Sandie Peggie: Employment Tribunal, associated legal claims, and related matters - thread #68

[nauticant]

Sandie Peggie, a nurse at Victoria Hospital in Kirkcaldy (VH), brought claims in the employment tribunal against her employer; Fife Health Board (the Board) and another employee, Dr B Upton. Ms Peggie’s claims were of sexual harassment, harassment related to a protected belief, indirect discrimination and victimisation. Dr Upton claimed 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 after a prolonged process judgment was handed down on 8 December 2025. That judgment is being appealed and an appeal hearing is expected to take place in 2027.

A second Employment Tribunal, Sandie Peggie vs Royal College of Nursing, has just been heard. The hearing started on Wednesday 23 September 2026 and ended on Thursday 1 October 2026. It is possible that a decision will be handed down before Christmas of this year.

Additional legal claims have been raised. Sandie Peggie is taking action against three senior managers who were witnesses in the first Employment Tribunal - Dr Kate Searle, Dr Maggie Currer and Esther Davidson, against Carol Potter, the chief executive of NHS Fife, for victimisation, against NHS Fife for discrimination, and against its director of people and culture David Miller for harassment. In addition, Sandie Peggie is being investigated by the Nursing and Midwifery Council over fitness to practice.

The past proceedings were live tweeted by www.x.com/tribunaltweets. Tribunal Tweets are likely to be providing coverage in future proceedings. There's additional information on Tribunal Tweets' substack: www.tribunaltweets.substack.com/.

Links to previous threads #1 to #60 can be found in this thread: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379717-sandie-peggie-list-of-threads-covering-employment-tribunal-and-afterwards

Thread 61: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5472628-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-following-employment-tribunal-judgment-thread-61 8 January 2026 to 3 August 2026

Thread 62: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5562302-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-following-employment-tribunal-judgment-thread-62 3 August 2026 to 24 September 2026

Thread 63: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5581909-sandie-peggie-employment-tribunal-associated-legal-claims-and-related-matters-thread-63 24 September 2026 to 27 September 2026

Thread 64: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5583133-sandie-peggie-employment-tribunal-associated-legal-claims-and-related-matters-thread-64 27 September 2026 to 29 September 2026

Thread 65: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5583663-sandie-peggie-employment-tribunal-associated-legal-claims-and-related-matters-thread-65 29 September 2026 to 30 September 2026

Thread 66: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5584074-sandie-peggie-employment-tribunal-associated-legal-claims-and-related-matters-thread-66 30 September 2026 to 1 October 2026

Thread 67: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5584523-sandie-peggie-employment-tribunal-associated-legal-claims-and-related-matters-thread-67 1 October 2026 to ????

Any thoughts on Sam Hall @Lacksie the female doctor larping as a man who prescribed children with PBs and hormones - illegally and without even meeting them and then complained when a safeguarding whistleblower called her out? Whistleblower had a breakdown and resigned. We don’t hear many stories about trans which show any positive impact on their environments.

No. There’s an important difference between describing specific conduct as inappropriate or harmful and labelling someone a “predatory nasty man”. The latter is a personal attack, intended to degrade and humiliate the individual.

I personally am appalled by much of Sandie Peggie’s conduct, but I’m not going to come online and join a pile-on of people hurling misogynistic abuse at her. Nor would I consider such abuse justified simply because I disapprove of her actions

https://x.com/tribunaltweets/status/2113551237421609319

A reminder: We report what we hear in good faith but do not provide a transcript of proceedings.

Thanks @nauticant .

@Lacksie your unerring defence of Upton is to be admired.

@nauticant has linked you to the case of Sarah Redvers who blew the whistle on Sam Hall a woman pretending to be a man. Hall has been doling out PBs and hormones to children.

So another trans person acting in bad faith. Would you dispute this?

But weren’t you labelling SP a racist bigot? How come it’s ok for you to label à woman like that but I can’t label à man who bullies a woman and demands access to female spaces as a nasty predatory man? What is the difference?

Well said @StealthTroublemaker

You do recall your comments @Lacksie as reiterated by Stealth? You were pretty vitriolic.

Any thoughts on the children impacted by Sam Hall’s behaviour or the fact she waged a war of hate against the decent Sarah Redvers doing her safeguarding role really well.

Anyone who's watched a hearing and followed Tribunal Tweets knows that they leave things out. Sometimes things it would be good to refer to afterwards. It's just too much for them to capture everything. However, they do capture a great deal of valuable stuff and are an essential service and resource.

I’m not sure why you’ve linked to this. It concerns the final day of the Redvers employment tribunal, not Dr Upton’s evidence in the Peggie tribunal

The claim being made was that Upton suggested a patient refusing treatment from a trans doctor could be regarded as transphobic. This link doesn’t provide any evidence that Upton said that.

