Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

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 #53

1000 replies

nauticant · 03/09/2025 22:53

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 resumed 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].

The hearing was 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 #50 can be found in this thread: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379717-sandie-peggie-list-of-threads-covering-employment-tribunal-and-afterwards

Thread 51: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5402652-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-51 1 September 2025 to 2 September 2025
Thread 52: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5403218-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-52 2 September 2025 to 4 September 2025

OP posts:
Thread gallery
59
prh47bridge · 04/09/2025 19:18

Yddraigoldragon · 04/09/2025 18:48

Confused about the Bananarama defence, in that surely there is a clash with the FWS result. The SC were clear that women’s prisons were included, so women convicted of various crimes still have this protection regardless of behaviour.

Surely therefore SP is covered too regardless of how she addressed the issue?

Fife have cleared her of misconduct too with no mention of her manner, so I cannot see there is anything there of value to pick apart?

It confuses me…

The idea of the Bananarama defence is that SP raised her concerns in the wrong way. The fact that the SC have been clear does not allow SP to behave how she wants. If, for example, her reaction to finding Upton in the changing room had been to threaten violence if he ever used that changing room again, NHS Fife would have been able to discipline her for that. So no, she is not covered regardless of how she addressed the issue. There is, as far as I can see, no evidence that she addressed the issue in the wrong way, but that is what Fife want to argue.

As per one of my posts on the last thread, the fact Fife have cleared her of misconduct is largely irrelevant. If Fife had conducted a prompt and fair investigation, and senior medics had not interfered to try to get the result they wanted, SP probably wouldn't have a case. The fact that an investigation clears an employee of misconduct does not necessarily mean that the employer was wrong to investigate, or that they were wrong to suspend the member of staff concerned whilst carrying out the investigation. Of course, in this case the investigation was not prompt, nor was the process fair, and senior medics did get involved inappropriately. That being so, SP would have a case even if she had actually been guilty of misconduct.

WearyAuldWumman · 04/09/2025 19:24

SlackJawedDisbeliefXY · 04/09/2025 18:15

Use the links at the bottom of the page halfway down under the heading

Submissions & Closing Arguments

Peggie vs Fife Health Board and Dr. B Upton - Part 2 (substack.com)

Edited

U was 28 at the time of the incident? He was a Junior Fellow? Therefore, he'd worked as a male doctor for some time and didn't decide to refer to himself as a woman until well after graduation? Have I misunderstood?

He wasn't some timid laddie straight out of medical school, then.

nutmeg7 · 04/09/2025 19:26

PachacutisBadAuntie · 04/09/2025 18:13

Here you go

😁😆😂

Contemporaneouslyagog · 04/09/2025 19:26

Yddraigoldragon · 04/09/2025 18:48

Confused about the Bananarama defence, in that surely there is a clash with the FWS result. The SC were clear that women’s prisons were included, so women convicted of various crimes still have this protection regardless of behaviour.

Surely therefore SP is covered too regardless of how she addressed the issue?

Fife have cleared her of misconduct too with no mention of her manner, so I cannot see there is anything there of value to pick apart?

It confuses me…

I read some of NCs submissions and I think JR is trying to argue that Nurse Peggie's expression of her rights to a GC belief were exceeded / nullified by her manner, in as much as it could be seen to be harassment .

SlackJawedDisbeliefXY · 04/09/2025 19:47

prh47bridge · 04/09/2025 19:18

The idea of the Bananarama defence is that SP raised her concerns in the wrong way. The fact that the SC have been clear does not allow SP to behave how she wants. If, for example, her reaction to finding Upton in the changing room had been to threaten violence if he ever used that changing room again, NHS Fife would have been able to discipline her for that. So no, she is not covered regardless of how she addressed the issue. There is, as far as I can see, no evidence that she addressed the issue in the wrong way, but that is what Fife want to argue.

As per one of my posts on the last thread, the fact Fife have cleared her of misconduct is largely irrelevant. If Fife had conducted a prompt and fair investigation, and senior medics had not interfered to try to get the result they wanted, SP probably wouldn't have a case. The fact that an investigation clears an employee of misconduct does not necessarily mean that the employer was wrong to investigate, or that they were wrong to suspend the member of staff concerned whilst carrying out the investigation. Of course, in this case the investigation was not prompt, nor was the process fair, and senior medics did get involved inappropriately. That being so, SP would have a case even if she had actually been guilty of misconduct.

