A drop in the ocean in the great schemes of things....but replicated by how many more

Glasweegran

Can I just point out that it was Sandie Peggie who forced the court case? She forced it to be public and have the doctor named and publicly outed.

The local NHS has received death threats as a result of all this, which could have been handled internally, and much of the cost avoided, but nurse Peggie refused that.

The NHS followed the guidance at the time, Dr Upton asked advice when transitioning, and was told to use the female changing rooms, she did nothing wrong (apart from exist). Sandie Peggie then started bullying in her for being there, called her names, misgendering her on purpose and comparing her to a rapist.

It's also worth nothing that it's been stated that no other staff members or patients had a problem with Dr Upton, or accepting her as female, while senior staff members have talked about Sandie Peggie being involved in racist incidents, and pushing her views on supporting Trump and his ideologies.... albeit that no-one went the length of official complaints, but they weren't happy about her coming back to work following suspension after her previous behavior.

See article for this:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c307ez5l4gqo

It's also in there that Nurse Peggie refused arrangements for different shifts to look after her dog. Previous articles have also stated that there were other places she could change if she was uncomfortable.

When you scratch the surface of the details on this case, it starts to look very different from the narrative of "Dr intimidates nurse"

Still though, there are those accusing the dr of sexual harrassment for which there is zero evidence, and no-one coming forward to back it up at all, unlike the idea that nurse Peggie has acutally been pushing a Trump style agenda of attacking a person simply for being transgender and going about their working day, which is bourne out by the statements of others.

One just makes a better headline than the other.

Thanks for the link Glaweegran, I wasn't aware of the horrible racist comments Sandie Peggie, commented and posted.

Gosh, I didn't know all of that.
Thanks Glasweegran.

I understand that women should have access to safe, female only changing spaces. and employers need to facilitate this.

Before the recent Scottish ruling, most employers were following laws and guidance in place and as a result of the ruling, are now in transition to accommodate certain aspects of that ruling, which has not been entirely clarified. A tension emerged that is being worked through. It is likely to lead to extra costs making more changing room spaces available etc.

I understand that transgender people have human rights and should be treated with respect and treated equally, without discrimination. .

I understand the tensions that arose in this case for all parties.

I understand the tensions and difficulties for employers - they balance a legal duty for health and safety at work for ALL its employees, including transgender employees, must comply with laws in place at the time, but treat reach equally and without discrimination. The law did recently change in respect of a ruling regarding transgender people- but the ruling in itself is not over ridden by human rights laws so there remains a tension whilst transition is worked through.

It's a shame this could not be settled within the trust- but I have seen the timeline how it was the nurse specifically that wished this to be taken for a tribunal ruling.

I was saddened to read the nurse's representatives referring to the transgender Dr as "Mr" repeatedly during the tribunal hearing. That did seem to be somewhat petty, disrespectful and intentionally seeking to cause some level of upset for this transgender Dr.

I was saddened to read the racist nature of the comments made and posted by the nurse.

The issue fundamentally is about accepting that there are transgender people in society, how we can accept that, how all employees of all genders can work alongside each other safely, with respect, are treated equally and there is no discrimination.

They are men. It is actually a form of sex discrimination against women when men are in female spaces. The court cases will continue if organisations continue to break the law.
I agree that those who identify as trans should be treated equally, those who have pretended transwomen are women have done them a terrible disservice.

The characters of the people involved are not relevant though. What is relevant is their biological sex.

Also to clarify, the law was not changed, the law was always the same. Organisations, often advised by Stonewall misinterpreted the Equality Act in terms of the definition of sex.

Just a passing thought, would it not be correct to refer in court to someone as ‘Dr’ if they are medically qualified or have a PhD?

Elrel

Just a passing thought, would it not be correct to refer in court to someone as ‘Dr’ if they are medically qualified or have a PhD?

Not necessarily.
A surgeon is known as Mr, Mrs, Miss or Ms .

I understand that transgender people have human rights and should be treated with respect and treated equally, without discrimination.