Do you have a source that actually supports the claim

I never called SP "a racist bigot".

So we can observe the behaviour as predatory but in your opinion not describe the person as a predator.

You really do rely on language to mean only what you want it to mean to uphold your personal beliefs.

@Lacksie the link was sent to you to show that TT do not quote verbatim.

Handily the link was to the tribunal about Sarah Redvers. Hounded for bringing up safeguarding concerns around Sam Hall doling out medication to vulnerable children.

Do you defend Sam Hall?

Upton even considering turning up when a patient has asked for a female doctor is outrageous and places his perception of himself as a woman above the patient’s comfort. A patient who asks for a female doctor does not want Upton, by definition.

If I am in need care, it’s bad enough I have to ask for a female doctor - I get it’s my responsibility, but it’s an additional burden on me when I’m already struggling. To add to that burden, the need to say, ‘no not you!’, to Upton is appalling.

His own words, that you quoted, make it clear.

Ah, sorry, got my GI posters mixed up. So do you believe she’s not a racist bigot, but a woman bullied by a man and her employer in order to make her undress in front of a biological male who then made her life à living hell for refusing.

Out of interest @Lacksie what is your link to Upton?

You defend him and his behaviour vehemently. You do not seem to see any of his behaviour from the female perspective. Why?

The thing about watching Tribunals live is you actually get to see how much some of these people are snivelling little shits. And then some.

And as much as I love Tribunal Tweets they do miss stuff (some must be the typer thinking he can't honestly have just said that crap?)

The doctor made it very very clear, in manner and tone, not just words that he gave no fucks about women who didn't want a man tending to them. And he made it very clear to women watching that he would prioritise his pleasure over women's upset and discomfort.

He was besides himself with male glee when he was using his twisted logic to declare himself not a robot but a biological woman.

Tweets can't tell you the innate visceral reaction a witness causes in the women watching.

Words cannot convey the feeling you get watching a man on the stand being very obvious that he gives no fucks about women's discomfort if it means he gets to larp as a woman, enter spaces most men are forbidden from and whilst he's at it did you know he womans better than his wife!

Well said @Boiledbeetle

@Lacksie you’d struggle to argue Upton behaved anything other than this on the stand. Nebulous dog whistle and all that. He hates women so much he plays being a woman better than his wife to show us.

As with the Sam Hall situation. These people have such an over blown sense of their importance. Any thoughts on children being prescribed PBs and hormones by Sam Hall?

Just to be clear then, if Upton cannot be described as having predatory behaviour because he clearly stated that he would present himself when a female patient had asked for a female doctor and then force that female patient, likely vulnerable, to reject him directly in his presence, what are we allowed to describe this behaviour that acts to negate consent of a female patient? Because forcing a patient to reject treatment from a male doctor certainly seems also the epitome of a power imbalance to me.

Very much BB.

Watching that man give evidence was highly informative beyond what can be read on TT. I sometimes watched with the sound off and the body language alone was very informative.

First of all I don't believe that Naomi Cunningham used the term "cisgender", I think that was Dr Upton. It was a particular point of this tribunal that she was allowed to use accurate, biological terms for male and female people.

There are a lot of tribunal threads or Sandie Peggie tribunal threads here to trawl though to find the relevant bits, it's quite a lot of work you're asking me to do and quite frankly I can't be arsed.

I remember Dr Upton explaining that by his understanding the only reason a women would object to him would be because of transphobia, and that he refused to acknowledge that in fact most women who would object would be doing so because he was male, and the horror that he would present himself to a female patient who had already made her needs for a same sex HCP known.

I'm annoyed at myself really, in an attempt to be reasonable I have made at least a tiny effort at proving what we are saying by dint of googling. Here is an article which covers Dr Upton seeing no problem with presenting himself as female to a female patient who asked for SSHC.

Trans Dr Upton WOULD treat patient who requested female doctor as 'incompetent' NHS Fife spark tribunal delay - Scottish Daily Express

I don't think that what Dr Upton has said has been "grossly misrepresented" at all, in fact I think we've all pretty accurately got the measure of him.

"As I've stated before, a lot of the content on these threads appears to amount to ruthless online bullying of a real , private individual who has been cleared of any wrongdoing. Why? Because they are trans. It's quite simply a disgrace."

No. No one here is ruthlessly online bullying anyone, no one here is taking it away from the thread and harassing Upton. No one here is transphobic. Dr Upton's trans identity is not the problem. The problem is that Dr Upton is a male.
A male who was in the nurse's female single sex changing rooms, and said he would present himself as a female to a female patient who had specifically requested a female HCP.

I think that is predatory. He shouldn't present himself in that situation in the first place. I think it would be incredibly cruel of a male doctor to do that.

I think if DR Upton presents himself to a female patient who had requested a SSHCP and then puts his hands on her it should constitute an assault.

I think any male HCP with such a disregard for female patients should not be allowed to be a HCP.

I don't think any male with such a disregard for female people is a particularly nice person.

I think anyone who attempts to handwave away what Dr Upton has said, done, and admitted about how he will conduct himself with a hollow cry of "You big bullies you! Just because someone is Trans. You're all bigots and transphobes!" is what is disgraceful. I think Dr Upton is a disgrace to his profession too.

Access to female spaces, yes.

But also a man who wants access to non-consenting female bodies.

A man who wants access to non-consenting female's bodies is an out and out predatory man.

And yet Lacksie says "Don't call the man who wants access to non-consenting female's bodies a predator! That's mean, bullying and uncalled for!"

Here are the relevant exchanges from 11th February 2025 as reported by Tribunal Tweets.

NC Do u agree that it's obvious yr male and some AE patients it wont be obv yr male
DU I dont beleive being drunk affects yr ability to identify a T person, state of intoxiccation. Me being T isn't obv to everybody, maybe to some
NC What if a woman asks to see a F dr
DU I dont see i have to give personal info to patients. I have no obligation to do that. There's no reason to. I dont see that.
NC What about a rape survivor wanting an actual W and not a TW?
DU I dont accept actual woman. I assume u mean c1s woman. ANyone can exp sexual violence, and it can be taken into account within limits of providing care in an emerg situation
NC It follows, that her wish for a F dr, a F patient wld be expected to reveal her sex trauma?
DU No any patient can refuse to see a dr. [gives an eg of a racial patient and staff issue] we accom as much as possible, w/out giving reasons
NC Imagine a woman in AE has unexplained heavy bleeding and says wants a F dr, is it ok for u to be asigned to see her?
DU It depends on the history. Catastriphic means resus, but otherwise short history and to O&G.
NC Imagine later and short history. Is she entitled to F for history
DU If she wanted me to leave, I would and get someone else. Consent is v important and take pat's wishes
seriously. dont want to impose suffering
NC So it's up to her to sya I dont feel comfy w you?
DU That's how it works. U dont know if she'd accept a TW. Y'd explain how exam works and stopping when patient wants to. Our job to make ppl comfy. It's approp for a dr to see this pat
DU Yes I consider myself empathic
NC But u think a woman in that sitn who has asked for a F dr, who realsies yr a male as she's distressed or only slowly realsises yr male. Using empathy, do u not see is v cruel?
DU Consulting rooms and cubicles so not necess in a separateroom
DU ANy person of any GI can experience or undertake sexual trauma. They often dont disclose this, whoever they are. Every single clinician wld have to say "this is my sex, GI, are u happy w me" I apprec they might find it hard to see me. My job is gathering info and treating

archive.ph/2Iswy

Upton was very clear that he would present himself to a female patient who had asked for a female doctor.

I believe he also reported an elderly female patient (with dementia if I remember correctly) for transphobia.

Any male person who is in a position of power such as a doctor is, who presents himself as a female doctor when the request for a female doctor is made, then demands that a female patient reject his treatment with him right there in front of her or treating him otherwise assumes consent is acting in a predatory way. He is acting in a way that intimidates a patient into consent.

That someone is minimising this behaviour on a feminist board is remarkable. But then again, safeguarding principles are often something else that some posters have no understanding of, and this is very much a part of safeguarding principles.

Do you see this @Lacksie ? You are defending the indefensible. Man states in a tribunal he will do what he wants. To be honest I have trust issues with men or women who present as the opposite sex and expect everyone to go along with it. It is a power play.

@Lacksie

From TT:
DU No any patient can refuse to see a dr. [gives an eg of a racial patient and staff issue

This bit is worth pulling out.

It shows that Dr Upton compared a female patient who had requested a same sex, female HCP who refused to be treated by him, to a racist patient refusing (in the example he gave IIRC) a black HCP because of their skin colour.

He is saying that the female patient is equivalent to a racist, that the female patient is transphobic.

From what I recall there was then some speculation which followed amongst ourselves along the lines of would that female patient's refusal of Dr Upton be put down as "transphobia", could the female patient then be unfairly deemed abusive, and could the female patient be denied healthcare as a result of this supposed "transphobia".

Thank you

The dismissal of the female experience of sexual assault was very clear then as it is now. It is a means to flatten the experience to mean that female people should not expect a same sex doctor because female people don’t have any additional needs to male people and should not get special consideration due to the additional layers of vulnerability that they experience of not just % of female people impacted but the fact that male advantage will almost always mean that female people are more physically prone to attack. And therefore will potentially feel very uncomfortable with a male person treating them.

Once you see the dynamic , you cannot unsee it.