NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #56

[nauticant]

Judgment was handed down on 8 December 2025:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6936ce28a6fc97b81e57436a/S_Peggie_v_Fife_Health_Board__Dr_Upton.pdf

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
Thread 53: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5404208-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-53 3 September to 1 October 2025
Thread 54: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5418690-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-54 from 28 September 2025
Thread 55: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5447019-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-55

You’d think

Yes. But it's a big ask of so many women not to be intimidated given the repeated displays of threats, violence and emotional incontinence from so many transactivists.
There are some seriously dangerous men involved here - inside and outside workplaces - as is displayed every time women attempt to meet without their permission.

2004, not 2014. 2014 was same-sex marriage.

(Duplicate of previous post.)

The grounds for appeal will run into many pages, once the judgment is picked apart, paragraph by paragraph.

It doesn't seem very legally coherent or stable.

Unfortunately, the Government is refusing to issue the guidance produced after Supreme Court ruling , which might help for the future.

Women seem to be much better than men, on average, at spotting a trans-identifying man. I suspect it's because the consequences of getting this wrong is so much greater for a woman. Men fear women will laugh at them. Women fear men will kill them.

So a woman, while still a girl, will carefully learn all the multiple tells of how men differ from women. She will become able to spot a man even at some distance in dim lighting, just by his gait and his stance.

She won't even need to see his height, large hands/feet, adam's apple, broad shoulders, narrow hips, jutting forehead/chin, stubble, receding hairline and all the other multiple typically male characteristics. Up close these all become very visible. In real-life rather than a photo, a trans-identifying man's true biological sex will be obvious to most women in virtually all cases.

Dr Upton looks like an adult human male who chooses to have long hair and wears make-up. Coupled with his height, deep voice and how he moves, I strongly believe the average woman, whether a colleague or a patient, would very quickly and correctly think that Dr Upton is male.

There is nothing wrong with looking like a man. There is a great deal wrong with being an adult human male and pushing your way into women-only spaces.

Thanks that shows that a male doctors belief they are biologically female - i.e. both their sex and gender is female is considered "protected".

For obvious reasons that causes issues because women have the right to consent to medical treatment.

So a woman asks for a female doctor and Dr. Upton's belief their sex is female is protected.

Of course this doesn't set a legal precedent but still it's absolutely nuts reasoning, and NHS Trusts will use it to invalidate womens' consent.

Was there a transcript for the whole of this tribunal or just the second part?

We will win. It's just harder than it was.

I agree with this 100%. The outcome is certainly disappointing, nevertheless, I am still hopeful and quietly confident. Maya Forstater had an upward battle too, but was ultimately successful, it just took time.

And the ET judges are scared of the consequences.

Yes, these cases are definitely the proverbial hot potatoes that they don't want to handle.

You are doing a lot of telling other people what they think. Speaking for myself, when other people tell me what I think, I don’t waste much time worrying about it, or them.

In a legal judgement? That's pretty incompetent.

There is a great deal wrong with being an adult human male and pushing your way into women-only spaces

i don't think DU was
known to do any pushing?

Regardless of your beliefs about her identity, she was cleared of any wrong doing.

All I suggested was that people need not continue to pick apart her personal appearance.

1st one says 'assigned male'; 2nd one says 'assigned as male' - perhaps a typo as the 'fe' separated into a different word?!

Another bit that is astonishing - this is a judge writing, not someone who writes the things that go inside greeting cards.

913. But conflict is not always to be expected. There may be circumstances where all staff are content that a trans person uses the facilities of the sex they have the intention to transition to at whatever stage that transition has reached. There may be other circumstances where staff feel uncomfortable to some extent with a trans person being present in the changing room but not wish to make any complaint or issue about it. If there are no complaints or issues raised, that would be an indicator that the wishes of the trans person on which facility to use can be accommodated. The complaint may be raised formally or informally. The nature of the responses of other staff, or lack of same, which may differ from one workplace to another, in our view is a further factor to consider.

This is not about 'circumstances', it is about the law and justice and fairness and equality and that sort of thing. That's why all those people got together in a room and presented their arguments and their evidence in front of a j-u-d-g-e.

I'm sorry, but I'm just going to have to quote that Burke/Lord Coke thing again🙄
It is the function of a judge not to make but to declare the law, according to the golden mete-wand of the law and not by the crooked cord of discretion.

On a t-shirt please, size M - and an XL for Big Sond?😄

Also for lawyers, they are having to get to grips with arguing new social phenomena. Who'd have thought that society would ever be in a position where we had to argue that girls and women were entitled to privacy from random men when taking their clothes off?

There was a reason why the powerful transactivists headed straight for the judiciary, the forces of law and order and politicians. If you can convince them that sex change is a thing and that women as a sex class no longer exist - then the world's your oyster - as we see repeatedly.

I'm not working with Dr Upton. To me he is just some bloke in the street.

He's also some bloke without a GRC as far as I'm aware, so still just a man man, no legal paperwork making him not a man on some occasions.

I am under no obligation to control or limit my speech when talking about him.

I am perfectly entitled to say that when Dr Upton was at the tribunal I watched him give his evidence. It was very evident that I was looking at a man and listening to a man.

I will not be forced or compelled to lie about what I witnessed as I watched a man give evidence about how he was not a man.

I cannot find the slightest bit of empathy for a man, who knowing he was a man, decided to claim he was a not a man and start using women only spaces.

He knew some women weren't comfortable about it but he put himself first. So if he is having an emotional experience because some people refuse to buy into his version of reality then tough shit.

What about all the women's emotional experiences every time a man like him enters a space not meant for him?

Did he care or even think about Sandie's emotional experience at finding him, a man, in the women's changing room? No he did not.

Aye, whatever

Sandie was right when she said he was a weirdo anyway.

Sorry if this has been discussed but who on earth is this judge Kemp who thinks how 'feminine' someone looks or speaks denotes their sex?

i simply inferred it from your statement that you didn't care if you were causing DU profound hurt by making personal comments picking apart her appearance .
im assuming you would not think that was ok treatment of any individual of any other category/
group; but perhaps you would. 🤷🏼‍♀️

That's a great post Boiled 👋

He had also made no physiological changes to himself either, as confirmed but the judge. Changed his name, grew his hair, put on a bit of makeup it seems, and the idiots at NHS Fife thought that was sufficient to let him in the ladies.

I don’t get why the “he had permission” gets him off the hook either. He knew he was a man. And an intelligent one at that. Did he really need his employer to tell him where to get changed? Someone who managed to get a medical degree couldn’t work that out for himself?

I highiy doubt he's on mn. Even if he was comments have been factual and polite, no insults.

Sandie was right when she said he was a weirdo anyway.

weirdo because she's trans?

Yes, I think employment judges in particular are very wary of extrapolating from the SCJ to the Workplace Regs. It seems to me that there's obvious read across, but we'll need higher courts to decide that. And since the NHS seems willing to spaff infinite amounts of money up the wall to protect male transvestites' access to female spaces, that might meen the Supreme Court all over again.

Or it might be possible to unblock this by putting a rocket up the bum of the following people:

• Bridget Phillipson, Minister for Women and Equalities, currently sitting on the EHRC guidance
• Wes Streeting, Health Secretary, who surely has some influence over the approach health trusts take to this litigation
• Pat McFadden, Work and Pensions Secretary and boss of the HSE, who therefore owns the Workplace Regs and could issue clarification on what they mean

Their Scottish equivalents too, I suppose, but since Scotgov is openly refusing to abide by the SCJ, the only likely outcome is that they concede with ill grace when Westminster forces them to.