And most of us understand that everyone has human rights and should be treated with respect, including women who do not wish to share their safe spaces with men who claim to be women.

LemonJam

Glasweegran

Can I just point out that it was Sandie Peggie who forced the court case? She forced it to be public and have the doctor named and publicly outed.

The local NHS has received death threats as a result of all this, which could have been handled internally, and much of the cost avoided, but nurse Peggie refused that.

The NHS followed the guidance at the time, Dr Upton asked advice when transitioning, and was told to use the female changing rooms, she did nothing wrong (apart from exist). Sandie Peggie then started bullying in her for being there, called her names, misgendering her on purpose and comparing her to a rapist.

It's also worth nothing that it's been stated that no other staff members or patients had a problem with Dr Upton, or accepting her as female, while senior staff members have talked about Sandie Peggie being involved in racist incidents, and pushing her views on supporting Trump and his ideologies.... albeit that no-one went the length of official complaints, but they weren't happy about her coming back to work following suspension after her previous behavior.

See article for this:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c307ez5l4gqo

It's also in there that Nurse Peggie refused arrangements for different shifts to look after her dog. Previous articles have also stated that there were other places she could change if she was uncomfortable.

When you scratch the surface of the details on this case, it starts to look very different from the narrative of "Dr intimidates nurse"

Still though, there are those accusing the dr of sexual harrassment for which there is zero evidence, and no-one coming forward to back it up at all, unlike the idea that nurse Peggie has acutally been pushing a Trump style agenda of attacking a person simply for being transgender and going about their working day, which is bourne out by the statements of others.

One just makes a better headline than the other.

Thanks for the link Glaweegran, I wasn't aware of the horrible racist comments Sandie Peggie, commented and posted.

Blackening the name of Sandie Pegge who is fighting for the rights of women does no-one any favours.

Dirty tricks - no more than women have come to expect now, sadly.

It isn't any form of discrimination for women to say no to men. And those kind of manipulative tactics just don't wash with women anymore.

Can I just point out that it was Sandie Peggie who forced the court case? She forced it to be public and have the doctor named and publicly outed.

Good.
Well done her.

A medic considered reporting Sandie Peggie to the police for misgendering doctor after she refused to share a changing room with him. She was suspended in January 2024 for 'unlawful harassment' so eventually took her case to court to clear her name because the Trust took no appropriate action. Theodore Upton was the person responsible and it was his actions which brought the Trust into disrepute.
A NHS manager had agreed to his request to use the women's changing room but had no authority to do so, and despite claiming a policy was in place there was no such policy in existence and never had been.
Upton claimed 'sex is a nebulous term which really doesn't mean anything' and claimed it would have been 'othering' for him to claim a private changing space. He stated he was female and that 'some people may be uncomfortable with a transwoman using women's changing facilities but that does not over-ride a trans's person's right that aligns with their gender identity.'
He was wrong.
As for Ms. Peggie's apparently unpleasant remarks they were presented as hearsay, reported from a lunch she shared with colleagues but not reported by the people there ,and were of no relevance to the case, just an attempt to blacken her name.
The Trust was at fault for failing to have a policy in place about transgender people, not discussing the issue with staff, wrong to allow Theodore Upton access to women's spaces and wrong to attempt to discipline Ms.Peggie for their failings.
Their treatment of Sandie Peggie, a nurse with an unblemished record, was reprehensible, and she was a brave woman to fight and win her case.
But Bridget Phillipson has still failed to give clear guidance.

Iam64

The projected continuing rise in the benefits bill has to be addressed wendym8116. We absolutely need welfare and sickness support for our people. I’m a life long Labour voter. I support a comprehensive review. I don’t believe people dependent on drugs or alcohol should be given mobility cars or more benefit thst their neighbour who lost their job

It's not the drugs / alcohol dependency benefits that worries me, it's the number of people off long-term with anxiety / depression or stress.
I just think a lot of them would prefer being back in the workplace & would be better off that way, but there's so little support to help them back. Managers need to be sympathetic & supportive, & GPs need to encourage people to go back before it becomes an even bigger mental hurdle for them.The review hopefully will look at ways to facilitate return.

Elrel

Just a passing thought, would it not be correct to refer in court to someone as ‘Dr’ if they are medically qualified or have a PhD?

This would have been much more respectful, for the nurse's representative to call the Dr by the name and pronoun they requested. Failing that Dr would have been better than MR which is intentionally misgendering Dr Upton.

If the nurse herself did that in the workplace, ie deliberately misgendering a patient, and insisting on calling a transgender person who identifies as a female "Mr" particularly when that person has requested them not to, she would clearly be in breach of the Nursing and Midwifery Council of Conduct regarding kindness, respect and dignity. Nurses must uphold transgender patients rights and challenge discriminatory attitudes. Doing the same to colleagues, would be is skating very close to the wind and they could make a formal complaint. The nurse would then face the. risk of disciplinary proceedings and/or professional misconduct proceedings, as it is in breach of the 2010 Human rights Act and another part of the code is that a nurse must always uphold the laws of the country.

Intentionally using incorrect pronouns ( misgendering) or "dead naming" using a former name like Mr) can cause emotional distress and is considered unacceptable.

The Equality Act 2010 protects individuals undergoing gender reassignment from discrimination.

Under her professional code of conduct nurses also must not bring their profession into disrepute. She risks disciplinary and/or professional misconduct proceedings by intentionally trying to misgender and upset a transgender person she knows identifies as a woman. She should know better. . anding professional.

This is aside from the racist verbal and online comments this nurse made. Again in breach of her NMC breach of conduct. The public should expect better of nurses and keep their personal racist views to themselves.

If a Registered Nurse found to have breached The NMC code she would be subject to impairment process then if found to be impaired subject to sanction. The NMC sanctions range from caution, to conditions of practice to sanction to strike off from the register.

This is nothing to do with changing rooms and safe space issues it is to do with respect and dignity. Just because Dr Upton is transgender that is no reason to be treated disrespectfully.

It is deeply disrespectful to ask people to lie or to adhere to an ideology which many find sexist and homophobic. I see asking people to do this as a form of coercive control. Many women recognise this as a firm of gaslighting. We know it isn't true. Upton is a man, I don't believe in the sexist regressive concept that us represented by gender. Upton is a man.

Again it is not discrimination for me to say men can not be women, and that all men who identify as women are in fact men. In fact gender critical belief is a protected belief. I think that is something that we need to explore even further legally following the forstater ruling.

All UK registered nurses, whatever gender critical, racist or any other personal beliefs they hold, still must adhere to the NMC code of conduct and the laws of their country, IF they chose to practice as a nurse. The same professional expectation is repeated in respective Codes of Conduct across the UK health care professions. Everyone is protected by Human rights laws in addition.

That means a Registered Nurse must accept that there are patients and colleagues who are transgender (of which a nurse may be critical) yet still that nurse must treat those patients and colleagues who are transgender with dignity, kindness and respect and not intentionally misgender them.

That is not lying, gas lighting or coercive control, it is a requirement of the Nursing and Midwifery Council for Registered Nurses to remain on the Register. Nurses can only legally practice as a nurse in the UK if they are on the Register. Employers check the nurse's registration before appointment and every three years, thereafter as the nurse must revalidate her practice every three years to remain in post.

eazybee Tue 05-May-26 18:30:24

Thank you for reminding us of the facts of this case.

LemonJam

All UK registered nurses, whatever gender critical, racist or any other personal beliefs they hold, still must adhere to the NMC code of conduct and the laws of their country, IF they chose to practice as a nurse. The same professional expectation is repeated in respective Codes of Conduct across the UK health care professions. Everyone is protected by Human rights laws in addition.

That means a Registered Nurse must accept that there are patients and colleagues who are transgender (of which a nurse may be critical) yet still that nurse must treat those patients and colleagues who are transgender with dignity, kindness and respect and not intentionally misgender them.

That is not lying, gas lighting or coercive control, it is a requirement of the Nursing and Midwifery Council for Registered Nurses to remain on the Register. Nurses can only legally practice as a nurse in the UK if they are on the Register. Employers check the nurse's registration before appointment and every three years, thereafter as the nurse must revalidate her practice every three years to remain in post.

Who has suggested that they don't adhere to the NMC code?
When has there ever been a report of a nurse not doing so?

What has that got to do with a biological man in the women's changing room?

Glasweegran said
"The local NHS has received death threats as a result of all this,"
I wonder if there could be a bit more information about this. The NHS is an organisation, not a person, so who was it who received death threats? What was the reason given for the death threats? Who were the death threats from?

In context of OP - some court cases, as in the Supreme Court'sFor Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers case early 2025 are described as BELL WEATHER cases with litigation significance. That it it is a trial to test a widely contested issue. Results are then used to shape processes for addressing issues. Sandie Peggie’s decision to seek a tribunal ruling was to use the tort litigation that fell out of the Supreme Court above to her claim against her employer NHS Fife. The contested issue in this context was rights of those in the workplace in respect of transgender matters.

The tribunal was watched closely by the main stream media and by legal professionals. Some aspects of Peggie’s claim were dismissed, e.g. her claims of discrimination and victimisation against Dr Upton and the Health Board were dismissed. So she is appealing. The outcome of that case will add to legal precedent of this widely contested issue.

The law is not static or fixed in time- it evolves and bell weather court cases shape the law and in turn shape things such as NHS trust disciplinary proceedings and pities to ensure dignity and respect in the work place for all.

More background info for anyone interested :

The Law Society Scotland weekly bulletin 15 December 2025.

Sandy Peggie and legal team launch appeal over NHS Fife employment case.

The case of NHS Fife nurse Sandie Peggie is one of the most closely-watched employment tribunals in memory and has been seen as a bellwether case following the Supreme Court'sFor Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers case early this year.

The outcome of the first tier tribunal was that NHS Fife was found to have harassed Sandie Peggie, but other claims of discrimination and victimisation were dismissed.

1) Nurse Sandy Peggie to appeal trans doctor employment tribunal judgment (Sky)
2) Sandie Peggie says 'I will not give up legal fight' with tribunal appeal (BBC)
3) Former UK equality chief questions Peggie tribunal ruling (BBC)
4) Sandie Peggie tribunal ruling 'not compatible' with the law as she prepares to announce appeal decision (Scottish Daily Express)
5) Scottish nurse wins part of her tribunal in trans doctor changing room case (Guardian)
6) Sandie Peggie latest: Judge amends NHS Fife ruling (Herald)
7) Sandie Peggie judge has missed the point of Supreme Court ruling (Times)

Just because Dr Upton is transgender that is no reason to be treated disrespectfully.

According to the Equality Act employees could nor be compelled by their employers to use incorrect pronouns. It seems that parts of the NHS have 'interpreted' the Act rather loosely.
Equally, Theodore Upton's claim to be transgender is no reason for him to treat a woman, an employee of lower rank, a nurse of unblemished record, disrespectfully.
It was established conclusively that he had no right to be in that changing room, but the most disturbing aspect was his refusal to leave when asked.
The delay in implementing the findings of the Supreme Court is worrying; a first draft was submitted in September 2025, but has undergone changes, and is not to be released until after May 7th 2026, probably after Parliament reconvenes. The threat was made by members of the transgender community that complaints would be made and the judgement would be overturned.

Ilovecheese 12.03.

My link detailed the requirements to adhere to the NMC code

Glaweegran's links can help you determine her attitudes regarding misgendering DR Upton and the claims she made racist on line comments during the employment tribunal hearing.

If any nurse, including Peggie, misgender patients or colleagues in the workplace or reported for posting racist on line comments she would be in breach of her professional code of conduct. She would place herself at risk of referral to the NMC and professional misconduct proceedings - at risk of sanction if found proved. Sanction options- caution, conditions of practice, suspension, strike of the NMC register and unable to work as a nurse.