I do not think that there is a way that SP could have broached the subject with DU that would not have been found offensive by DU (it is after all 'denying his existence' or some such)

Does it just come down to trying to walk through the differing accounts of the confrontation to try to decide which sounds more likely?

DU through his away-with-the-fairies tribunal answers and 'lack of clarity' in generating the contemporaneous notes log files does not seem to be a witness that I would trust to see events in the same way as the man (or woman ) on the street

Peregrina · 04/09/2025 19:54

Could I ask the legal bods on these threads - now that action is being taken against Kate Searle, Maggie Currer and Esther Davidson, what happens next?

I assume some formal notice was served on them and that they have to reply, and within a certain time, but then what?

SlackJawedDisbeliefXY · 04/09/2025 20:00

I have posted this before but in case some have not read it

Invisible Scars | Psychology Today United Kingdom

In our day to day lives we are constantly in interactions that could be considered as 'micro-aggressions'. Normally we don't care and just get on with our lives, but if we have been presensitized, suddenly we are surrounded by people who are out to get us.

I do wonder if a certain amount of 'looking for offence' is the cause of the radically different event memories that DU and other witnesses have

Invisible Scars

Unlock the power of locus of control to overcome limiting beliefs and take charge of your life.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/beyond-school-walls/202410/invisible-scars

thewaythatyoudoit · 04/09/2025 20:02

With ref to the discussion in recent posts about the emotional reaction of KS to challenge in xx, I see that today the complainant in Graham Linehan's prosecution got into such a kerfuffle during his xx that he asked if he could go to the loo! What he seems to share with KS is prior unawareness of how throroughly a good legal team will review the evidence and that they will construct timelines with it. The fact that he would be faced with incontrovertible evidence of his own stalking and harrassment of TERFS and the thrill he got from frightening women seems not to have occurred to him - he'd contacted pals to come to court to watch, so now they've all seen his comeuppance

Bannedontherun · 04/09/2025 20:03

I have read NC submissions and interestingly she did address the respondents application to change NHSF and DU pleaded defence to that of a manifestation of expression of a protected belief as crossing the line.

i think as a safeguard in the event the judge permits the 11th hour application.

So and she also addressed the Higgs case in brief.

Higgs won, and the last appeal to the SC by the school was dismissed so i do not see where R is going with this one.

it is not going to fly not least because Peggie as per DU was not aggressive or threatening.

moto748e · 04/09/2025 20:05

thewaythatyoudoit · 04/09/2025 20:02

With ref to the discussion in recent posts about the emotional reaction of KS to challenge in xx, I see that today the complainant in Graham Linehan's prosecution got into such a kerfuffle during his xx that he asked if he could go to the loo! What he seems to share with KS is prior unawareness of how throroughly a good legal team will review the evidence and that they will construct timelines with it. The fact that he would be faced with incontrovertible evidence of his own stalking and harrassment of TERFS and the thrill he got from frightening women seems not to have occurred to him - he'd contacted pals to come to court to watch, so now they've all seen his comeuppance

Both people who seem to think they are the centre of the universe.

Bannedontherun · 04/09/2025 20:07

thewaythatyoudoit · 04/09/2025 20:02

With ref to the discussion in recent posts about the emotional reaction of KS to challenge in xx, I see that today the complainant in Graham Linehan's prosecution got into such a kerfuffle during his xx that he asked if he could go to the loo! What he seems to share with KS is prior unawareness of how throroughly a good legal team will review the evidence and that they will construct timelines with it. The fact that he would be faced with incontrovertible evidence of his own stalking and harrassment of TERFS and the thrill he got from frightening women seems not to have occurred to him - he'd contacted pals to come to court to watch, so now they've all seen his comeuppance

do you have links on this case as i nearly got sucked in to thinking Linham was to extreme

SlackJawedDisbeliefXY · 04/09/2025 20:08

thewaythatyoudoit · 04/09/2025 20:02

With ref to the discussion in recent posts about the emotional reaction of KS to challenge in xx, I see that today the complainant in Graham Linehan's prosecution got into such a kerfuffle during his xx that he asked if he could go to the loo! What he seems to share with KS is prior unawareness of how throroughly a good legal team will review the evidence and that they will construct timelines with it. The fact that he would be faced with incontrovertible evidence of his own stalking and harrassment of TERFS and the thrill he got from frightening women seems not to have occurred to him - he'd contacted pals to come to court to watch, so now they've all seen his comeuppance

Hmm, the BBC report does not seem to mention that?

Graham Linehan goes on trial over alleged harassment of trans woman - BBC News

Graham Linehan smiling in a grey jacket

Graham Linehan goes on trial over alleged harassment of trans woman

The Father Ted creator is on trial at Westminster Magistrates' Court days after a separate arrest at Heathrow.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn0x2kx08wdo

thewaythatyoudoit · 04/09/2025 20:10

Bannedontherun · 04/09/2025 20:07

do you have links on this case as i nearly got sucked in to thinking Linham was to extreme

I am not tech enough to link it, (sorry!) but it's all in Nick Wallis's X account (he was in court taking it down verbatim) and Wings has retweeted it all. (Sarah Vine KC. blistering form)

PetethePlumbersToolkit · 04/09/2025 20:11

Namechangedagain999 · 04/09/2025 19:06

i feel slightly worried that we are in an echo chamber. Seeing all of this through our own perspective. I am afraid this case will go the wrong way but surely it can’t? Upton is a disgrace and KS is an obvious disgrace so many obvious disgraces? LC jees - did no one want to do the right thing the right way? Please god it won’t go any other way but the right way. But I am still worried.

I know what you mean. It's not that we are in an echo chamber, the comments on press articles and other media are saying similar things, but there is such a culture of fear about saying/doing the wrong thing and being accused of transphobia that the result could go either way. It should be cut and dried, but I can see NHSF being hung out to dry and R2 being given a telling off but not actually found to be at fault.

prh47bridge · 04/09/2025 20:19

SlackJawedDisbeliefXY · 04/09/2025 19:47

I do not think that there is a way that SP could have broached the subject with DU that would not have been found offensive by DU (it is after all 'denying his existence' or some such)

Does it just come down to trying to walk through the differing accounts of the confrontation to try to decide which sounds more likely?

DU through his away-with-the-fairies tribunal answers and 'lack of clarity' in generating the contemporaneous notes log files does not seem to be a witness that I would trust to see events in the same way as the man (or woman ) on the street

In terms of figuring out what happened, the tribunal is likely to start with an overall assessment of the reliability of the witnesses and then figure out which account seems more likely on the balance of probabilities.

PachacutisBadAuntie · 04/09/2025 20:23

Bannedontherun · 04/09/2025 20:07

do you have links on this case as i nearly got sucked in to thinking Linham was to extreme

I think you'll have to scroll down and load more till you get to the beginning...
https://nitter.net/nickwallis?lang=en

TwoLoonsAndASprout · 04/09/2025 20:28

Bannedontherun · 04/09/2025 20:07

do you have links on this case as i nearly got sucked in to thinking Linham was to extreme

The thread here about GL being arrested has Nick Wallis’s tweets in it:

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5403886-graham-linehan-arrested-on-arrival-at-heathrow-part-2

BreadInCaptivity · 04/09/2025 20:41

Bannedontherun · 04/09/2025 20:07

do you have links on this case as i nearly got sucked in to thinking Linham was to extreme

https://x.com/nickwallis/status/1963528916284440649?s=46&t=88gZvdSnTk70X8b2ZUPZtA

Direct link

MyrtleLion · 04/09/2025 23:11

Nick has confirmed he will live tweet tomorrow as well. He’s moved his schedule around.

1VY · 04/09/2025 23:55

WearyAuldWumman · 04/09/2025 19:24

U was 28 at the time of the incident? He was a Junior Fellow? Therefore, he'd worked as a male doctor for some time and didn't decide to refer to himself as a woman until well after graduation? Have I misunderstood?

He wasn't some timid laddie straight out of medical school, then.

He only graduated in medicine in 2021 . We don’t know what he did for the three years between leaving high school and starting medicine at Dundee University.

The graduation ceremonies were cancelled in 2021 because of the pandemic so there was a ceremony in June 2022 which most of the rest of his class attended, but he didn’t. He is listed as Theodore Upton then and also when he first registered with the GMC in 2021.

He also used the name Theodore and presented as male when he got married in 2021.

I think it was mentioned at the tribunal that he started to identify as a woman at work in January 2022, so just a few months after he graduated and got married.

Im assuming he started as FY1 in August 2021 and FY2 in august 2022. So by the changing room incident at Christmas 2023 he had been qualified for about 2 1/2 years , I’m guessing he was working as an F3 and not in core training, which can be quite competitive ( and he’s not very bright ).

moto748e · 05/09/2025 00:01

He also used the name Theodore and presented as male when he got married in 2021.
I think it was mentioned at the tribunal that he started to identify as a woman at work in January 2022

So less than a year after he got married, then?

Easytoconfuse · 05/09/2025 06:43

1VY · 04/09/2025 18:27

Someone asked upthread

“What do the transgender people think a woman is? It can't be biology because they're never going to have it. It can't really be clothes because we run a spectrum from sniff and pick from the wash basket in the dark because we're busy to full on Barbie. It can't be educational level or mothering style because we're all unique.“

Id imagine that the clothes issue was a particular problem from DU at work, because all the junior doctors wear scrubs and crocs. Scrubs are supposedly “unisex “ but they are usually cut for the male body - larger at the shoulders, smaller at the waist and hips. So no chance to “ dress as a woman at work “ .

All junior doctors in hospital will have long hair tied back and have no jewellery like a watch, bracelet or necklace, although some might wear stud earrings or a simple band ring. Most women wear very little if any make up and have short unpainted nails.

So how on earth does a man in that situation perform femininity? yes he can change his first name but lots of patients don’t bother to read a name badge.

Patients and staff will see a 6ft tall, broad shouldered ex rugby player with an Adam’s apple, a 5 o’clock shadow and a receding hairline who walks like a man and sounds like a man.

He also acts with the entitlement of a white Middle class man.

So the only people at work who can make him feel feminine are the other staff. This must be much more important than it might be in an office, when a transwomen can (probably unlike any of the women ) wear a short skirt , high heels, tights and a see - through blouse that shows their underwear. They can have long painted nails, a great deal of make up and long, carefully styled hair do.

In hospital , all junior doctors have the same courtesy title of doctor, so no chance to correct others all day - “it’s MISS Upton not Mr. “. Patients will just refer to you as “ a/ the doctor “.

You don’t get to send emails all day with your pronouns and correct people.

You spend your day running around like a blue arsed fly, doing handovers , ward rounds, chasing results, answering bleeps , writing notes and discharge summaries, ordering investigations, talking to patients and relatives. Little time for head tilting, giggle, girl talk and hair flicking.

It must be a very unrewarding setting for those who need others to validate their feminine gender identity.

Well, that's me removed from the ranks of proper women because I don't do any of that. I do have 2 children that I gave birth to, accidentally totally naturally, but I don't suppose that counts for anything.

I have a horrible feeling you're right and it sounds as if they've been getting their knowledge of women from the sort of films that used to be on the top shelf in the video shop and I assume are now on restricted satellite channels.

Does that mean that a certain fragrant fragile self-described female maybe never wanted to be a doctor at all? He couldn't have been picking fights all along while he prepared for a media carrer, could he? He did want to be involved in writing the transgender policy, didn't he? If so, then he got what he wanted and deserved. I do love it when the universe does that, but it's so unfair on Sandie Peggie.

EsmeWeatherwaxHatpin · 05/09/2025 06:45

Can I take a slight detour to Darlington nurses. Do we know which tribunal will hear it. I’m in that neck of the woods and have a weeks leave still in my pocket. It’s been a while but I think there is a tribunal at North Shields. I’m guessing they might move it to Newcastle though if they expect a large following. It’s a bigger venue.

Skyellaskerry · 05/09/2025 07:16

SqueakyDinosaur · 04/09/2025 12:45

Re the differences between NC's and JR's submission documents, NC is clearly a very organised person - in the attached podcast she talks about preparing bundles for court. I wonder if RMW could do with a coaching session?

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/s9e12-tribunal-bundles/id1473171786?i=1000683857011

ETA: I also think she has a lovely speaking voice.

Edited

I really enjoyed that thank you! Also brought back early work memories as a legal secretary I used to prepare the document lists and documents for counsel briefs (and they had to be folded perfectly, tied in pink tape). Never heard reference to bundles at the time though 😆.

usernameinserthere · 05/09/2025 07:32

Peregrina · 04/09/2025 19:54

Could I ask the legal bods on these threads - now that action is being taken against Kate Searle, Maggie Currer and Esther Davidson, what happens next?

I assume some formal notice was served on them and that they have to reply, and within a certain time, but then what?

Notice was served early August. Responses expected in next few weeks.

from the BBC

Margaret Gribbon, the solicitor for Ms Peggie, said the latest legal action - covering NHS Fife and the three managers - was raised on 6 August.
She added: "All four respondents' legal defences to the claim are expected to be received within the next fortnight.
"The claim arises from these senior managers' opposition to the decision by another FHB manager in March 2024 to lift Sandie's suspension.
"Sandie only became aware of this matter when the suspension review manager gave evidence at her tribunal hearing in July."
Ms Gribbon stated that the claim was one of alleged harassment and victimisation under the Equality Act 2010.

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