they employ this fool?

Well tbh garden chambers were the chambers Alison Bailey successfully took to tribunal over being discriminated against for her GC beliefs

after the bin fire that that was I wouldn't have thought their credibility was all that anyway....

lcakethereforeIam · 30/08/2025 17:31

You'd think the bin, being on fire, would have made it noticeable enough to avoid driving into.

I can see why he they thinks he's they's non-binary, at some stages there are at least five of him them.

JurassicPark4Eva · 30/08/2025 17:31

impossibletoday · 30/08/2025 13:34

Oh him? And Robin?

I hope the panel at least get to see them in person....

SlackJawedDisbeliefXY · 30/08/2025 17:44

prh47bridge · 30/08/2025 16:56

For clarity, chambers do not employ barristers. Barristers are self-employed. Chambers are a group of barristers who have got together to share expenses and administrative services. Barristers pay chambers to use their rooms and services. Having said that, the other barristers in his chambers may be able to expel him if they think he is bringing them into disrepute.

Many thanks for the explanation, my background is stem so apologies for the misunderstanding.

We have similar structures in my profession - if a partner posted these images they would not remain a partner for long.

TriesNotToBeCynical · 30/08/2025 18:39

SlackJawedDisbeliefXY · 30/08/2025 17:44

Many thanks for the explanation, my background is stem so apologies for the misunderstanding.

We have similar structures in my profession - if a partner posted these images they would not remain a partner for long.

Edited

That would probably be true in mine. And the performative gender choices and pronoun choices are ridiculous. But I can't help regretting that men and women are hidebound by gender stereotypes, and even apparently have to choose a gender-appropriate style of dance to conform.

Please create an account

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

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread